I must be so completely uncultured, because I don't understand how these could cost so much. My son produced better artwork when he was 5.

I'm searching for deep symbolism in these. Anyone found some?

Awful. Drab. Over priced. I mean, really?

May not be everyone's cup of tea. But evidently it is someone's cup of tea.

http://www.mcgawgraphics.com/blog/mark-rothko-painting-no-1-sells-surprising-751-million

I took several art classes that involved art history throughout school, and I'll still never appreciate this kind of stuff.

PemberDucky wrote:I love Rothko. I love his work.

So which of these is your favorite?

No other artist, living or dead, has had as much impact on me as Rothko. I will never forget seeing a complete retrospective of his work on display at the Guggenheim museum in New York. As you may know, the Guggeheim is a giant spiral, and the Rothko exhibit began at the top of the spiral with Rotko's early works that were in a realist (non-abstract) style. As you moved down the spiral, the pieces displayed progressed to increasing abstraction, showing Rothko's experimentation with panels of color, which became darker over time. At the bottom of the spiral, the very last piece displayed was a piece he had completed just before committing suicide. That last one was a swath of black with some gray.

The other thing to consider with Rothko is the role the size of the pieces plays in their appreciation. These are cute 3 foot by whatever reproductions, but when you're standing in front of an 8 foot canvas of one of his original pieces, you can't help but be overwhelmed and in awe of the subtleties and sheer beauty of his work.

I very much appreciate Rothko artwork. The emotions emanating from these pieces are overwhelming!

What I did not like is the way these are framed. The thick black border frames distract from the art and make the artwork look pale. I saw a different much better framing for Rothko somewhere with frames being neutral colored wood.

Is there a reason the "McGaw Graphics 13624FR Rothko 1949" is listed as dishwasher safe? It seems a little too big to fit in a home dishwasher....maybe a commercial dishwasher.

So are these produced under supervision of Rothko's children and not the guys who commandeered and ripped off his estate?

Rothko v Pollock in Draw Something

You guys complaining here have obviously not seen his more exciting works:

Hmm. Well, I'm sure these are masterpieces and all but give me Pollock or Picasso any day.

These look awesome. I think I'll stop by Home Depot and grab a roller and some paint and make me a few.

mdnorman wrote:No other artist, living or dead, has had as much impact on me as Rothko. I will never forget seeing a complete retrospective of his work on display at the Guggenheim museum in New York. As you may know, the Guggeheim is a giant spiral, and the Rothko exhibit began at the top of the spiral with Rotko's early works that were in a realist (non-abstract) style. As you moved down the spiral, the pieces displayed progressed to increasing abstraction, showing Rothko's experimentation with panels of color, which became darker over time. At the bottom of the spiral, the very last piece displayed was a piece he had completed just before committing suicide. That last one was a swath of black with some gray.

These pieces aren't my cup of tea for sure, but that exhibit sounds amazing. I definitely would have liked to have seen it. Thanks for describing it!

mdnorman wrote:No other artist, living or dead, has had as much impact on me as Rothko. [...] That last one was a swath of black with some gray.

I can appreciate your passion, but even this passion can only bring you to describe his ultimate work as "a swath of black with some gray."

But I believe you only wrote that for those of us who don't see the genius as you do, and I would ask you to describe in your own words how these pieces of art have moved you. I realize that some things cannot be put into words, but ... I'd like to understand and I'd ask for your help.

Solonari wrote:I can appreciate your passion, but even this passion can only bring you to describe his ultimate work as "a swath of black with some gray."

But I believe you only wrote that for those of us who don't see the genius as you do, and I would ask you to describe in your own words how these pieces of art have moved you. I realize that some things cannot be put into words, but ... I'd like to understand and I'd ask for your help.

Rothkos work is really taken out of context in this sale. Consider the colors Red, White, and Blue. Not terribly meaningful in and of themselves. Now consider them arranged into a flag. Suddenly they mean something. They mean a great deal more flying over an embassy in a hostile nation and mean something entirely different draped over a coffin or flying at half mast. That arrangement of colors is very dependent on the context in which you see it. Imagine this sale was small framed flags. it would be something of relatively minimal value because the context is removed.

Rothkos paintings really need to be in context and, more specifically, in scale. My favorite (No. 16) (http://images.metmuseum.org/CRDImages/ma/web-highlight/DT11296.jpg) is 8' 10 5/8" x 9' 9 1/4". The viewing area is pretty close so the painting consumes your entire field of vision. It's also no on the floor. The height matters. When you look down toward the bottom of No. 16 you see a clouded orange, it's a color that is struggling. As you move you head upward you find the darkness. (remember this is your entire field of vision). Moving through the darkness is a little bit haunting because it's not pure darkness you can really look into the darkness and see colors and textures other things that exist within it. The darkness pulls you in. Then, when you neck is turned fully up looking at the sky you see the brilliant band of orange. It's actually hard to look at. It's difficult to look up at that brilliance after spending time in the darkness. When you look down again you realize that brilliance is the same color as the clouded lower bar. That the brilliance is is already there but you have to move through the darkness to strip away the clouds and find the potential of the orange.

That's why i like No. 16. You may see something else in it entirely. A friend of mine thinks it's an allegory for life, death, and resurrection. But you'll never get that vastness from a 2' x 3' reproduction.

Someday I'm going to buy a full size reproduction of No. 16 and I'm going to hang it in a hallway.

I'm pretty sure that No. 6 is upside down on the main sale page but right side up when you click on it.

I'm in the market for Rothko Prints but find these to be horribly wrong. The white borders, black frames, and convenient living room size just all seem wrong. It's a swing and a miss for me.

I know less than nothing about paintings. but amazon has the blue, green/brown painting for 81.50 shipping prime. It says its framed and ready to hang.

You can find just the prints themselves on Art.com

gentlax13 wrote:I'm in the market for Rothko Prints but find these to be horribly wrong. The white borders, black frames, and convenient living room size just all seem wrong. It's a swing and a miss for me.

I have No 6 and it's beautiful.

It's easy to try and criticize something you don't understand after that fact by saying "oh I could do that". Maybe (doubtful) you could copy it but, the fact remains you where never creative enough to think of it in the first place. If you stood in front of an original emotionless with the only thought being "that's just stripes of paint" then I honestly feel bad for you.