It's quite an interesting photo, and your narrative helps me to understand a little better what to 'see' in a painting like this. Although I probably wouldn't hang it over my couch (actually, I don't even have a couch), it's still interesting to see all the subtle strokes and color variations.

Thanks for opening my eyes a little wider, Tara!

yes his lines is soft and not hard lines. i like his work to look at.

Well! What a revelation! I've never been a fan, and I shall never become wildly ecstatic about his work, but this is fascinating.

To me, this little piece brings to mind the experience of looking at the treeline on a Washington hillside in the fog, that feeling of almost seeing the shapes of the trees as they blur into the cloud cover. It's a sight I love, and I never realized this subtlety in his work. Thank you for sharing this!

it is interesting to view

in 1917, Marcel Duchamp exhibited a urinal as a work of art. Many years later, Marshall McLuhan said "Art is anything you can get away with". I don't begrudge Rothko or any of the abstract expressionists or minimalists their place in art history nor am I criticizing you, Tara, or anyone else who finds Rothko's art interesting, inspiring or worthy of their admiration, for whatever reason. I'm been known to stare at & admire a puddle of water, an oil slick or a corroded piece of metal, so who am I to judge others for what they choose to stare at & admire? But, speaking purely for myself (& I have seen Rothko's work in person), I find his work to be visually uninteresting. I think I understand the historical & philosophical forces that led the abstract expressionists to create the kind of work that they created & it was probably necessary for art to travel down that path, but I think it turned out to be a dead end.

What I look for in art (which may be completely different from what others look for) are qualities like beauty, truth, wonder, imagination, & energy & I just don't see any of those qualities in his work. I have a limited amount of time on earth, a limited amount of time to spend in museums & I find myself constantly exposed to a barrage of visual images (many of which I find very appealing) screaming for my attention. So, while I could probably find something to admire in Rothko if I tried hard enough, I just don't see the value in spending my limited time on doing that.

Having said all that, I think your snippet of a Rothko painting & the accompanying thoughts you shared accomplished what you set out to do & I applaud you for that...

This is what I simply cant do. I fail doing this so often. And it is what I dream to be able to do. A smooth transition from one tone to another with the soft middle tone. Maybe I explain it clumsy, but I hope you know what I mean.

a good sample, and shown with fine detail; and you accomplished what you wanted to: to get people to look closer. I found the Rothkos I saw in person to be absorbing and transforming. I didn't feel the same passion for him I felt for other 20th C painters, but I was moved by all I saw. I don't agree with Claude about maybe 50% of abstract expressionism, but I agree about the other 50%. Besides, a number of artists get lumped into that catch-all category very loosely (not suggesting Claude's doing that, but people do in general). I'd rather see the artists individually, anyway, because A.Expr. is a rather misleading term. But Rothko can be mystical, after seeing many of his rectangles and the dissolves he created: It's like being at a threshold of existence, and seeing concrete shapes come into 'being' (his rectangles); or, going the other way, like falling into a black hole and then seeing a universe "come out of it". It's a strange pre-dawn, "coming into being" thing. Anyway, I was never wild about Rothko, the way I am about O'Keeffe or Van Gogh or Rembrandt, or even the best of Warhol.

But you weren't asking that we be that, or anything else; and I love that you posted this to get people to think about it. We have little talk about artists here, and I'm glad you gave us some. (Interesting, too, to read Helle about how hard it is to create those "morphs". It is! Whether he used solvents or glazes, it takes real finesse.) And, as I've said before, some of those 'experts' really do have intimacy, have seen many shows of his works around the world, and have sat with and penetrated his paintings for years. So some of them could be taken out of the quotes...but others, the arbiters of taste, the dictators of taste, and so on, definitely belong in quotes, lol. A fine upload. Feel free to do this anytime your fancy calls you to...

What fun! I'm glad you're all looking and thinking and speaking about this.

I must admit, I was much more enthralled with Rothko's earlier work, and with his black canvasses in the Rothko Chapel in Houston. The rectangles didn't inspire me, other than to notice that amazing transition (so difficult to do, as Helle says), and to figure out the best way to photograph one so I could show you what I wanted you to see.

Perhaps instead of using the word "experts" in quotes, I should have called them sycophants. :P There's a difference (as Mark says) between someone who really knows what they're talking about and someone who tells you what you should like.

La Touche !

The texture translation is very nice, great capture.

Hardly i say 'i don't like', when i look at Art whatever that is... There is always a meaning and a concept behind, even when we don't see it. There is always a thought, a feeling, often a story...others, can be a 'inner digging' to find a path... A whole life or even two, looking at so many kinds of Art, wouldn't be enough, to understand and then, admire it, but in reality, there is always a point here and there that makes me think and makes me wander about what i see and about its intentionality; and it is for me always a learning. So, i feel deeply what Helle expresses and i also admire this here, due the tones in presence...is not easy at all and i can say that i like this..'feels' to me, like a inner landscape - a climbing -But also agree fully with Mark about the 'dictators of taste'; To be critical, in whatever that is the subject, is a serious thing and needs years of study, an open mind and much honesty . Stamps are not the way. Well! But the MAIN here, is that you started an healthy ''discussion'', Tara:) and is not easy al all, to express thoughts about Art, but they are so needed to all that do and share their Art, wherever it is. Thank you very much !

Like Denise I see a fog shrouded hillside covered with trees. Rothko was an interesting artist. He moved through several 'periods' during his life. He once said that his paintings showing blocks of color were meant to express raw emotions. If all you saw was the color then you had missed the point. He once described viewers of these later works bursting into tears when they saw them much as he had cried when he painted them.