On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 4:50 AM, William Conger <[email protected]>wrote:
> The new auction records for Rothko, Newman, and other icon artists of the > high > modern period are disturbing even as they are expected in this age of 1 > percenter excess. (See today's NYT). My problem is not with the prices as > such > but with the aura they cast around the art that is selling at those prices. > It's becoming very difficult to look at a Rothko anymore as an artwork. > These > works are supposedly the inspiration works of an era, helping to define > the best > of the best in aesthetic terms. They've been the mile-markers ambitious > young > artists for two or three generations. But more and more they seem to fall > flat > for me. Dead. The more a Rothko sells for the less art it seems to be. I > saw a > few Rothkos at the National Gallery in D.C.. a few days ago. Admittedly, > they > are not the finest I've seen (the Phillips Collection, also in D.C. has > better > examples) but they looked very ashamed to me, so embarrassed, and dull; > pompous > but empty.... Did they look "soulless"?: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/film/8546869/Harrison-Ford-criticises-soulless-action-films.html
