That was SUCH a good description of Rothko's work Danese.
Deepa. On 4/24/07, Danese Cooper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
$46 million is a ridiculous amount of money for a painting (any painting) but I'd hardly characterize a Rothko as "stripes" of color. The depth and texture Rothko's methods achieved are much more compelling than can be communicated by a reductionist description (or even a print or photo of the painting). You really have to see them in person, and see them up close and properly hung to get the whole effect. They are calming, soothing and sometimes deeply moving. They are interesting to experience from different perspectives; because most are quite large, you can surround your field of vision with color standing close and then stepping away the separation of different color fields resolves in your eye. Such a simple thing (paint on canvas) but carried off so beautifully. Impossible to cheaply copy (because of the surface texture and something about the layering of color that achieves the end result). You can actually see that it took some time to make each one. Again as architect Christopher Alexander coined the term, which Bill Joy later taught to me, there is a quality with no name that is deeply pleasing and that makes you sigh when you recognize it. Rothko was channeling that quality in paint and canvas, IMHO. Danese On Apr 24, 2007, at 1:32 AM, Rishab Aiyer Ghosh wrote: > stripes of red, black, white and purple - how much is it [1] worth? > > apparently at least $46 million [2], guaranteed by sotheby's to david > rockefeller who's selling it. > > -rishab > > 1. http://economist.com/images/columns/2007w16/Rothko.jpg > 2. > http://economist.com/daily/columns/artview/displaystory.cfm? > story_id=9061031 > >
