Your comment, "Some artists seem to be driven to figure out where the top of the heap is and then navigate their way to the center of attention like a moth to a flame." made me think of the Rothko exhibit I saw in Paris last year. I was struck throughout the chronological show at the magnitude of Rothko's ego. Almost from the beginning, …
Your comment, "Some artists seem to be driven to figure out where the top of the heap is and then navigate their way to the center of attention like a moth to a flame." made me think of the Rothko exhibit I saw in Paris last year. I was struck throughout the chronological show at the magnitude of Rothko's ego. Almost from the beginning, his accompanying commentary was quite explicit about his drive to break the mold, to take art to another realm, which he is generally seen as having succeeded in doing. It seemed to me, as I watched his art progressively push boundaries towards overwhelming the viewer, that his need to be out front remained the driving force—not that his talent didn't get him where he wanted to go—and was reflected in the demands he made on museums and other buyers. In the end, his star seemed to be dimming as art took a turn in a new direction. There are several theories on why he killed himself. I have my own idea.
Thanks for writing Elizabeth. That sounds like it was an interesting show! Was that the show at The Fondation Louis Vuitton? On the website they have a quote from Rothko:
“I became a painter because I wanted to raise painting to the level of poignancy of music and poetry.”
That sounds like something I might say leaving out poignancy and replacing it with a less tragic term but there was a lot of tragedy going around in the 20th century. I guess there always is. I have peered into the well of tears. It is not a place to linger.
I might say: "I want to paint what I cannot see like poetry and music - blend them together to express the great harmony that drives them and is the root of them all."
What IS your idea of why he killed himself? As a youngster in college I had a passing interest in Rothko's paintings but I didn't ever study up on him. Back at that time, in the 1970's is was hard to study up on anybody like we can do today. I guess I figured if he killed himself that was probably not a good path to go down. Certainly, in his time, it was still the early days of abstraction so there was plenty of pioneering to do. I assumed he must have suffered from depression.
Your comment, "Some artists seem to be driven to figure out where the top of the heap is and then navigate their way to the center of attention like a moth to a flame." made me think of the Rothko exhibit I saw in Paris last year. I was struck throughout the chronological show at the magnitude of Rothko's ego. Almost from the beginning, his accompanying commentary was quite explicit about his drive to break the mold, to take art to another realm, which he is generally seen as having succeeded in doing. It seemed to me, as I watched his art progressively push boundaries towards overwhelming the viewer, that his need to be out front remained the driving force—not that his talent didn't get him where he wanted to go—and was reflected in the demands he made on museums and other buyers. In the end, his star seemed to be dimming as art took a turn in a new direction. There are several theories on why he killed himself. I have my own idea.
Thanks for writing Elizabeth. That sounds like it was an interesting show! Was that the show at The Fondation Louis Vuitton? On the website they have a quote from Rothko:
“I became a painter because I wanted to raise painting to the level of poignancy of music and poetry.”
That sounds like something I might say leaving out poignancy and replacing it with a less tragic term but there was a lot of tragedy going around in the 20th century. I guess there always is. I have peered into the well of tears. It is not a place to linger.
I might say: "I want to paint what I cannot see like poetry and music - blend them together to express the great harmony that drives them and is the root of them all."
What IS your idea of why he killed himself? As a youngster in college I had a passing interest in Rothko's paintings but I didn't ever study up on him. Back at that time, in the 1970's is was hard to study up on anybody like we can do today. I guess I figured if he killed himself that was probably not a good path to go down. Certainly, in his time, it was still the early days of abstraction so there was plenty of pioneering to do. I assumed he must have suffered from depression.