:):(:confused::mad::p ;):D:o:rolleyes::cool:
Rothko. My personal opinion.
Posted 27-07-2009 at 23:59 by Черномашенцев Владимир
This is a reprint of the appropriate topics:
"Let's argue about the taste of pineapple with those who ate them." Zhvanetsky
In the late 80-ies of the XX century, this phrase famous Soviet satirist evoked nervous laughter in the hall. However, I quote from his childhood memory, so I can be wrong with the accuracy of quotations, but the sense is roughly as follows. For in those days in the USSR pineapples for the people was not. And if someone would boast that he tried this inexpensive exotic fruit until 1991, then let them show their membership card, or does not exaggerate their "heroism."
Conversation on the topic, as I see, is the standard fate of any topic, which eventually outliving itself. It requires a certain shake-up. But back to Rothko. As there was a famous Soviet classics: "Personally, I Pasternak (Bulgakov, Solzhenitsyn ...) do not read, but absolutely do not approve of his work." Since I was here, too, brings children and youth memory, I deliberately do not reveal the authorship of this classic. Maybe I do it a little thought.
Personally, I do not like Rothko, do not understand and do not respect. But I confess that I have seen his paintings only in artistic albums. And the man who was little related to printing (at least the advertising), knows how to distort the color pictures in the chain of photographer-designer-printing. Unequivocally, that abstract paintings can be given the right judge, only seen the original. Even better - the originals, as well as a separate picture, taken out of context of the artist, sometimes surrounded by incompatible paintings, neighbors, alas, sometimes does not look trivial. To a large degree of abstraction is important texture of the canvas and lighting. As well as size does matter.
But why then can I say, never having seen the originals, that Rothko - not my artist? Probably because I love Vermeer more from reproductions, to the point where he could see only one known to me the original in the Vienna Kunsthistorisches Museum. Why am I unable to understand Turner before his recent exhibition at the Pushkin Museum? Why I am happy to look at reproductions or photographs of many, many, including the wide world of unknown artists? When the world-famous name does not overshadow the painting.
I agree with many - prices are high Rothko and the country. Of course, his big bright canvases look great in modern western interiors. Of course, his paintings in many ways be called design. Also, I'm not impressed by the Black Square "by Malevich. If reproduction Square - full suck, the language of youth, the original and not have to tremble. But you can at least respect for the primacy of Malevich in such a "slap in the face of Public Taste. I will not argue that another Soviet classic Mayakovsky wrote this sentence about Malevich. But I'm sure this secret!
Perhaps it was all done in the absence of the Third World War. If 50-100 years ago is really a rich man could buy a real masterpiece, proven over centuries, by the end of the 20 th century masterpieces are not selling - this cow is needed most. Vienna Museum will not sell a single Vermeer and the Hermitage Museum - Rembrandt. There is no war, so there is no military theft and mess. And the people in peacetime rich everywhere - and also requires the masterpieces themselves personally. What? Create new masterpieces! Now for a western man can "roll" all. And it is easy to believe that the occupation of Afghanistan by the Soviet Army in the 90 years was a grim demonstration of the "evil empire". But the war in Afghanistan in the early 2000's - now good for the democratic world. What can we say about such trifles as art? Advertising market, a budget - advertisers have mastered it. And already the bank soup Kempbl seems many normal people a masterpiece. And do not tell me about the fact that all the rich buyers and gallery owners can not be wrong. They seem to be quite different interests, but paradoxically, they converge in one - if the artist has a high price, then you should make every effort to price is not reduced. Personally, if I had reserves Rothko, would ask his friends from time to time to make a friendly barter - let them buy, and for me too in the other does not rust. Incidentally, once I provernul such a simple way, the truth in jest, and at a party, to please a good friend while drunk.
"Let's argue about the taste of pineapple with those who ate them." Zhvanetsky
In the late 80-ies of the XX century, this phrase famous Soviet satirist evoked nervous laughter in the hall. However, I quote from his childhood memory, so I can be wrong with the accuracy of quotations, but the sense is roughly as follows. For in those days in the USSR pineapples for the people was not. And if someone would boast that he tried this inexpensive exotic fruit until 1991, then let them show their membership card, or does not exaggerate their "heroism."
Conversation on the topic, as I see, is the standard fate of any topic, which eventually outliving itself. It requires a certain shake-up. But back to Rothko. As there was a famous Soviet classics: "Personally, I Pasternak (Bulgakov, Solzhenitsyn ...) do not read, but absolutely do not approve of his work." Since I was here, too, brings children and youth memory, I deliberately do not reveal the authorship of this classic. Maybe I do it a little thought.
Personally, I do not like Rothko, do not understand and do not respect. But I confess that I have seen his paintings only in artistic albums. And the man who was little related to printing (at least the advertising), knows how to distort the color pictures in the chain of photographer-designer-printing. Unequivocally, that abstract paintings can be given the right judge, only seen the original. Even better - the originals, as well as a separate picture, taken out of context of the artist, sometimes surrounded by incompatible paintings, neighbors, alas, sometimes does not look trivial. To a large degree of abstraction is important texture of the canvas and lighting. As well as size does matter.
But why then can I say, never having seen the originals, that Rothko - not my artist? Probably because I love Vermeer more from reproductions, to the point where he could see only one known to me the original in the Vienna Kunsthistorisches Museum. Why am I unable to understand Turner before his recent exhibition at the Pushkin Museum? Why I am happy to look at reproductions or photographs of many, many, including the wide world of unknown artists? When the world-famous name does not overshadow the painting.
I agree with many - prices are high Rothko and the country. Of course, his big bright canvases look great in modern western interiors. Of course, his paintings in many ways be called design. Also, I'm not impressed by the Black Square "by Malevich. If reproduction Square - full suck, the language of youth, the original and not have to tremble. But you can at least respect for the primacy of Malevich in such a "slap in the face of Public Taste. I will not argue that another Soviet classic Mayakovsky wrote this sentence about Malevich. But I'm sure this secret!
Perhaps it was all done in the absence of the Third World War. If 50-100 years ago is really a rich man could buy a real masterpiece, proven over centuries, by the end of the 20 th century masterpieces are not selling - this cow is needed most. Vienna Museum will not sell a single Vermeer and the Hermitage Museum - Rembrandt. There is no war, so there is no military theft and mess. And the people in peacetime rich everywhere - and also requires the masterpieces themselves personally. What? Create new masterpieces! Now for a western man can "roll" all. And it is easy to believe that the occupation of Afghanistan by the Soviet Army in the 90 years was a grim demonstration of the "evil empire". But the war in Afghanistan in the early 2000's - now good for the democratic world. What can we say about such trifles as art? Advertising market, a budget - advertisers have mastered it. And already the bank soup Kempbl seems many normal people a masterpiece. And do not tell me about the fact that all the rich buyers and gallery owners can not be wrong. They seem to be quite different interests, but paradoxically, they converge in one - if the artist has a high price, then you should make every effort to price is not reduced. Personally, if I had reserves Rothko, would ask his friends from time to time to make a friendly barter - let them buy, and for me too in the other does not rust. Incidentally, once I provernul such a simple way, the truth in jest, and at a party, to please a good friend while drunk.
Total Comments 0
