Granted, this may reflects the life and work of the artist ?:)

 Picasso (saw at the show), there is a model of the monument Appolinaire. He's caused no association with the work, life and personality of the last .:)
 This is probably due to the paucity of my aesthetic tastes .:)

Mark Rothko - a genius, no question.

Added after 1 minutes 51 minutes
And that it may be incomprehensible? That body, my hands stretched forward, so your fingers. Associativity in pure form, a real Picasso. You can talk about the form. Why is the schedule (the monument of the wire)? Why geometric graphics: ovals, lines, triangles? Why is oriented forward (rather than flat, for example). A: Probably, because Picasso felt Appolinaire. Here and its visual poetry - graphic letters. Here, and his courage, revolutionary. Here and in its simplicity, completeness, conciseness creativity. I - no deep knowledge Appolinaire, but for me this his sculptural portrait of Picasso disclose it fully, as a person.

Russian artist Vladimir Umanets spoiled work abstractionist Mark Rothko's "Black on brown ", which is in the Tate Modern gallery in London , leaving the sign in the corner of the picture.
In an interview with Guardian journalist attacker said he increased the value of his autograph masterpiece , which read : "Vladimir Umanets '12 . Potential product yelloizma . "

The museum staff did not have time to stop him. As written in the Twitter one of the witnesses , Umanets slowly walked to the painting , took a black marker and, after standing for some time, quickly made a sign , and then disappeared.

 Picture "Black on brown " , damaged by an intruder, was created in the late 50 's and donated to the gallery after his death.

Vladimir Umanets consider themselves artistic movement " yelloizm " (" yellow "). "Supplement" them Rothko painting he expects to see an exhibit of the future exhibition .

His act Umanets not accept a criminal offense. Although he said he was ready to arrest if the London police deems it necessary.

Here's a bigger photo , it is clear that the Russian artist V.Umanets not hurt anything, but on the contrary , very artistically signed :)
 To be honest , you have to say. it M.Rotko in 1958 ruined a good canvas, izmarav its brown paint.
 In any case - the picture has become more expensive. M.Rotko different spots - quite a lot,
 and signed V.Umantsa - until only one. In a way , this picture is a rarity :)

To be honest, you have said that you - troll and Earl, and "spoiled" by Mark Rothko canvases are tens of millions of dollars.

Exhale.

Well, for canvases Rothko paid millions, but no one has explained - for what they pay?
:)

For the name of the author?
for the highly performance?
of antiquity and rarity?
 
or under the influence of suggestion, that "it's necessary"!
<- 9 ~ ~ -> :)

And in other cases, you understand?
Why are the prices for Aivazovsky clear?

About Aivazovsky clear to me that this is the wizard, a true artist. Very few people can write well . The prices do not cause surprise.
We can only say the prices are too high for Aivazovsky compared to other artists of this series.
It may be that - there is a bit :). But it is easy to find an explanation.
 Good copy Aivazovsky - also costs money , sometimes considerable.
 A copy of the square of Malevich or black to brown Rothko - how much can it cost? :)

You have to meet with the owners of Rothko's paintings and they ask about it.
:D

About Rothko without me nasprashivali owners and answers are known.
 I asked the owner of Malevich, 15 years ago .
Answer Make sure , and I have then bought the painting by Malevich. :)
 Certainly, the work of the sub Aivazovsky "Among the waves" - labor, talent , professionalism -
similar to the cost M.Rotko the picture without a title.
 Even the pictures look like :)