Mark Rothko

[artcol]

Сообщение от zarajara

Do not like the principle of simplicity, which they so enthusiastically followed.

Why not to like?
Fundamental, in general, the principle.
Incidentally, the word "simplification" did not accurately reflect the nature of this method.

[zarajara]

Сообщение от artcol

Why do not you like? Fundamental, in general , the principle .

Love of

artcol, thanks! You know, first thought about why I do not like the principle of simplicity.
Response as, strangely enough, is far beyond the limits of art .
I think simplification - is the entropy and complexity , on the contrary - the life and development.
The system, when it is on the rise through the complexity , and when the recession - easy , that is entropy.
And so, when the artist follows the principle of entropy , I , as a fairly active person in life , it is not like that. Something like this , I suppose. < - ~ 12 ~ ->

[artcol]

Сообщение от vg_edger

I think that basically it is not fans , and partners (such as Leni Golubkova ) who hope vparit this garbage even more to the point , until people figure out that " the emperor has no clothes ".

Am. abst.ekspressionizm - a phenomenon of American culture, the culture of the world hegemon. A culture is politics by other means only . USSR promoted socialist realism , USA - abst.ekspressionizm . SUNSET U.S. - and then look at the line for a Rothko , will they ? I doubt it. Something in it, but it's a bad one , to judge from reproductions . But perhaps, live looks different, a lot of work "work" for its size .

Added after 3 minutes

Сообщение от zarajara

I like the complexity

Trim minor, isolated and left (not lose) the essence - it is not easy.
After Malevich - not a formalist nihilist, it is currently a successor of "ancient" tradition find harmony.

Added after 17 minutes

Сообщение от zarajara

I like the complexity

artcol, thanks! You know, first thought about why I do not like the principle of simplicity.
Response as, strangely enough, is far beyond the limits of art .
I think simplification - is the entropy and complexity , on the contrary - the life and development.
The system, when it is on the rise through the complexity , and when the recession - easy , that is entropy.
And so, when the artist follows the principle of entropy , I , as a fairly active person in life , it is not like that. Something like this , I suppose. < - ~ 12 ~ ->

Life creates diversity , but survives - very-very ... Two sides of the same coin.

[Кирилл Сызранский]

Сообщение от zarajara

The Dying Swan, Ballet Trocadero

Well, there are men in the company.

[Игорь Гурьев]

Anyone who is interested in the history of art, knows that in art there is a boom mezhduvremenya periods and periods of decline.
The period of decline can coexist with periods beginning heyday (as it was in the last third of the 19th century: the decline of classicism and the flowering of Impressionism).

Heydays last 60-70 years (roughly). Let us recall the heyday of Dutch painting, for example. Or Spanish painting of the 17th century.

Revival - a special article, he had two and a half steps (early and late, and in the middle - the so-called "high").
And it lasted half a century already.
But only in Italy.
Flourishing in a sense.

There are periods of intertemporal, who have offered some very major artists (as in Italy, France, Russia, England, Spain, 18th century: Guardi, Tiepolo, Chardin, Fragonard, Levitsky, Roars, Gainsborough, Reynolds, Goya and others).

Anyone remember the great artists of the first half of the 19th century, Besides Delacroix, Ingres and Venetsianov?

In general, my position is simple: the rise of painting began in the 1860s, starting with Impressionism, then by stage: Post-Impressionism, Fauvism, Expressionism, Futurism, "Jack of Diamonds", "Blue Rose" ... Nintendo square.
Stop the car ...
In general, the heyday ended in 1920 (although the companion Matisse died already in 1954, but it's a private matter).

In the sense that in 1913 nothing new in the painting was not.

Americans woke up only after the Second World War, and also wanted to have around "great art."

Lord, one known as "abstract expressionism" is worth something!
The same eclectic name!
And abstract art was, and expressionism was what "abstract expressionism"?

But what to Rothko friend, even to discuss it ... I personally zapadlo

In general, the American art of the second half of the 20th century to gain worldwide exposure - about the same as a fast food "McDonald's."
And it has the same relation to art as "McDonald's" - for cooking ..

Only Rothko expensive "Big Mac" a million times.
Well, at one thousand pieces Rothko pictures and big poppies - hundreds of millions every day.

[Konstantin]

Сообщение от Igor Guryev , 2298791"

Only Rothko expensive " Big Mac " is a million times .

All geopolitical and other ... skie study of global processes do not respond to a specific question - why Rothko , not Doe ?
The draw of fate?
But then legitimately claim that you can unleash all , and this is definitely not the case.

[Seriy]

artcol, I've laid out a detailed investigation of how abstract art came to the United States , from Europe, you missed it by ear and eye .
The statement that the AAE - bad artists , this is from ignorance and nenasmotrennosti . David Park as a colorist , not worse Monet, Matisse. Great is the colorist.
AE also a normal term, because many of the artists that wrote expressionism, abstract art is . In many expressionist Jackson Pollock works at Dibenkorn work is at the interface.
And the painting, like art, skill, developed - I have already described how. Van Gogh did not fit to hold a candle to the AE technique smear. Just all developed not where you want all sorts of art historians rossproiskhozhdeniya stuck in the 1920s and carrying his stuff and ignorance to the masses.

[artcol]

Сообщение от Seriy

artcol, I've laid out a detailed investigation of how abstract art came to the United States , from Europe ,

All ( almost ) came to the U.S. from Europe. The question is whether Rotkol as much as he should or not. Color touch - all this is secondary to the case of sums with multiple zeros. For me Rothko - recognizable landmark - but I do not like .

Classic Am. out . - That's all. As Aivazovsky.

So do not boil. Better Get to Mau , lie down on the beach.

Added after 15 minutes

Сообщение от Igor Guryev

And it has the same relation to art as " McDonald's " - for cooking .

And yet - this is an American non-elite culture. At McDonald's the way it hangs on the walls of abstract expressionism.

Added after 22 minutes

Сообщение от Konstantin

why Rothko, not Doe?

The draw of fate?

When it took something like that - he was in the field of view, was taken into the bank, and then they'd go.

[Seriy]

Сообщение от artcol

When it took something like that - he was in the field of view , was taken into the bank, and then off we go .

This amateurish approach .
Color Field painting is not only Rothko, this whole area , which today is Gerhard Richter, for example. AE development had its own logic . Yes, in Europe in connection with Hitler and the war , there was a break, but after the war, life in full swing and 50's there were many worthy artists AE , for example , artists around the Situation International. Now they cost hundreds of thousands of euros and interest in them is growing. Te AE was an American short time , and then became an international style. In the U.S., there is scope, but Rothko, one of which I saw was all of moderate size , but compared to Motherwell or Stille almost all chamber .

[artcol]

Сообщение от Seriy

This amateurish approach.

Сообщение от Seriy

Rothko, one of which I saw was all of moderate size

Since you can not argue.
You - see, I - no!
gg