Rothko/Nihilism...
Unknown
[> >[ger...@indigo.ie (Gerry Quinn) writes: > Verdigris wrote:
[> >[> >Rothko painted visual chords which evoke a musical response.
[> >[>
[> >[> If we must enter this synaesthetic mode, the response Rothko
[> >evokes in
[> >[> me is similar to that of a loud and tuneless fart.
[> >[>
[> >[> Consider: a rectangular area, similar to a drum (no favoured
[> >[> vibrational modes); a single tone or very few; where there is more
[> >[> than one tone, a smeared but uncomplex interface...
[> >[>
[>
[> >
[> >You may recall that Cezanne's response to one of his critics was
[> >also a fart.
[> >
[>
[> Maybe that's why I like Cezanne... But we were talking about Rothko.
[>
[> - Gerry
I am either editing directly in Internet Explorer or pasting from
Microsoft Write. the only other source of the crash might be the indent
character "[".
________________________________________________________________________
Another approach to Rothko's work is as meditational art. the comparison
is with Zen caligaphy, where the artist will draw a circle with a single
brushstroke, perhaps to represent the moon as symbol of the unattainable
perfection of enlightenment.
Rothko's concentration on the theme of one or two flat colour areas
is analagous to the work of a philosopher who tries to perfect a
fundamental concept. I have no idea what Rothko actually thought about
when constructing his paintings but the single area, perhaps contrasted
with a second area is about the relation between subject and ground and
about how an area represents space. It seems to me that he was attempting
to maximise expression with minimal means.
The abstract painter is always facing the void. Like the Zen meditator,
he must strike down all arising thoughts. In striving to select the
ultimate form of expression, he must make some statement which breaks
the perfection of the empty surface. To replace the white space with
a single colour is to replace one perfect expression with another. To
include something else, perhaps by leaving a strip of unpainted canvas,
is to make a definite but minimal statement. This first statement would
usually lead to the creation of an elaborate world of abstract forms which
poses the usual problem of when to stop. Rothko stops sooner rather than
later whereas the tachistes kept on flinging the paint on until further
additions made no differencr to the image.
The language element that Rothko uses occurs in the work of many "abstract"
painters but particularly in the work of Matisse, Picasso and Duffy. The
framing of an area by a solid colour field creates the illusion of an
object in the simplest possible way. For example, in depicting a seated
figure Matisse "cuts" the figure out by surrounding it with a colour area.
In Duffy's painting of orchestras, he uses this device to cut out the
images made by the sheets of music on the stands. Picasso used these "space
frames" in his collages as a device for breaking the surface of work into
a three dimensional illusion. With later abstract painting, the game is to
preserve the integrity of the surface as an aesthetic whole by not allowing
it to be subordinated by the subject. This creates a paradoxical tension
between the subject and the paint surface which can only be resolved by
suppressing the subject altogether. Rothko's work represents the ultimate
stage in this process.