Mark Rothko 🇱🇻 Abstract Painting • Art For Sale

[Deleted]

Oct 17, 2013 16:34:19 GMT 1 @delloy said:

Oct 17, 2013 16:21:15 GMT 1 @sonnyone said:

I have that one here flattening, waiting to be framed

Does anyone here have print 17/75 from the "Rothko's Modern Life (Nine)" edition? It's my go to number for prints and would make me VERY happy, it'd also calm down *some* of my OCD issues. I might be persuaded to make it worth your while if you'd like to swap for mine (18/75 - annoyingly). Here's hoping!!

And, I reckon it's gonna be more expensive. This is Laz we're talking about here...

Funny you should mention it, and me being the OP of this thread.....spookily I have Number 17

Really?!? What a coincidence! LOL.

I think we should swap

Is kismet, no?

[Deleted]

Just got the email from Outsiders, no more details on the new print, but, there is a picture of a signed print - looks nice and bright.

[Shoeless]

Would a kind member care to grab an extra this weekend?! Ill be in London next week so no trouble with postage! Have wanted one of these for the wall. I will be visiting the Tate while there and looking forward to seeing the Rothkos.....this would be a nice addition to the collection.

Please pm if you wouldnt mind helping!
Best

[chaserawr]

Id also like to add my name to the list if someone could grab one.

Plenty to trade or if you need something in LA I can return the favor

Love this print.

Pm me

Thanks

[jnschicago]

I would appreciate someone buying one on my behalf.  Please PM if interested in helping me out.

Best,

John

[Graham H]

Bugger.. One away... I have 16!

Not much use that is it??

G

Oct 17, 2013 16:21:15 GMT 1 @sonnyone said:

Oct 17, 2013 16:02:04 GMT 1 @delloy said:

Thats all the info I have at present but I expect they will be the same as the last release. Giclee with silkscreen gloss 100 x 80cm and priced the same at £175 but this is just my guess

I have that one here flattening, waiting to be framed

Does anyone here have print 17/75 from the "Rothko's Modern Life (Nine)" edition? It's my go to number for prints and would make me VERY happy, it'd also calm down *some* of my OCD issues. I might be persuaded to make it worth your while if you'd like to swap for mine (18/75 - annoyingly). Here's hoping!!

And, I reckon it's gonna be more expensive. This is Laz we're talking about here...

[Michael Jacob]

Does anyone know if Rothko did his boxes in silkscreen editions? If so, Id like one.

[Gard]

I did a quick search and it doesn't look like he did any. Im not sure about this but I think Warhol was the first artist to use silkscreens in his his works and prints (I'm pretty sure someone did it before him but one of the first I know of) and he came after Rothko. 

But two great artists has done their versions John Tsombikos (Borf) and Vik Muniz.

[Deleted]

Nov 19, 2013 21:39:25 GMT 1 Michael Jacob said:

Does anyone know if Rothko did his boxes in silkscreen editions? If so, Id like one.

He did, but rare as hens teeth apparently

Mark Rothko

Among the elite of the world’s most expensive artists, the most difficult to find cheaply is the only American in the Top 5 artists, namely Mark ROTHKO, whose price index has risen nearly 225% over the past decade and whose personal auction record stands at $77.5 million (Orange, Red, Yellow [1961], on 8 May 2012 at Christie's New York). Rothko was primarily a painter. He did few drawings and produced few prints. The rarity effect of his lithographs has not really done much for their value and amateur collectors can hope to pick up a signed and numbered colorfield screen print from a limited edition of 30 for less than $2,000, as was the case at Fabiani Arte in December 2012 (Senza Titolo N° 10, 100 x 70cm) .... However, to do so, you would have to be very attentive to this kind of extremely rare market opportunity; with the exception of lithographed exhibition posters, only three Rothko screen prints have gone to auction in the past 20 years.

[Gard]

Any pictures Nuart? I did a search on Christies and Sotheby's (you would expect them to sell these) but as it says in that text non has gone to auction in 20 years. When I try to google it I just get lots of reproductions..

[Damien]

www.liveauctioneers.com/item/1576894

just a poster by looks of it, from 1970 though

[Damien]

i've seen a few signed in plate before. thats just a copy of sig though right?

[sohohoho]

www.arcadja.com/auctions/it/rothko_mark/prezzi-opere/25021/

[chads007]

Quite like that rothko poster. How much do they usually fetch

[DameHoracia]

The Tate (shop) have released two reproduction screen prints, they also have posters.

[Coach]

There was a piece on the today programme on radio 4 this morning, about the Rothko painting that was vandalised in the name of Yellowism a coupke of years ago.
The painting has been fully restored by the Tate restoration department.
It took something like 18 months to copmplete. the first ten months was spent recreating the canvass and the paint used by Rothko, so that they could use that rather than the original to test many types of solvent.
Several months were then spent treating and reparing the original.
The end result sounds inpressive - it is impossible to spot any damage.
The chap who painted on the Rothko has released a statement apologising for what he did.
He spent quite a long time in prison, it was reported.
Anyhow, it was an interesting feature, which, if your are interested, you will be able to hear on Listen Again. The feature was at about 8.45am.

[mutatis]

May 13, 2014 17:31:28 GMT 1 Coach said:

There was a piece on the today programme on radio 4 this morning, about the Rothko painting that was vandalised in the name of Yellowism a coupke of years ago.
The painting has been fully restored by the Tate restoration department.
It took something like 18 months to copmplete. the first ten months was spent recreating the canvass and the paint used by Rothko, so that they could use that rather than the original to test many types of solvent.
Several months were then spent treating and reparing the original.
The end result sounds inpressive - it is impossible to spot any damage.
The chap who painted on the Rothko has released a statement apologising for what he did.
He spent quite a long time in prison, it was reported.
Anyhow, it was an interesting feature, which, if your are interested, you will be able to hear on Listen Again. The feature was at about 8.45am.

Thanks - received an update from The Tate email today on the very same subject. With a film about the restoration - click HERE

[randomname]

This is why I hate hipsters.

[Matt]

It's all in the title ! 

Please PM me if you are selling. Am based in London.


Cheers, 

Matt

[anarquee]

urbanartassociation.com/index.cgi?board=29&action=display&thread=120725

[Matt]

Thanks anarquee,

Had seen that, and it is sold, and I hit myself in the face for missing it…

There is one on sale on another dedicated site but they are a bit optimistic about price in my view...

[Deleted]

Sept 18, 2014 16:39:14 GMT 1 Matt said:

It's all in the title ! 

Please PM me if you are selling. Am based in London.


Cheers, 

Matt

You have a PM. UmBongo

[gletak]

I have one, pm me if you have not bought one yet.

[gletak]

Selling this print because it too far behind in the framing queue.

Edition: 75
Size: 100 cm x 80 cm
Year: 2013
Giclée print with silkscreen gloss on Somerset White Satin 330gsm paper
Signed and numbered by the artist



Looking for offers in the area of £300 + shipping. Based in Norway.

[gletak]

Bump

[dreadnatty]

Rothko on Beauty, Friendship, and How the Emotional Exaltation of Art Mirrors Human Relationships

by Maria Popova
“Beauty conforms to the demands of the spirit.”

www.brainpickings.org/2015/05/29/mark-rothko-artists-reality-beauty/?utm_content=bufferde219&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer

People often weep before the paintings of Mark Rothko (September 25, 1903–February 25, 1970) — something he believed was a different side of the same spiritual transcendence he himself experienced while painting them.

In The Artist’s Reality: Philosophies of Art (public library) — that remarkable compendium of Rothko’s little-known writings on art and storytelling, published by his children three decades after his death — the beloved painter examines how this contagious rapture of art works its magic on the beholder and, in doing so, exposes the invisible mesh of mutuality binding us together in a web of human affection.

Writing nearly a century after Leo Tolstoy’s insightful assertion that “emotional infectiousness” is the most important criterion for good art, Rothko considers the function of beauty not only as a deeply emotional experience but as a bonding agent that creates deep resonance between those beholding it:

The perception of beauty is definitely an emotional experience. That does not mean exclusively the human emotionalism of sentiment or sensuousness (as has already been shown), but instead that the process involves an exaltation which is communicated to us through the emotional system. This exaltation is usually composed of sentiment, sensation, and, in its highest state, intellectual approbation… Beauty conforms to the demands of the spirit. The experience of beauty may also be a sign of the reception of the creative impulse.

Rothko is careful to point out that technique alone doesn’t make for transcendence:

Skill itself is not an index to beauty. Of course, the artist must have sufficient means at his command to achieve his objective so that his work becomes convincingly communicative. But clearly it is something else which the art must communicate more than this before its author is seated among the immortals.

Noting that a wide range of creative stimuli can elicit the experience of beauty — from sculptures to sonatas, from paintings to people — Rothko examines to the undergirding psychological commonality:

Beauty … is a certain type of emotional exaltation which is the result of stimulation by certain qualities common to all great works of art.

But Rothko’s most delicate point deals with the parallel between beauty and friendship — both the emotional exaltation of aesthetic pleasure, he suggests, and the warm resonance of human affection require an intimate tango between abstraction and particularity, between infinity and finitude. With an eye to Plato’s definition of beauty, Rothko writes:

Plato … states that somewhere in nature there exists an actual prototype, an abstract absolute of beauty, of which all the manifestations are simply different facets.

[…]

To feel beauty is to participate in the abstraction through a particular agency. In a sense, this is a reflection of the infiniteness of reality. For should we know the appearance of the abstraction itself, we would constantly reproduce only its image. As it is, we have the exhibition of the infinite variety of its inexhaustible facets, for which we should be thankful.

Let us consider the case of our relationship to our friends. We love them with a common love because we all participate in the common prototype of humanity, but because each human being is a new and different manifestation of this prototype we want to know more about each one. Yet we should not be able to enjoy our friends at all if they could not be referred to the common prototype, for through the recognition of this identity with the prototype are we able to make sensible observations of differences.

[…]

Our notions of beauty today are essentially Platonic.

One is reminded of Anne Lamott’s moving meditation on friendship and the difficult art of letting yourself be seen, in which she urged: “Trappings and charm wear off… Let people see you.” How often do we find ourselves too afraid to let others see beyond the neatly packaged prototype of what we appear to be and into the particular manifestations of our singular humanity, the very source of our beauty?

The Artist’s Reality, more of which you can devour here, is a beautiful read in its totality — a rare and revelatory glimpse of the convictions and creative credos from which some of the most powerful paintings in human history sprang. Complement it with Selden Rodman’s fantastic forgotten interview with Rothko, Oscar Wilde on art and temperament of receptivity, and Jeanette Winterson on why reaping art’s most transcendent rewards requires the paradoxical experience of active surrender.

[Cardiff]

I had a few hours to kill in Houston last week and decided to check out the Mark Rothko retrospective at the Museum of Fine Arts. I had never seen Rothko's work in person, and really didn't understand the appeal. I rented my headset and walked through and was absolutely floored. His paintings were hypnotic and literally sucked me in...they seemed to "breathe" and have life/feeling of their own. I learned via the audio tour that he intended to paint emotions, and my experience certainly confirmed his success in doing so. After walking through, I perused another collection on display that had a number of Picasso's, Monet, Van Gogh, etc. and they all seemed exceptionally flat compared to Rothko. Anyway, I was reading the "has this place changed?" thread and thought I should try to contribute something positive instead of going on about how I don't like the current state of the forum.

If anyone's in Houston, I would highly recommend checking this out. 

Rothko @ MOFA-Houston

[jimmy]

I will check it out this weekend.

[Deleted]

I look at miaz bros, rothko, christopher Wool etc...and I think I don't get art. I'll stick to my rule of if I like the look of it i'll buy it.

[BKBOI]

great post cardiff. One needs to see a Rothko in person to appreciate it. I think it has something to do with the scale of the painting. I think staring at a 3 in. x 5 in. picture of the painting on the computer does not convey any emotions and would end up looking like work a 5 year old can paint in kindergarten.