Into the artist's mind - Mark Rothko's Untitled (1969)

Few years ago I did not enjoy modern art galleries. The proclaimed masterpieces looked uninviting and hard to understand. Looking at ‘famous’ squares and splotches of paint and having to appreciate them felt dreadful and only made me wonder why these artworks cost so much money. But as time went on and I learnt a bit about art, it turned out not as scary as it seemed. In this review I want to share the things I have learned and I will do so on the basis of one of Mark Rothko’s Untitled pieces from the year 1969.

Mark Rothko is a name known in the art world. Even if you don’t visit galleries often, you probably have heard of him. He was an experimental painter, closely connected with expressionism, later on becoming an abstract expressionist. He abandoned narrative pieces, stating that all depictions and figures in the artwork are restricting as they stop the viewer from interacting with the art directly. 

Rothko’s pieces are all about colour – it tells the story here. The artist considered it the purest way of connecting to the audience – with no mediators or agents standing between you and what the artist wanted to communicate. This sounds very good but how can it help you connect with an actual Rothko piece? 

As we approach the piece, all we see are two rectangles in warm shades of grey – the one on the top is darker than the  one on the bottom. On closer look, it turns out the shapes are not evenly painted – they were put on the paper with a very thin layer of paint, so one can even see the canvas showing through. This technique is Rothko’s signature one – most of his pieces were created by putting many, many very thin layers of various hues on each other, creating luminous pieces buzzing with colour. Looking closer, the bottom rectangle is actually not just one value– it gets lighter and lighter towards the top. This makes the meeting point of two rectangles blurry, as if covered by fog. There is no clean-cut shapes in here.

We see how the piece looks, but what does it mean? That is a much harder question, deserving a whole book than just a simple paragraph. Personally, I like to approach modern art pieces without the preconception that they need to mean anything. I like to think that art is a product of a discovery that the artist made and wants to share it with the world. Therefore I ask myself two questions: How does it make me feel? Why would the artist want to show it to others? My experience shows that the answers to these questions are often connected.

When I look at this piece, the first thing that strikes me is the dull colours. Compared to other Rothko’s pieces, so lively with hues and saturation, this one looks … bleak. The shades of grey are warm but it does not make them more interesting – only gives them a feeling of being washed out. It makes me think of emptiness. This painting  is about depression. The artist wanted to show his experience, how does depression feel to him – a world without colour, clumsy brushstrokes and lack of motivation to do more, to do better. There is sadness shining out of this piece, sadness that is universal – as there is nothing between you and the feeling, staring directly at each other.

The painting is empty, but that’s what it is supposed to be.

This may not be the conclusion you arrived at, but do not be worried – art is for everyone and what you feel about it is just as valid. No matter how uninteresting modern pieces may look to you, I believe there is always something to them. One just needs to allow oneself to look closer. Emotions and thoughts of the viewer are appreciated – put yourself in the piece and try to understand it from your own perspective. Appreciating the works rather than judging it in the classical standard can open you up to a much deeper experience – one that speaks directly to your senses, rather than just your reason.

Thanks for sticking around!

Nat