The mathematical complexity of any portray lies within the artist’s acutely aware and intuitive use of golden sections & sure underlying geometrical grids & patterns, and so on.. In that sense, Rothko’s work aren’t complicated in any respect, however reasonably extra zen-like of their simplified, floating rectangular shapes.
I do not dislike his work. However I’ve the identical downside with Rothko that I’ve with a lot of the Summary Expressionists: which is that they could not even be bothered to study the fundamental craft of portray! (aside from the truth that none of them discovered to attract apart from De Kooning & that hardly). For instance, brittle items of Jackson Pollock’s ‘drip’ work proceed to common fall onto the ground of museums, the place they’ve develop into a nightmare to restorers since Pollock used widespread non-archival acrylic home paint (on unprimed canvases). Whereas Rothko’s 1964 «Research in Crimson» which used to hold at Harvard College turned blue within the Seventies, as a result of Rothko did not know that winsor purple when painted over ultramarine blue turns fugitive and disappears. The work had been subsequently despatched into storage in 1979 underneath the false declare that the unique colours had merely «light». However I collect they’ve now been repainted in purple by restorers utilizing some form of digital know-how (and look terrible).
I ponder what these poorly crafted works will appear like in 200-300 years and even sooner, like perhaps 50-100 years from now? I think about lots of them will likely be rotting in storage.