#daily rothko

[dailyrothko]

Mark Rothko, No. 1, 1961

Oil and acrylic on canvas.

Taken at National Gallery of Art, Washington DC

Gift of the Mark Rothko Foundation; Museum of Fine Arts, Boston

© 1998 Kate Rothko Prizel & Christopher Rothko/Artists Rights Society (ARS), New York/Art Resource N.Y.

#mark rothko #markrothko #rothko #daily rothko #dailyrothko #abstract expressionism #modern art #abstraction #colorfield #ab ex #colorfield painting #mid century

[jesush8r]

rothko 

#mark rothko #daily rothko

[blood-and-breath]

#more rothko toast this morning I might start this as a daily thing I’ve got lots of jams around #so I’m gonna start a tag #rothko toast

[vvanessaives]

every time i follow some kind of art adjacent profile on ig minutes later there's always some wannabe influencer girly with 'curator of beautiful art 🧐' in the description that starts following me

#rena.txt #i followed a page called daily rothko. i got a followed by some girl with the profile full of pictures of museums and art. it's the third #time already that this happens. i WON'T follow u back girl.

[onenakedfarmer]

Daily Painting

Mark Rothko UNTITLED [1949 - No. 18] (1949)

#daily painting #Mark Rothko #painting #1949

[mesillusionssousecstasy]

11:14 am : "N°6 (Jaune, Blanc, Bleu sur Jaune sur Gris), 1954" par Mark Rothko (huile sur toile) pour l'exposition "De Zurbarán à Rothko Collection Alicia Koplowitz - Grupo Omega Capital" au musée Jacquemart-André -  Paris, Avril MMXVII. 

(© Sous Ecstasy)

#art #art therapy #art show #art blog #art account #art paris #art daily #art lover #art addict #art community #art worm #art exhibition #painting #peinture #sous ecstasy #mark rothko #musée jacquemart-andré

[nobrashfestivity]

Re: Rothko and identity politics - his words tell some of the story but not necessarily all of it. He was a Latvian-born Jewish immigrant who anglicized his name as an adult because of concerns about anti-Semitism. Much like Hollywood, it's not surprising that artists in earlier generations made choices to assimilate, and either felt that their identities did not have a place in the art market, or that they were safer leaving them behind. The idea of art as an ideally frictionless experience, where the viewer doesn't have to or need to think about the artist, feels like a very consumer-oriented one. I understand the point of view that when identity statements feel more and more mandatory, it makes some artists feel ghettoized or objectified for their identities, and that's not great. In either case it's hard to get away from the idea of art as a commodity.

(Love your blog, read it daily!)

Thanks for your message.

I am not sure I understand your point. It seems like you're suggesting because of discrimination, artists need to use their cultural identities to help level the playing field. I think in Rothko's case, of course, but simply changing his name is a little different I feel than what's being talked about here.

I think it's become a question of hyperbole that galleries love and many artists love because it makes them seem serious and talented. It confronts the viewer with this kind of academic assertiveness trying to scare them into thinking the art contains something they cannot see.

It's kind of detrimental to people actually learning about art if every dumb John Currin nude has to be filtered though a "My experience of being probed by aliens has lead me to this soulful expression about the liminal space between Bart and Lisa."

It is a complex issue, absolutely, and I'm not for banning anyone from doing anything, quite the opposite. I want everyone to enjoy making and experiencing art, even the cork-sniffers. And i do believe that effort must be made to bring in people that were discriminated against in the art world.

It's simply that it's bad enough to suffer through a "Is this a pile of rags on the floor or a Bushwick art exhibit" experience without the extra intellectual terrorism.

for as long as this has been around I am always amazed how accurate it is-

[originallandlockedmariner]

Haring died, as my conservative father would contend, from the ‘faggot flu’ or Anally Injected Death Sentence. An easy target for the narrowminded, despite his more than 50 public artworks - many of them created voluntarily for hospitals, day care centers and schools. Basquiat was found dead from a heroin overdose, leaving behind nearly 917 drawings, 25 sketchbooks, 85 prints, and 171 paintings. Rothko cut an artery in his right arm with a new razor blade after overdosing on barbiturates. There was no suicide note. Sometimes art has a sad and dark ethos in which it is born. Sometimes the artist succumbs to inner demons or unsuccessfully rages against the shitty hand they are dealt. Sometimes obscurity devours its best. And sometimes, if we are blessed, their voices live forever.

@daily-esprit-descalier

#me #my words

[teeth-ing]

besties don't forget to take your daily rothko

[dailyrothko]

Mark Rothko, Untitled, 1945 oil on canvas 39 1/4 x 31 1/4 in. Collection Kate Rothko Prizel Catalogue Raisonne Number: 276 Estate Number: 3163.45 © 1998 Kate Rothko Prizel & Christopher Rothko/Artists Rights Society (ARS), 

#mark rothko #markrothko #rothko #daily rothko #dailyrothko #abstract expressionism #modern art #abstraction #colorfield #ab ex #colorfield painting #mid century #1945

[dollypopinspiration]

Daily Rothko

[knuckleduster]

when youre outside in the sun and the daily rothko post just looks like a black square

[jamieroxxartist]

✔ An Online #ArtShow Everyday!

Good Morning Social Media! Today’s featured #Spotify #Playlist is: This Is #MarkRothko; Mei Ling and I feature a new playlist daily. It’s what I have on here in the studio while I Paint and work. You can Listen as well, for #FREE, both here at the Link and on the Pop Culture BLOG at my website: www.JamieRoxx.us (direct link on my profile page) enjoy :)

🎧 #SpotifyPlaylist: https://open.spotify.com/playlist/2NcpEYWFY3K6ZCAOEhL9Xa

✔ RIP today, Feb 25, 1970 – Mark Rothko, Latvian-American painter and academic (b. 1903) walked on.

Featured here: A #Painting I painted a couple of years ago:

‘Club Stems’ #PopArt! traces of #Expresionism #PopNoir #Legs #tights #Stripes 2018, acrylic and oil blend on canvas, 20"x24" by @ArtistJamieRoxx #JamieRoxx (www.JamieRoxx.us) This Sold Painting is Not Available.

#Blog #Art #LifeattheBeach #ArtistsLife #BestFriends #SharPei #Painter #NeoNoir

[kaylarhetoric]

*Gender through artistic representation*

In this entry, I will examine the critical question, “What gender norm is undone in this artifact, how is it rhetorically done, and how does it push back against gender norms? Is it productive or unproductive?” In David Levithan’s novel Someday, Levithan pushes back against gender norms by using metaphor, emotional appeals and contradiction to productively argue that gender is ultimately not confined within the concepts of “man” or “woman.”

Someday is the last book in the Every Day series by David Levithan. The story centers around a character named A, who wakes up in a different body each day. Throughout the course of the story, A falls in love with a girl who learns to love them through the extreme challenge that comes with A’s ever-changing life. In Someday, A meets X, who is a traveling soul like A. X, who identifies as male, is mystified to learn that A doesn’t identify as a man or a woman. X invites A to an art gallery to see if A can match their self-concept to a person in the art collection.

Gender is the socially-constructed expression of a person’s identity, often assumed to be aligned with an assigned sex. Butler argues that gender is often combined with the idea of femininity vs. masculinity, which ignores the theory of gender beyond binary. According to Butler, “To keep the term ‘gender’ apart from both masculinity and femininity is to safeguard a theoretical perspective by which one might offer an account of how the binary of masculine and feminine comes to exhaust the semantic field of gender… gender has a way of moving beyond that naturalized binary” (Butler 2004). Even marginalized views of gender are often discussed in relation to the dominant view of gender binary, which shuts down marginalized perspectives, because “To be not quite masculine or not quite feminine is to still to be understood exclusively in terms of one’s relationship to the ‘quite masculine’ and the ‘quite feminine’” (Butler 2004). According to Butler, some theoretical approaches to gender suggest introducing more genders into societal conversations, while others argue against quantifying genders at all and view gender as more of a spectrum.

Levithan uses metaphor to create and compare characters representing the dominant and marginalized perspectives of gender. X’s character represents the dominant, binary perspective of gender. A, nonbinary, represents the marginalized view of gender as a spectrum. Since both characters wake up in different bodies each day, they discuss how they view identities over time despite daily change. X and A look for pieces of art in a gallery that match their self-concept to discuss with each other. In trying to define themselves, they also demonstrate how they consider the definitions of gender. X has a very clear definition of gender and identifies with a specific gender he feels matches him best. Even though he has woken up in different bodies all his life, his internal sense of self is represented by a traditionally masculine sculpture, Torso of a Young Man. He tells A, “I wake up in women’s bodies. But I never wake up female” (Levithan 2018). As X attempts to articulate how he sees himself using metaphor, he also projects his view of gender onto the world around him. As X and A explore the gallery, X openly tells A he thinks the binary boundaries of gender he believes in are universal. He claims, “every human being has to be one or the other… I think we all have a type. It’s just a question of whether we admit it to ourselves or not” (Levithan 2018). X, convinced A will choose a specific man or woman in the paintings that represents their true gender and appearance, insists that A looks through each room of art searching for their best representation. Much to X’s surprise, A associates their internal self most with colorful abstract artwork by Rothko, not a specific person and gender. Just like X, A’s choice is a metaphor not only representing their self-image, but also for a perspective on gender that goes beyond the boundaries of binary constraints.

A’s use of contradiction supports Levithan’s argument that gender identity can be viewed beyond traditional gender norms. In the gallery, A tells X that a room full of abstract paintings feels like the best representation of who they are. A’s thoughts as they look at the artwork are full of contradictions. A thinks, “Some look like horizons, others like stacks. Some colors go together. Others clash and complement at the same time. They are clouds, but they are solid. They are quiet, but they speak. They make no sense, and they make perfect sense” (Levithan 2018). A’s perspective on the art demonstrates that A’s view of gender and self-concept isn’t tied to one thing or a limited definition. Instead, the artwork and A’s self-concept is more than one thing at once, not simple and clearly outlined like X’s is. The complexity of A’s perspective is emphasized when they clarify how the abstract artwork fits them. A expresses, “I know I’m not an abstraction. This is not the answer. But it’s the best answer, much better than picking a kind of body and saying, This is me.” (Levithan 2018). Even though the abstraction is not limited like gender binary, A decides their internal self also shouldn’t be limited by labeling it abstract. The contrast between X and A and the contradictions within A’s undefined self definition reveal a range of gender and expression that goes against the dominant binary view X holds. While X is comfortable with his concrete self-expression as a man, A suggests that gender expression can “make sense” without the common definitions people use to make sense of them. A believes humans aren’t abstract paintings, but gender can be thought of more abstractly.

X uses emotional appeals to make A feel insecure about their current perspective of gender so that A will consider X’s binary perspective as more favorable. In doing so, X draws a connection between gender norms and self-worth. X uses emotional appeals to pressure A into considering the merit of abiding by the dominant binary ideology of gender. Specifically, X takes advantage of A’s existing insecurity in their romantic relationship to try to make A want the security X believes comes from abiding by gender norms. X tells A, “How is she supposed to love you if you don’t give yourself any true form? What is she supposed to love - a name? How can you give her something that you don’t have?” (Levithan 2018). X tells A that for their partner to truly love A in return, they must express a concrete gender identity. X poses A’s gender as something they can or cannot offer their partner, tying A’s gender to their value in a relationship. According to X, subscribing to an assigned gender would make A more worthy of their partner’s love because they could offer them more. X also appeals to A through their shared lived experiences to make A feel insecure about how they currently view themselves. X and A both change their body and appearance daily, never having a body of their own to hold on to. That experience is difficult for them both, and X argues that strict self-definitions are vital because their lives are already so abstract. X says, “for me, it’s important to have a concrete identity, even when you are changing your physical form so much. Perhaps even more so. It’s important to know who you are” (Levithan 2018). X poses gender as an important part of his self-image and identity. By emphasizing their similarity of constant body changes while stating the importance he places on gender, he implies that A should consider gender important to their identity as well. By using emotional appeals addressing A’s devotion to their relationship & daily hardships, X wants A to feel insecure about his currently undefined self-image so X can present his perspective as the solution. X and A have both experienced wanting to hold onto something despite their ever-changing lifestyle. X offers his view of gender as a core part of his identity as a way to feel secure.

Sanchez and Crocker conducted research on the relationship between personally investing in societal gender ideals and mental health. They concluded that a person’s mental health was worse when they placed a high value on gender ideals because a large part of their self-worth came from those around them instead of internally. Specifically, Sanchez and Crocker argue that “People who invest in gender ideals believe it is personally important to conform to gender norms and expectations and often express gender-role consistency,” and those who invest “define their worth through external sources, which promotes fragile self-esteem and vulnerability to depression” (Sanchez and Crocker, 2005). How people consider and express their gender can impact how other people respond to them, but also how they think about themselves. Sanchez and Crocker argue that since gender is something people perform, the reaction from the audience of other people becomes a key factor in self-worth. According to Sanchez and Crocker, “People who are less invested in traditional gender ideals have better psychological outcomes because they are less likely to allow others' opinions, judgments, and performances to determine their self-worth. The process of becoming less invested in gender ideals may require a different framework for determining self-worth that gives greater personal autonomy” (Sanchez and Crocker, 2005). While X finds comfort in investing in traditional gender ideals, his perspective is not a universal truth. A’s identity isn’t tied to performing a specific gender, which offers A an opportunity to define their self-worth without dependence on external sources. Sanchez and Crocker’s research emphasizes the importance of recognizing gender without essentializing it. Gender does matter to some people, like it matters to X in the art gallery scene. But A’s marginalized viewpoint offers a balance, pushing back against the dichotomy and essentialism X proposes. A has found contentment by not dichotomizing, embracing the daily changes of their life instead of trying to latch on to one gender. Challenging the traditional ideology and norms of gender creates a space where gender can be part of a person’s identity, but also where people can be comfortable with their self-concept without being grounded in a specific gender. Gender definitions can be productive when they support an individual’s confidence in their identity. But clear gender restrictions become unproductive when gender is closely tied to a person’s worth, either their worth in a relationship or their self-worth.

The gallery scene in Someday productively pushes back against traditional gender norms. Levithan uses metaphor to develop a character who represents the dominant view of gender binary, X, and a character who views gender as a spectrum, A. A’s contradicting description of their self-image reinforces the idea that gender can be more abstract than “man” or “woman.” X’s use of emotional appeals, focusing on A’s partner & hardships, link gender conformity with acceptance and self-assurance in an attempt to make A feel insecure about their unrestricted self-image. However, research shows that X’s view of defined gender is flawed. Reliance on gender norms can actually lower self-esteem because self-worth becomes dependent on approval from external societal sources instead of coming from within.

Works Cited:

Butler, J. (2004). Undoing Gender, pp. 40-46. Routledge.

Levithan, D. (2018). Someday, pp. 317-321. Penguin Random House LLC.

Sanchez, D. T. & Crocker, J. (2005). How Investment in Gender Ideals Affects Well-Being: The Role of External Contingencies of Self-Worth, 29(1), pp. 63-77. Psychology of Women Quarterly. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-6402.2005.00169.x

[mesillusionssousecstasy]

11:16 am : "N°6 (Jaune, Blanc, Bleu sur Jaune sur Gris), 1954" par Mark Rothko (huile sur toile) pour l'exposition "De Zurbarán à Rothko Collection Alicia Koplowitz - Grupo Omega Capital" au musée Jacquemart-André -  Paris, Avril MMXVII. (© Sous Ecstasy)

#art #art therapy #art daily #art account #art paris #art show #art blog #art exhibition #art lover #art addict #art community #art work #painting #peinture #sous ecstasy #mark rothko #musée jacquemart-andré

[theviruseye]

Ekphrasis Reflection

From D.S. Waldman’s panel, I learned about ekphrasis and how it could be applied to art. Stated at the panel, Waldman believes in art and art making. His works are supported by SDSU, and he presented us with an exercise at the start of the lecture. It was a “seeing and writing meditation,” as Waldman would call it. The painting that Waldman introduces is one curated by Georges Braque, and titled Violin and Candlestick (1910). He asked us to describe what you saw in 3 words. In my notes, I wrote down that the art he is showing us seems shattered, unorganized, broken, and distorted. I thought of the painting as a broken mirror, as it was the first thought that came to my mind when viewing the work. I saw this painting to be an allusion to Cataract Blues by Roger Rosenblatt and Jules Feiffer. In Cataract Blues, the author, Roger Rosenblatt, feels broken, shattered, and devastated by the loss of his daughter. This idea contributes to the blues and feeling of the blues in the book. I feel like if Roger was an artist, he would make something along the lines of the painting that Waldman showed us. It would be an allegory to how he is left in pieces after he tragically loses his daughter, while still holding strong and being connected. While analyzing the painting, Waldman asked us to write down something that you regret.  I made a connection to Everything Is An Emergency by Jason Katzenstein. Towards the end of the book, Jason regrets how he didn’t take enough time to face his fears earlier, and how he didn’t attend E.R.P. as much as he needed to. His realizations on pages 196 and 197 shows us how he regrets overreacting over every aspect of life. The feeling of regret hits hard, and I think that Waldman wanted his audience to remember the impacts that regret has on our lives. The next work that Waldman showed is Untitled by Mark Rothko. Waldman stated that he resonated with Rothko’s work because it represented the smoldering of himself. This idea can return back to Jason Katzenstein with how his OCD smoldered him whole, and how he had daily battles with his OCD. Going back to Waldman’s lecture, one point that stood out to me was how Waldman stated that he believes  everyone has a unique perspective with art. I like to think of that saying as a pure fact, because it is true. I think that art is subjective in a way that it offers experience through what you think and what your perceptions are. Different perceptions and thoughts result in a different experience, and I believe that is what Waldman was saying. Your experience with a work of art will probably be different than someone else's. This is an overall theme to Waldman’s panel. One of Waldman’s biggest inspirations is poet John Ashbery. Waldman reviews one of Ashbery’s works’ titled Some Trees. From the reading, Waldman explains how the trees from the title become a lyrical connection to speech. The word evolved down the page. I thought this was fascinating. The fact that written words can be considered as lyrics seems like a wild thought, but comes to life with the words of Ashbery. This allows for an associative relationship as a reader, and allows for the introduction of ekphrasis to be present within words. Towards the end of Waldman’s lecture, I noticed that Waldman spoke in a relatively monotone, yet articulated fashion. I feel like the way he spoke fits in right with how the poems are supposed to be read. It definitely enhances the reading experience. In addition to Ashbery being a main inspiration, Ben Lerner is another standout poet that Waldman favors. It is safe to say that there were role models for Waldman, and they impacted his own works. One saying that Waldman said in his lecture was, “If you learn the traditional form you can learn to push against it.” This quote presents the idea of reciprocation, essentially saying that once you learn something, you can work from the opposite perspective. I think reciprocation is an important skill for people to have, and I believe that Waldman wanted to see his audience push the boundaries. Waldman goes on to state that if you’re not being vulnerable, the reader doesn’t really seem to care about you in the context of art. This goes to show that meaning and purpose should always be an aspect in the mind of a curator. Waldman also thinks that specificity is essential to written works, which ties back in with the importance of meaning in works. Overall, attending Waldman’s lecture made me open to the concept of ekphrasis, and opened my eyes to language as an art form.

#submissionVIRUSeye #VIRUSeye