Mark Rothko-Heritage, Environment

The Smithsonian Institution
Mark Rothko: Heritage, Environment, and Tradition Author(s): Stephen Polcari Source: Smithsonian Studies in American Art, Vol. 2, No. 2 (Spring, 1988), pp. 32-63 Published by: The University of Chicago Press on behalf of the Smithsonian American Art Museum Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3108950 . Accessed: 29/03/2014 02:40
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
The University of Chicago Press, Smithsonian American Art Museum, The Smithsonian Institution are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Smithsonian Studies in American Art.
http://www.jstor.org
This content downloaded from 182.178.239.129 on Sat, 29 Mar 2014 02:40:21 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
MarkRothko
and Tradition Environment, Heritage,
Polcari Stephen
Portrait ofMarkRothko. Mary Archives FullerMcChesney Papers, of American Institution Smithsonian Art,
One complexof ideas which Rothko used throughout his career was that of archaicheritage and environment: theaggregate ofall tradition. first of Through symbols, theexternal and influconditions an architectural frame and thenof encesaffecting theifeand developinheritances of nature, and psyche, mentofan organism, human behe positedan archaism tradition, havior, society that enduresand is a determining tradition: handed down forcein contemporary life.For something thedisasters ofcontempofromthe Rothko, past World War rary history-especially -Webster's Dictionary II-had theirrootsin thepast.His a tradition of symbols represent his career Mark that not Throughout tragedy onlyenvelopsmodRothko ern life, butalso thefuture. (1903-1970) soughtto evokethetotality ofthehumanexAlltoo often Abstract Expressionthat is ism is as yetanother perience.Declaring painting portrayed a "meansofphilosophicthought" manifestation ofprimitivism-the and morethanmerevisualreacemulation oftribal artistic form tionsor sensations, Rothko differen- and culture-in modernart.2 tiated his artforthesereasons Whilethisis trueoftheworkof from mainstream School ofParis Pollock(1912-1956), Jackson from that ofPicasso.1 Clyfford Still(1904-1980), and to a art, especially his assessment is oversim- degree,AdolphGottlieb Although (1903Rothko criticized Picasso's trueof plified, 1974),itis not completely workforlacking Rothko's art.On thecontrary, from "anyvery deep or esoteric forbeing thevery first Rothko set forth an philosophy," "Americanist" viewthatindividuals forbeingconpurely physical, cernedwithsenuous color,form, are a productoftheirmentalenviand design, whichitdid nottranronment and heritage. This conscend.In contrast, he advised art cept,widespreadin American notonlyto master the and thought in the 1930s,was emyoungartists skillsofpainting bracedbypainters such as Thomas but,more imporHartBenton(1889-1975) and to formulate a personalphitantly, Grant Wood (1892-1942), whose losophyofpainting bygaining worksreflected some "general American of habits, understanding and traditions. Evento lit- customs, psychology, philosophy, physics, theotherarts, and thewrit- theAmerican CubistStuart erature, Davis, Rothko whose workrepudiated Benton's ingsof mystics." clearly stated his artwas one of ideas,not and Wood's representational style, modernartreflected theAmerican of sensuousform and merely color. as well as theordinary "mental ma33 Studiesin American Art Smithsonian
theconditionintowhich heritage: one is born
??1~
:~?
?i
ii3?
;t?1 a~~l~i;F~`';'j"
.BYR14 ?:r
!?e ::'
~j;~t
F ~~?.. ~~~-' ~L;; ~-
i
`----~ II1I -f
;I"
terial environment."3 Rothko combinedthisenvironmental determinism witha search forarchaicrootsand patterns. He was thusin accordwiththedescriptionsof modernism in the 1930s that emphasizeditstraditional sources.As critic Sheldon Cheney observedinExpressionism in Art, "TheModerns, indeed,go to man's pastreverently. Theyrecognizethe lifeoftheages as soil from which arttakesnourishcontemporary ment." themoderns For Cheney, had to stepback intothepastin orderto go forward. James similar Johnson Sweeneyputforth sentiments whenhe wrote:"Itwas realizedthat a new epoch could growonlyout ofa new archaism. The surface soil had become exIt had to be turned hausted. deeply and completely to produce anything youngin vigoror sap."4 Rothko's ofhuman investigation lifeand habit-tradition-partially thecomingofWorld from sprang WarII, thelatest ofthecatastrophes that seemed to be a continuing partofmodernlife.The war led to psychological introspection among artists, justas theGreatDemany intropressionhad led to cultural in the 1930s.5 Rothko, spection Barnett Newman(1905Gottlieb, in a 1970),and others participated searchfortherootcauses,historical precedents, and emotionaleffects notonlyoftheSecond World Warbutofwarfare throughout time.For theAbstract Expressionartbecame an investigation of ists, thehistory of innerrather than outersocial life.Depthpsychology and Surrealism became twoofthe toolsto examinetheorigins ofhumanbehavior. Freudianand espeits psychology-with ciallyJungian archaic, emphasison theancient, and primitive, and on mythic and collective behavior-provided the instruments forunderstanding and defining contemporary history. Rothko expressedhis concur34 spring1988
rencewiththenotionof a collectivepsychology a 1943 raduring dio broadcast withGottlieb. He declaredthat such a commonpsycould be tracedbackto anchology and was evident in myths. tiquity These myths and their underlying conceptsexpressedtheprimaries ofhumanexperience, whatever their topicaldifferences: recall theknownmyths Ifour titles we have used them ofantiquity, are theeternal again because they we must symbols upon which fall back to express basicpsychological ideas They are thesymbols of fearsand motivaman'sprimitive no matter in which land or tions, whattime, changingonlyin detail butneverin substance, be they Greek, Aztec, Icelandic,or Egyptian.And modern finds psychology them stillin our dreams, persisting our vernacular, and our art, for all thechangesin theoutwardconditions oflife.6 Rothko's approachto thepastthearchaicand the antique-was further in 1943 in the clarified draft (beforeitwas altered original Gottlieb and Newman)ofhis by now famous letter to theNew York Times: theevolution Anyone familiarwith art what knows ofmodern potent and the catalyzers Negrosculpture, artof the at were its Aegean inception.Eversince this the inception most men our time, of gifted whether seatedtheir modelsin they their orfound within themstudios, selvesthemodels art,have for their distorted these modelsuntilthey awoke thetracesof their archaic and itis their distortion prototype which thespiritualforce symbolizes ofour time. Tosay thatthemodernartist has been fascinatedprimarily bytheformal relationship aspectsofarchaic artis,at best, a partialand misleadFor any serious ing explanation. artist or thinker willknow that a
1 Untitled, ca. 1939-40. Oil on canvas,293/4 Richard x 36 in. Collection E. and Jane M Lang
.?i
r4'
r.
i.
:5~''I" .I.~~I?:? ?~??:?i~ ; :ii: a ~;;; ~il~h~3~TI! .?. ~I ?-~; )i 'C ~~?;?. 7 ?1~ sp~~ IC~c~n:?.=P~?;
A seriousstudent ofancientculas formis significant onlyinsofar itexpresses theinherent idea. The Rothko was drawnto ancient ture, truth is therefore thatthemodern thereligious and art, particularly artist has a spiritual with scenes found in kinship mythological theemotions which these archaic Greekpainting and architecture. He often visited theNearEastern and themyths formsimprison and Graeco-Roman roomsofthe which Thepublic they represent. which reactedso violently Metropolitan MuseumofArt, and therefore to the in the 1920she copied images art, primitive brutality ofthis from books on ancientartto illusreactedmoretruly thanthecritic trate a Bible.8 The results ofthese whospokeaboutformsand techthis studiesare perceptible in his art. niques.Thatthe public resented is not Rothko's workpresents a spiritual mirroring of itself youthful to understand.7 theme-the dzfficult symbolic lifelong ofthearchitectonic, theenviunity In thispassage,Rothko states and thefigurative. The many ronmental, ofhislifelong interests and commit- compositions ofsome ofhis important formative workfrom 1940-41 theidea ofarments, including chaicartas a prototype, ofwhich to 1946generally consistofhorimodernartrevealstraces, and his frieze bands zontally segmented sense ofa spiritual and emotional byGreekvase painting, inspired and architectural withearlierartand myth. architecture, kinship In thepreambleto theconstitution sculpture. These worksincorporate oftheFederation ofModernPaint- barely and perceptible fragments ers and Sculptors, written in 1940, ofancient which art, quotations Rothko and another as evocations and signsof artist, probably function condemnedartthat neGottlieb, thepast.9 Rothko used his ancient on to join thepastto the gatedthe"worldtraditions" fragments whichthey felt modernartwas sup- present as partofa new creation and a "spiritual mirror" ofcontemposed to be founded.
35 Art Smithsonian Studiesin American
*r ..?_.i.:;....~ ~~~L. ,-.i\ ?~'' "`' ~ ''~'
.' ?q~f~e~f~h~
~S~z~r?~ :
F: 9? i J :" 3?~ r
~?~i~abi~i~i~g: ' ~s~
ci; t'~;~;P~.~B~Ps~:;)~.f
i~~
?.,
-? i~Q~C~
:1
i??
:? ?? .? ?,? .I:
2 Akhenaten/Amenhotep IV (Egyptian), ca. State 44 in. high. 1365 B.C. Limestone, Berlin Museums,
ofa Warrior, 3 Arrival bydria red-figured (southern Italian),fourth B.C Terracentury in. high.TheMetropolitan cotta, 231/2 MuseumofArt
life.For him,thepastwas porary innerand theoriginoftheWestern outerworld. In an untitled from painting thevariRothko 1939-40, suggested and of ety, yetcontinuity, humanity therootsofcivilization (fig.1).10 threerowsof The painting contains The top band comprises forms. ofvariousanheads representative To theextreme cientcivilizations. is thehead of theEgyptian right Akhenaten, recognizable pharaoh chin(fig. curving bythedistinctive 2). Thishead flowsintoa double head witha Greekor Assyrprofile ian beard,intowhatappearsto be an Oriental head withswelling whichin turn cheeksin profile, sharesa nose withthehead having theelongatedlips ofa facewithan smile.A profile archaickouros-like helmet in a Corinthian ofa warrior theupperfriezeat the completes Alltheheads are joined bya left. scalloped,wavyline thatis similar band called to a Greekdecorative running dogs,manyexamplesof whichcould be foundin vases at theMetropolitan (fig.3). of clasThe center tierconsists sic Greekarchitectural fragments. arancient In thebottom register, chitectural ornaments (including of acanthus leaves),also suggestive and bones,signify claws,tentacles, as well as our dual rootsin nature These forms Greekcivilization. as signsofour anthusfunction cientand biologicalpast.(Similar ancient claw bones makeup the lain Rothko's rootsof thefigures the the terSlow Swirlby Edge of Sea [1944,The MuseumofModern Art]). a Rothko's suggests painting and architecoffigural combination ofsome tural compositions typical at the oftheBoscorealefrescoes William that he, Metropolitan Baziotes(1912-1963), and other Abstract loved.11 Expressionists and arof figural Thiscombination in elements chitectural originated
36 Spring1988
workin the 1930s.For exRothko's ofeleconsists ample,Interior and ofclassicalarchitecture, ments and "real" architectural sculpture to distinthat are difficult figures and an unfrom one another, guish titled workfrom 1936-37 depictsa the toward nude womanwalking cornerof twowalls,lookingback overhershoulder(figs. 4, 5). The in an wallsseem to place thefigure and signifienvironment embracing Butby enclosethefigure. cantly his transformed the 1940s,Rothko encloses conceptofthespace that environment one. The enveloping and mythic. had become ancient thistransition Rothko symbolized ancientarchitectural byinserting intothefigural frames; fragments now embodtheselaterpaintings oftradition. ied theinternalization Thisshift in approachis particuuntitled in another evident larly ofthe 1940s,in whichthe painting in artist combinesseveralfigures reminiscent frame an architectural ofclassicalniches(fig.6). Here createda multisided Rothko and enclosed form human/organic architectonic a classicizing itwithin of Greek reminiscent environment steles.Moving funeral vertically (from top to bottom)thecomposiofseveralGreek tionconsists in beardedheads fusedtogether and frontal views;several profile and a flat breasts (Mir6-inspired?) phallicor hip shape combined whatappear to be buttocks; with tendrils, and,at thebottom, curling and roots,all in earthtones. thistles, in The use of compositefigures deciRothko's theseworksreflects the sion to makethehumanfigure and art. he his Both of centerpiece thehuwantedto portray Gottlieb it.They manfigure butnotmutilate create to felt however, compelled, ofthehumanfigrepresentations would addresscomplex ure that and forcesat ideas ofthefates workon humanity. Thus,their workwould have to be bothfigura-
S? ?j i~.
?I:1?-?:
'' ?``?? "r...
.:?::
r?L
I-T~. II
?~ c r. --? -mu~ ?,? :?: ?: ??. ? ;I irnF? au..e
FI
~T~J~71 ?.. 1:? -.k?
I~
~"~,~G~iiJ,:I:?~?:?~PIT?` 'I
ii::: ....
,2
i i: '?'? :i
:i r: ?f ?~~B~? .~:i?;-? ?i ;PI~L_-
:?
,. i.
??
~93d~i-.? 4
r
?!r lisis~ r t
4 Interior, ca. 1932. Oil on masonite, 231s/,6 in.National Gallery Gift ofArt, of x 185/ni TheMarkRothko Foundation,Inc. 5 Untitled, 1936-38. Oil on canvas,237/8 x Gift ofArt, of The 181/8 in. National Gallery MarkRothko Foundation,Inc.
the are notacFor this, tiveand conceptual. Rothko's then, figures, in anyconventional conventional whole humanshape tualfigures A composwas simply sense.Theyare notsinglebeings inadequate. deiteform was needed. Gottlieb are varied, butcomplexes:they dytraces cided on a pictograph namicforms, structure, shapes,ancient and conceptual and fragments, byRenaissance partially inspired in whichhe placed parts signsand philosophical or literary predellas, ofthehumanbody,objects, and symbols. Figural appearanceor ofprimi- form is notimportant exceptas shapesand signsevocative in a seriesof some function, tiveand ancient forms or signof attribute, Rothko thepast.LikemostAbstract Exprescompartments. experimented witha similar workat thisstage,Rothko's sionists' compositionalschemein at leastone ofconofpersonifications consists in whichhe filled comdrawnfrom painting, everycepts,notforms withfragments ofthe partments daylifeor objects. Crucifixion and Greek/Christ heads howsolution, (fig.7). His primary TragicMyth frieze ever,was thearchitectonic to drewon Greekliterature Rothko Such a figurative figure. compositionallowed himnotonlyto sugexpandand develop his notionof human environment to includea heritage gesttheconventional He was and tradition of disaster. frame-head on top,feetbelow-hiscon- particularly butalso integrate and layer in Aeschyinterested whichporlus's Oresteia ceptionoftherootsand sourcesof trilogy, itshumannature. thehistory oftheGreek trays
37 Smithsonian Studiesin American Art
'' ~'9 e ~e~mR~a
??
?.i;.? .-?L
?? ~ Pr~B~': 'T
~"
r:f ?:.i?
~"?r
-I
I ~. ~ i?? ?;?=i ?:;
Z': :?'? 7~iFee~Zs~r~l~ir; r~ ii
' ~;c: .. ~SP~BP~5-a2~~~~ ----?`-i~ ~?7~ -iL;~' WITSIIYB~~ ~ ?~ ?^ ?
??? '; ??.rrT

r. .~ c~?~A?
J ~" ~????
2. -.t
i.J ?-L :c.. .::':;: ''' ;~?? i; ?? ?.?)?;.? ':.

i i. r-l ~-????
?r?~ ': 1"' ~l~n~FBC~I? -II
re. ~
~z: ?.-
?:'r.?G 'i: ??.??` ~`;3P'
-r#
-~
L4P:" :il` '~: i:: ?:??,: ;?:?
il
-J.-rYw;nlr~lci~,~t~n.~s "' -?- ?:
~,~'~iPi~'~"~l?3~~~?ì~L~3
6 Untitled, ca. 1940. Oil on canvas,31'/r6 x 23V/in. Collection Museum, Neuberger StateUniversity at Purchase, ofNew York Foundation,Inc. of TheMarkRothko Gift
worldas a sequence ofintergenerationalmurders, insatiate discord, remenace,and political, perennial and familial It dedisaster. ligious, and legacyof the pictstheconflicts Greeks'worldwar,theTrojanWar,
38 1988 Spring
and createsa dramaofextreme emotions and violent of situations, lifeand death, and of inwardconflict and obligation. Rothko was not theonlyone to drawon Greek themesin the1940s.Thatsevtragic
Untitled, early1940s. Oil on canvas,30 x 36 in.National Gallery ofArt, of The Gift MarkRothko Foundation,Inc.
'??I~ . I
r 'i;L- ? ?"
..
?~
"~' ':*4 Iv;:
?Il:E.i;? ?.':~I~h~e~. 1Fi?:i ::j
eral artists, including Seymour and Martha Graham,12 Lipton simulchose themesfrom the taneously same source strengthens theargumentthat artwas partly Rothko's rootedin thereaction to World WarII and theprevalent sense of uncertainty amongcontemporary American artists about thefateof and civilization. Cassanhumanity dra'sdescription oftheHouse of Atreus inAgamemnoncould have been a description ofRothko's world:"... thehouse that hates god, an echoingwomb ofguilt, kinsmen sevkinsmen, torturing ered heads,slaughterhouse ofheblood." For roes,soil streaming in the 1940s,"thestorms of many ruinlive[d]." Rothko's interest in Aeschylus and ancient dramawas detragic rivedfrom Nietzsche's TheBirth of Out oftheSpirit Tragedy ofMusic, a workthat influenced him greatly as a youngman.'3Nietzsche's deofan artoftragic scription myth, and extreme Dionysian energies, from his valuation of joyresulted drama. Assertions in Aeschylean
39 Studiesin American Art Smithsonian
TheBirth that artshould of Tragedy dramatize theterror and struggles ofexistence musthave seemed to Rothko to support his understandrole underthe ingoftheartist's terror of contemporary history. Nietzsche's own "primitivization" oftherootcultures, and art history, oftheWestthrough his focuson and pre-Socratic Aespreclassical dramaas well as his advochylean artprovidedthe cacyofa visionary linkbetweenconceptsoftheprimitiveand theclassicalthat lies at the base ofRothko's art.Rothko's classicismwas a Nietzschean, Dionysian in archaism-preclassicism Nietzsche's terms-new to artand thought. twentieth-century It reflected themodernvisionof theclassicalworldthat, for Johann Joachim many, replaced Wincklemann's "a calm simplicity, a noble grandeur." Through Rothko modernized clasNietzsche, sicismto conform to his world:he made itarchaic. In TheBirthof Tragedy Nietzsche arguedthat Aeschylean and tragic tragedy myth represent
~j~:ji? ?i? ??
i'? r"~
?; 9?, ?,, ?~3i ?e?-~if;fl:?: ? d~Iu~W1Ar~ "' ~lli(ru~ " l~m -~RV ~c ?. -u, ??-i i ~ ~ .~?
-? ;?. ~ 11:L ?:.
~,~?
-?-;i? :ai~c~:?:?:.? _ .: ~?': :? :: ;+~ ?, ~;;; :: :: .i? 8? P?:i r ;?.: hi i.. Ix; cli: ?-?? 1;? 1;: ~ ~" ;? : :S: ~ .? :: ?~~ ?:e~? "b:: i: .'.:..` ;; ~5-L ?i ~F? b"i:;_:??' :jl;??1~1~ r ;-'"-.? s ?? ?, ~Z~ c :?:I: :: ? ?; ~-~Bb~iLlr.?i?~ ,.Y C----?~-~? r ?z :i: ; ~ -.?. I. - j:! t~ ?*: "$. r t ;:: :? ~ .~LI'?*~. ~ti? ??:-?.~rc~ ?~ i rr:? ~ .. ?? i ?? .?;.~-r~uU, 1:~??. '' ''`' :??' ~ :'
;t, I- .e `??: t: ----
:'
?? '?
t.
.?' :?~ .: ??? ??
?)i
t r
?; 2?: ~ i' r ,I + ii ;-z :i? ? ?~ ??k~
rC~L
-~I 3~i~
T:~. fL'i:.. .r r-?? _I ;;i
?~
r i.-??
I:t?~P: -? !:? :??;il J-.~ i
.?
BL ;; ~i:?". C?.Y; F.j~S'rj ~:~4L?~~--' .?:~~.~.~
,1
r;~rr~glll~+?L;?~ELs~UP ,? P4 ~:~PY~L5~i~C5~Z
;; ?= ?C~IIIIAI~ITIT.~ :;:-: ;r *-; ~d~ersr--gt~p~ L~r"g~S; re ~-P: i~? ;j:
~:=
~~;t? ~J??,.1 ?-:~iz. = ?;~ ~.~QE~. .r ?" .~,
~: i ~:3 ~ :`?~FCQ~%eeB~F~\;;)c~~~'~iZ~C~':i~ .....,
':il :i~' ' ? rnr? a~se~-
~; -a 1.
;1 ?...??c---~ 7 --'????~ ?? ,?? i: -:-'? ??'-: rl~~?? ,.? -r -
;?:? ~~CU?-_i;r \ ? ~---?m~y. ? .... ?~t
"""?:? -'I?: h-? ?:.
?:
?:.
crs-cL-~Tcl~Ii~~ ???iT. .:.. ;'L ~~ ?r ;?::.?
I
-;i:~B~B~B~B~B~B~B~B~B~B~B~B~B~B~B~B~B~:~ IYr ?I --~. :I '-~R~Z~C 'f
~??i?.? ????.?.
: s~ :?? "?'~' r Isi? . .?
?;
9
r---?? 1~--.? 1 ~
-~ :
:? I,?
ri
?. ?,
??i ~i?r;f~: ?: - p ~erran . ?~ _ Y r i?-? ?? .i~-a ,L :~1~6;L~ry ;I ?: 'i .
I,: :?. ,.? -,a~
v =r:?`?~~ .?.=Pllr. -rroao
~? ,.? II
*'?i?~
? -s ~-: ".~,:?~'I~' ci
-=-
-,
-Ulra? .?*
~wat~Lxi~p~i~U~ .i. ,,~,~:-~?~;???~?r;i;%~ c l;;jeC~L6~1 ~~.~~'\~jbl?
I ~ r?J~Mi .I:Y~IX~X';~I~ ?r ?:i? :.?s?:t,-2 ~..? .1. .; ' ' :i3~s~E~C~B~:? E :If-?::: '" :~..r? ;
;r J?~~ ~j;l
dYIO~S~
IL
~...?;
?ii:
8 The Omen oftheEagle,1942. Oil on in.National Gallery canvas,253/4x 173/4 of Art, Foundation,Inc. of TheMarkRothko Gift
Here Rothko stateshis desireto get to thecentral themeof all myths. He sees the modern mythmakertakesovertheenDionysiantruth himself-as the creative truly tire domain of myth as thesymbolwhose reflect the power myths ismof itsknowledge which it course of the human in all its spirit makesknownpartlyin the public vicissitudes, aspirations, powers, cultof tragedy and partlyin the and wisdom. secret celebrations ofdramaticmysTheOmen of theEagle, a key butalways in theold mythiteries, visual ofthecomrepresentation cal garb.... Through the tragedy of ideas with which Rothko plex attainsitsmost myth profoundconwas in the 1940s, engaged early itsmostexpressive tent, form.4 his concernswithallpresents and origins myth encompassing a god offertility, Originally Eagle com(fig.8). TheOmen ofthe of Dionysusbecame a symbol bines,in hybrid images,thepast In earlyrites, he tragic suffering. and present, theprimitive and the dismembersymbolized suffering, theartistically ancientand classical, and restoration. Nietzsche ment, and themythic and tragic. modern, theDionysian as a pictured spirit As withmany worksofthispekindofgod and saviorwho could riod(e.g., TheOmen,TheSacrifice lead mankind by meansofartto tookthesuboflphigenia),Rothko In Nietzschean acceptsuffering. jectof TheOmen of theEagle from dramaand myth, tragic Dionysusin- Greekliterature. Here his source is fusedtheindividual witha larger thefirst Agamemnon, playofthe set ofvalues and a higher form of in whichtwoeagles Oresteia, lifethanthemerely individualistic. swoop down upon a pregnant hare itsforms-the tragic Through and devourher unbornyoung, and music(anotherof myth thecomingwarwith symbolizing Rothko's interests)-the Dionysian Troy of and thecomingsacrifice advancedculture and spirit theinnocent Iphigenia. awareness. The imagery of Rothko's paintA beliefin thenecessity ofmyth, ingis at once classicaland mythoand especially thesuprapersonal logical.Atthetop is a seriesof or communal, underliesRothko's Greekheads and at thebottom a art.In 1945,forexample,Rothko set ofhumanfeet corresponding indicated his beliefthat a "Mythbelow a horizontal line,thederivamovement had begundur- tionofwhichcan be tracedto Making" ingthewar.'5In thecatalogueof in Greekvase chiton-clad figures Still'sexhibition at Peggy Clyfford the heads and Between painting. Art ofThis Century Guggenheim's feetare eagle heads and wings, surRothko wrote: gallery, an architectural arcade mounting and recedechoingclassicalforms the current into the Bypassing preoccupaing Againa background. tionwith and the nuances architectural environgenre of symbolic Stillexin a figmenthas been internalized formalarrangements, ure.Two ofthe arcade'scolumns thetragic-religious drama presses which at all are roundedand pendulous, isgenericto all Myths no matter where occur. to mindan imageof times, they summoning He is creating to rewhileothercolbreasts, counterparts nurturing
universal truths that are infinite and eternal. For Nietzsche and the concentrates Rothko, myth nature of life in tragic Dionysian form. As Nietzsche wrote: symbolic
hybrids place theold mythological whohave losttheir in pertinence theintervening centuries.16
:iu
1?~ ?;i~~rt~tt~L~LtrP~i~gl~Bi6~~Ui : i3
*'` ~~Qa'
9 GrantWood,Victorian 1931. Oil Survival, on composition board,32/2 x 261/4 in. Private collection
Rothko evokedthepastnotonly as environment butalso as memThetheme hereis derived from.the As he observedin oryand survival. AgamemnonTrilogy ofAeschylus. a pro1949,"an atavistic memory, The the picturedeals not with parexistside by dream, phetic may ticularanecdote,butrather with side withthecasual eventoftotheSpirit whichisgeneric ofMyth, accordswith day."Such a remark to all myths at all times. It involves forexample,in the discussions, a pantheism in which man, bird, American surrealist magazineView, beastand tree, theKnownas well wherein 1946 one authornoted as theKnowable-merge intoa that is seeking themodernartist singletragicidea.17 thesubconsciouswherethe"preofancesnatalmemory, thesurvival The figure is therefore thepointof and tralcustoms and theautomatic as in mostof Rothko's reference, lie. instinctive ofthespirit" and is made to embodyand work, activity of customsand rites The survival of expressthecomplexnature was a themecommonto thewritman.TheOmen of theEagle is a and totemintended to ingsofmanyon whomRothko single-figure Abstract other Rothko's ideas aboutthe drew, Expressionists represent SirJamesFrazer, ofculture and conscious- including Jessie phylogeny and CarlJung, and itinness.Although itresemblessurreal- Weston, thedefinition of tradition isthybrids, thoseofMir6 forms especially artof was partoftheAmerican in itscomposition and Ernst, ofdis- that theantithe 1930s.20 similar and variegated For instance, partsand artists ofthat modernist American itsallusionsto spatialdimensions, thehistoric itfrom timealso soughtprimalrootsand pastdistinguish in theevocationofartraditions them.In some ways,Rothko's figGrant chaic American ancestries. uralstructure, withitssimultaneity arand interrelated but disjointed Wood,in his own deliberately Gerchaicstyle is a pictorial to (based on Flemish, parts, equivalent manand nineteenth-century AmeriT. S. Eliot'sandJames Joyce's stream of consciousness. Gothic can primitives)-American (Eliot and Survival were extremely (fig.9)Joyce fig- and Victorian important inheritances uresin thedevelopment American ofthecon- personified in created much the Rothko of the of the way cept continuity past totems ofWestern in Abstract withthepresent legacies.21 inSeveralof Rothko's works, Expressionism. )18 Dream Rothko's 1941-42 thus Ancestral of cluding Imprint, figures and extendhis themeoftheabsorption Memory, Memory, Prehistoric ofthefigure Tentacles the environment. (fig.10), refer ofMemory by After the 1930s,Rothko to ancient memories developed specifically
42 Spring1988
talumnsend in hooks,suggesting ons or tentacles. The compositehuman-birdarchitectural of TheOmen of figure theEagle additionally represents, a mythic creato Rothko, according ture.In describing thework,he indicatedhis intention to make of his and refigures something primitive also declared ligious.He, however, that in illushe was not interested stories, trating mythological onlyin their meanevoking generalspirit, and ing, pattern:
a conceptofthementalenvironmentas theGraeco-Roman tragic Amerpastto whichcontemporary ica and Western Europe belong and whichshapes their experience. In 1948 an anonymous critic sucrelated Rothko's idea: cinctly to say I'm he is trying ... thething toldis that formsand space are is no beginning or one, thatthere thatwe all are end ofanything, part ofour environment.19
i I?.
A :T ??';
? r---
10 Tentacles ofMemory, 1945-56 Watercolor and inkon paper,213/4 x 30 in. San Albert FranciscoMuseumofModernArt, M. M BenderBequest Albert BenderCollection, Fund ofTwo Confrontation to Sophilos, 11 Attributed krater Boars.Volute (Greek), earlysixth in. century B.C. Terra-cotta, 193/s x 217/8s MuseumofArt, TheMetropolitan Gift ofMr. and Mrs.MartinFried
and to thesubconsciouswithin whichthememoriesare buried. The darkbands and theimageof foundin Tentafilaments attenuated the are drawnfrom clesofMemory bands,theincisedlines,and the in Greekvase offigures contours such as Confrontation of paintings, TwoBoars (fig.11). The tentacles seem a of darkness probinglayers ofEliot'snofitting representation writer thecontemporary tionthat mustselectwordswitha "network down rootsreaching oftentacular and desires," to thedeepestterrors to thelevelof experienceall humansshare.22 to theclassireferences Rothko's of contemporary cal underpinnings in became more abstract society bythemid 1940s. signand form verHe combinedmore refined themes his established sions of withmorefrequent borrowings usoften surrealist from imagery, washesand watercolor. ingthin art His allusionsto Graeco-Roman became increasand architecture as and abbreviated, fugitive ingly forexamplewithslight suggestions columns. oftogafoldsand fluted linesto accent used fluted Rothko thecostumeofone ofthebird43 Art Smithsonian Studiesin American
seers in TheOmen (fig.12), as well in PersonnagesTwo as thefigures (1946,MarkRothko Estate).In Sactheend ofa fluted column rifice, and thescrollofan Ionic capital turned on itsside are combined witha Mir6-like figure (fig.13). One source forthecapitalscroll mayhavebeen theMetropolitan's theTempleof Ionic columnfrom Artemis at Sardis(fig.14). In anotherwork, stacked vertically planes,fluted shafts-perhaps derivedfrom thesame Ionic column-and volutesevoke both architectural and humancurves the workfrom (fig.15). An untitled early1940s (fig.16) unitesa row of heads,a groupofarms,and a sewith riesofsatyrlike clovenfeet wall planes drawn architectonic from thecubiculumofthe Boscorealefrescoes at theMetroallude to Some paintings politan. and guttae; otherscontain triglyphs rectilinear outlinesthat have been from architectural strucsimplified in Vessels tures;23 ofMagic (1946, The Brooklyn Museum)handlesof Greekvases and chiton-clad figures Rothko's toappear.Furthermore, nalities echo theochresofGreek vases or theAegeanblues associ-
?.? ?.??--? :. ?=:. .

(4: u~...:~ '-"'" t~C~'4~ ~??t~I ?ds:;aiii~ i" ~I~??RI~VI ::,:
r?~...I '-~Lt~:I
-i-,I. .?c.-)C~i~;:?si7; ~ ?c~~~;b~;~"~l?-: u?
..~C.~~.~,i 1X~~. ~:-.???~;I~?. i:?? ;:? :::;:~ :~--?? ?i .?:?:? .ci. ??::~?-? t?::;F~:_:i'?
I;
S?r~lB~Uj~`CPdR~'r*~~:r~. -,s )"Z ~~ ~1~ ' li.e '.;; :;~ ~I~Z~
:?? ?~ ~;??' .j r.\ ~:::~ ~~ ?;? "'
1.37
c-I~
r Brir i~:L~?
?: ;; i.-~t ~E',. : ~-~I~ci~t?~ ri ??1''?.(: :r
~?~?
~;~:?u~-v"lw~tt~i~r~;~i~~ A ?? i; 1~ ?..
I~:'c?~Y
t.. U"li~Zs.'li
?-' r..
?r: ??i~ .:i .`
:rj;
i.i~. ~f :~t'~
1 ~L ~ , IcBP: t~ ~tfli:~ : ~ ~:~R~
.r. 2;-.
...
~iC7:; ??:~r~??I
-~.1 !\L1 ~ -'':' r '? \~? n-??~? :i;L ?::~LI.
*5-" 'r:
ri~i(9bb~G"
:1, :?
I; :i: :?; ?-??; r;: :? --
.. ,... :,; :?:?-
;t.:-; ?Z 4~ :i' ~~~PI~R ~EI~LYIC~~
:: .; ;?-? :`~;?
;I ?;
1 ',?. :??'!
~..
;.?
??':,:?j??i~-c:;::' I~Y?: .:1 ?i:.4.~.? ~ts:
S:;.
`?~Ld : t- ~?m?ir~y~lXIJI~P~i~cJ~i3~~f~l~~~rm~eaM' 1~ -? ??
?? )~? :H; :1? ~r?
i:
: I:
Y
; .IC?. -.f.-. a-.:-~rl?
: .I
i
???::
..-.L-.~~. r. .t.:.-.;,
r--???'?-C
?,;~d~?; ~:-'1?-(:~~???2 :f?.::ra~
,CL;.7~
?\
????: ? "'
?'c: M:~:::~:.-. .... : ; ~ic3::~?; n? :-:_:?;r :_ ::~ "'
??i!:??;: ; ~. gi ?? :-.????:?:?-~?`r; .??': ...:~ -??r?t '`.`::. .?.... ..e ?;~'i:~~.r.?t~~e~:~.' :.'.. ?? ?'??':;:-??-I~~ ...;; .C2-~~ :"`
!?
'.1 1~ j? ?.
; r .:?
:i~~i831;i ?Ii? -??. 1~:? l?~?'-%f?~'~;: ~'~`:~J~;?? : ?.c '"'' .??~?~' ?,;
P. rr???? .,
I. --
.:..
'"
?'
~rp~ ?, .c?
12 The Omen,1943. Oil and pencil on canvas, in. National Gallery ofArt, 195/16 x 131/6 Foundation,Inc. Gift of TheMarkRothko 13 Sacrifice, 1943. Gouache on paper,393/ x 26 in. ThePeggy Collection, Guggenheim and TheSolomon Guggenheim Venice, Foundation,New York
atedwiththesea aroundGreece.24 Archaic Phantasyis a summationofRothko's a layerearlywork, and ingofassociations, symbols, and combinedfigural signswithin architectural suggestive organisms of theinternal and external human environment (fig.17). Whilethisorseem ganismor figure mayat first to be a variant ofa surrealist form createdbyautomatist meanderings, itis,in reality, a deliberate, layered to complex,a "compoundghost", use Eliot'sphrase,made up mostly ofsigns, and memories fragments, that definehumanfateas Rothko conceivedit. Archaic Phantasy combines a triangular simifigure-form lar to that in Ernst's TheCouple MadameJean (1924, Collection Krebs, Brussels)withotherforms that to mindthespidery bring
44 1988 Spring
the scales (from armsof an insect, column),curvitop oftheArtemis linearfoldsofa toga,and a crown or capital. The whole is placed bestriaoffluted low an earthstratum tionsand thecenterofwhatlooks Phanlikean Ionic scroll. Archaic ofhumanity's past,a tasyis a totem conflation ofRothko's conceptsof all external/internal beginnings and ends,and a reflection ofthe idea that humanfateis to be exthan rather plainedbyitsoriginal causes. byitsfinal In Archaic as in most Phantasy, ofhis earlywork, Rothko presents from artas a specter, formed and shades or ghostsoftheforms ofthepastmade into experiences and expression. modernform a Rothko's modernist artreflects ofa civiself-conscious examination
I
''~~' '"' :J.
??
i,. t;r ?, :r~ '`? ~~:'*: ~.?ramr
.
r?~Tm' ~?l-~r\ . dl ~d C~Lluci~.r ?? i~i ?-?? ".T 9Y--* $ ?' :~ Y ~f;-~eqc~l~?'??? ~A-?~ .... ~t ~ : i '~ "? .:f i.??/J ?i u. ~4?,,.;2 .~ ~?? ?r ?~isre%-.i' .~ ?:? .ar r.-.1
1 1. :
i'1'
4 ;
i...;'?: E ~?%Q~P~~t:';-f~'~?'~~ ?? ;t CI L;1 ? ~Z~
??: ?? 'IIC~P~S ~ ':3 'I?:. ?~IIR~L~ ~?:.`. ' '~??? ?'..'-. PI~L~iAS?:~~B?:,? ~t~r c, rr:..?r~P~-?'YT~ L~'(i ~,???~ ~ i?i ?c. -7
?~. ~Y'~'-IWIP~---
I-
I?~ II? I
I B '' :? ?C i. ?' ?~' rt. r
1. ??;
'J.??i '?r.-??
?? .? .r'.. I~
??
?I??
.. -r__j-:'-iLI? -~? I-?-?-rr;: ~:F
?ir
;CI YX ~ ;e
~'" ~;~L1 51 C ;r
n? ..
?~?-?'f-??~:-:h
-- SR?2~i~ju-''' ~IW~~ ~iiy~B~"Y~
14 Ionic capitalfromtheTemple at ofArtemis Sardis(Greek), B.C. Marble. fourth century TheMetropolitan MuseumofArt, of the Gift American Society for theExploration ofSardis
(?
?,. ? '~? .?~~
r,,
:? C.
r ,? :~ ..r ~i r?=-r. ,7~i ? .. -;-.~ - 'L~:~L~C.SRV Rt~a:~gl .. .'r,: ?, C.
ì'
I;i; ? 8' ~?.:?~i ?.?.ra~a; Xgy?~I~ k ~?? .C? h r r.. r ri ~?L ?t I .?rt ~L~L. ~jt~mn-;BJ!? r ;r
1?. ~ ?? :rJ` .?. ;?. 1F~r? :, ~?
: .~?
I: ??? ~I
-~ 1.. :?
?:; .. r~ac. ~~ -~i ? ??:. 1, ~ -??I? Ir , ?r~? '' ?? (
?IOXi" ??I? 'C ',F :?. : i: i~:'' ?
?~:r?o
~ .r
.?.?~'~i~i~f~!k?;!:l'=i Y :.? .. ??-?1r, .. r';-'l?*?I1C~qRI;S~~~Prr ~ff:7 ~??
rZ.
' i
-?~9'~?
r.
''
~C~ ~ .. -
i:
I: ?-F i
S;
on paper, 15 Untitled, 1945-46. Watercolor ? 1988, TheEstate 401/2 x 27 in. Copyright ofMarkRothko 16 Untitled, early1940s. Oil on canvas,351?6 of The ofArt, x 24 in. National Gallery Gift MarkRothko Foundation,Inc. 45
in whichthecontemporary lization is merely a momentary fragment. The character ofthisearlyworkis statedin an anonymous inclearly whichRothko must troduction, haveapproved, to thecatalogueof hisexhibition attheArt ofThisCenin 1945: tury gallery Rothko's paintingis not easily ied. It occupiesa middle classif abstraction and groundbetween surrealism. In these paintingsthe
Studiesin American Art Smithsonian
abstract idea is incarnatedin the has a latent image.Rothko's style archaicqualitywhich the pale and uninsistent coloursenforce. This thereverse particulararchaization, oftheprimitive, thelong suggests ofhumanand traditional savouring into experienceas incorporated added]. Rothko's myth [emphasis are symbols, fragments ofmyth, heldtogether almostautobya free, maticcalligraphy that givesa peculiar unity to hispaintings-a unity
?ler~ur; :
il!ilc:c??:
-?r ? r~~ ?? c~~-?r :, ?.? -;:
E~:?: ~n~ 4r --? ~?''i ?i
~Y?. .'. ?.
???'"; ' r?.?-
.V*--?r.l =.Lj 3~-~P ?- ^? '?:
?~?`?.?~UL~;;
~~~i% .i~. r
-~ra~re~Rsl] ?Csas~i;a(lt~,
?.s
.:4 ;i:
I?'
i i./
if--:
6~:?; r;: ~;~C ?c-:,:?~-j a:~i,. cc
:?-
_r r*.
--?L
L~ ~r..L)?
; I(
?.?.
c'-"-~ ?("`
'?
~ ~c?: ?,Y I-I r-"aaP.i~I~-~?
U"~~ r?I-.
A"
.:P .i? -:i.~ ?;~ ..?-~?~ ?.:r:,;'?" '" :;''i. :uie ?? ;B~i~t~5~tr~9e -i~ "'
,,,:~X??iS
r?1?1: 31 ~PW~ _1 I~s~
:?i":~?:
'i:
-'??
17 Archaic 1945. Oil on canvas, Phantasy, in. National Gallery ofArt, 487/16 x 241/s Foundation,Inc. of TheMarkRothko Gift
18 Hierarchical Birds, ca. 1944. Oil on canvas, x 31s5/8 in. National Gallery ofArt, Gift 395/8 Foundation,Inc. of TheMarkRothko
.~..~.I
~;-~La\~Y(UW~~:'
'''
i! ?
':QYI?b? r:
?:ii~-)i? ----~?Y
Itji h-S.*. `'" ?~?i
??r: ?? ??.
,ycRcra~-----~
nr ---
?rr :i-
r7.
I' ?? -) ?,:
f f~ ?i.? ? ''~? ' ? ;i. .?. ?ì ?\ ... 'iir: I .. Y. 4.
''' :? i
I? ?; r?,
?; :
::
:5r
4 .r?.. .U' ..? ::,?~;;=~?:: ..
:: ..? i.
.I r : :? -?'?
:?? ?-? :i: r
'' ~_ :~Ef~ 5.
'' c. .i.-
:~~r ?? .-. ?,
r~?:
?:-?''?t, ,:lii a ?i
'?'.:ir~f .~i ~P~ .?c~. i?i
.?.? .?.~:.? 3
".r???r,~.i: ~. I: ~? r~i;i:I:: ;C .?:?L:'':r :;":? YI? g:: r\??: iI-? ~ ?? ? ?ri: '?' `?le .. r:I
in which theindividualsymbol acwas,butpartofan arprimitivism foran archaism as civilizaquiresitsmeaning,not in isolagument in itsmelodicadtion,butrather tion.In his mythmaking Rothko into theother elements in tendedto begina new and modern justment the It is this uninterpicture. feelingofinter- versionofhumanity's nalfusion,ofthehistorical conchainofexistences; like rupted sciousand subconsciouscapable he offers a reincarnation of Joyce, in thenew forms ofthe ofexpanding far beyondthelimits tradition of the picturespace that present. gives Between1944 and 1946 Rothko Rothko's workits forceand essential character. also began to symbolize thelegacy ofearlycivilization and humanlife His workis notprimitivism in a new way.One set ofsignswas per se-a searchforfundamentals and based on evolutionary Like biology. theelemental-but a combination mostofhisgeneration, Rothko was ofarchaism and itsapparent interested in theparallelorigins of oppoHis emphasison thephysical site,tradition. pastand consciousrootsis nota primitivist repudianess,a concepthe explored tionofcivilization, as Gauguin's through imagesin whichbiological
47 Smithsonian Art Studiesin American
ca. 1946. Oil on canvas, 19 The Entombment, Herbert Ferber 23 x 40 in. Collection
-'k :?
'I ~?? ??~"

r E~' P ?r Ì i*r; ??
a -i
~ i ~uLnm ~ (i) i -? ~ \r E
?,
20 Geometric (detail) decoratedwith dipylon mourners, funeralscenesshowing chariots, and warriors (Greek), eighth century B.C. TheMetropolitan MuseumofArt, Fund Rogers
i :c?:,~Ji~ ~.~,iv ".?u :3 1~YT ir
?,
'' /?17 .A~i??.
-C
'''~ :1 ?i '??
--??~ ?' ---L
:.
~ ?i " i: : ~? r~g~~G~~TlsP~ ,---s~Y ~4~Lla ILI I i IRE~s Il~t'' -Ws7~jaC~p~p~ ~9 ~Y;? ?L~ r ?, r. :~ XI ~?j s~
..,.
~C~Y -rl
,?5ie41Yr~
-~---~~C? -
- ~
?, -----I
I-rr? -- I
~;? ''
I f~s,: C;: r.a .. I .%J~Ya;ca~~(;\t~~~3t;iB b~e~ '' ~1~1 .i - I ~' ? :?-? -p;5~Jr~ 1; i. -'CL~J. ~e~r-~~wl:
ts ??
E:?5~ Jr?I~L'~.I --?f-?~~):
;,,'.
rsa~
r,~cr~~a~~rl~? - -----r
~--
-??.-?
: e ih "
Zli ?,
'ir ?%: '''
~Y ''
~R 4?\ .i??-~ ''
r )?
.r. /~::
and psychic rootsfusewithcultural for In Hierarchical roots.25 Birds, he dividedthecanvasinto instance, differentiated strata horizontal by toneor color likethebands of Greekvase painting (fig.18). These are typical colored strata variously which ofpaleontological diagrams, on were also a majorinfluence within work.Contained Rothko's are thestrata and cutting through
48 Spring1988
thebiomorphic shapes of birds, and otherelemental fish, (and forms.26 the mythic) Through conflation of diagram and vase associatedprimal bands,Rothko civilization withprimalearth. Rothko thedepthof symbolized timewiththeseevolutionary strucA geologicaltimescale intures. vokestheancient forcesthat shaped theplanetand itsinhabi-
and ink ca. 1944-46 Watercolor 21 Untitled, National Gallery of TheMark ofArt, Gift Rothko Foundation,Inc.
in. (image). on paper, 22/s x 3923/26
.I .~.??? :?C::??
?If:
.r, ?I~-- ;-??
:: ?-~~2 ?i~ ?Z
3. , : ~:?:?;~ -'? '~-?..? :?~ ?, .; ?, \?
?:
TPt?,. -:i. "?. rit ~t :i. i~,~:ri;?c?~\',?'~?'? : :~~ .? K~iilil( .?-~ ~; T'w: r; ds~ji . .'~'' .'''
.?~?: -`~ ,,, '?.?; 1?? ?.?s?,, ,-??,.. ~ ?.I ??z?. '' :.?.~i::: ?' ''' j~.?? ~
-? 9
.: ????~ i: i'I.I??? '?? h : ::i

::
: iC1 .... ???.?, ?Jr~s '''' r: I~"? I'??"~?::l~~\r:, ;????? .`r.-:l ...r~7;t~ ?--" ~? ?Z
?. '' -' ?7; Y . r
?~.. ::)?y ?. ''~;? ~j~ ?. ??
~?
E~::~!::I:?~;?r:?~:~ ?`??:?: ??????;. ? ,. ,. *?' ??~? :???? ?? ' '';:' ??... ......
?^
?,\?! ? .~..
?~?? 9?: ~;? -rr.
?r ? ?;,.~ -.r ?r:?

??
?.i '-~ ?? i?, c. I.....~ ~. ..
r~'~L? i.
iii;:
?? .'? ;'I *.
..
5.
-------Y
??~5~5~ ~dl~?~B~I~L~aeRls~c~'''~'' ?.?
???
%' ?. :::?
?'?: s
?: ? "
?.? . i;~m~m.
.?
aarr~guF?
~.?:
...
`TI,%.
?-
?- J 5i.'?~-i?-? ??? -~Y~r~Y~Cll~)`m~c~~-`'PI~`-L~~~yj~E~y-_s la .? ..;h:'~''~''` ?-)-(C? "' :-?li.T:?r~? r I~~6~?::.:.l;(i~i~i~i~i~ir~Pf;~tl~:l:??. ;~ITI~PJI~7~ . I ?:.
6;`V-~?, 3:5~.;~ i.
timeand thusimtants throughout ofvastepplies thecontinuation Rothko's ochs intothepresent. ideas echo thoseofJames to Hutton-considered bymany be thefather ofgeology-who in 1780 observedthat, peeringinto thegeologic recordsof thepast,he of a begincould see "no vestige of an end." Fosno prospects ning, hiare nature's silsand earthstrata or "unconscious," giving eroglyphs us signsof humanity's pastwhile also making propheciesof itsfuand ture.Rothko's paleontological a resuggest evolutionary pictures turn thefundato thepastto find mentals that underlieand foretell and thefuture. thepresent They also evoketheconstant changeand evolution ofall species. theconRothko also symbolized ofthepastin hisEntombtinuity mentseries.The entombments taketheir from basic compositions Renaissance Lamentations or For example,TheEntombpieths.27 mentconsists of a biomorphic, with multibreasted Virgin Mary raisedarmsand an Ernst-derived, across scissorslike biomorphlying wailherlap (fig.19). The apparent
display ingpose and theprominent ofthebodyalso seem to relateto or public displays Greek protheses in vases ofthedead (again,evident at theMetropolitan; 20). fig. unByplacingmostofthefigure as ifitwere partofa derground and using diagram paleontological for form a surrealist biomorphic thebody,a claw foran arm,and a shell-like shape forthefigure's combinedthe lowerbody,Rothko withhis legacyofentombments In idea ofthelegacyofnature. such otherwords,he declaredthat deathscenes are partof natural that deathis partof a natural life, such as cycle.Otherentombments, I (1946,Whitney Entombment MuseumofArt), repeatthebasic and vertical structure of horizontal butcontainno allusion crossings Rothko to humanforms. Instead, foundin naturalized thefigures them making piettsand protheses, The compositional appearorganic. structure becomes a signofman's an indexoftheeternal mortal fate, itfinds a permafate of all things; includnentplace in Rothko's work, with art, ingboththesemi-abstract forms itsburgeoning, spreading
5: i ,t 1'I'
Cr
;t i ;?
22 Clyfford Still,1945-H, 1945. Oil on canvas,

in. San Francisco Museum of 903/8 x 683/4
ModernArt, oftheartist Gift
23 Number17,1947. Oil on canvas,48 x Museum,Gift of TheMarkRothko Foundation,Inc.

357/8 in. The Solomon R. Guggenheim
"ii r;
a uri''' C~" ::::?~??:?C.
c .?
line (fig.21), above thehorizontal and thefully abstract work.28 WallsofColor In 1946,partially undertheinfluRothko's ence ofClyfford Still, workbecame increasingly abstract, and his forms and became rougher morepainterly in edge and shape. Stillmade Duringthesame time, his dramatic totemic imagesless representational (fig.22),29which details Rothko to eliminate taught and bluroutlines. Stillalso showed and Rothko how to equalize light
50 Spring1988
24 Number11,1949. Oil on canvas,68'/8x in.National Gallery of The ofArt, 435A/16 Gift MarkRothko Foundation,Inc.
darkvalues in an all-over compositionand how to further incorpointothefigratenaturelike surfaces translated ure. Rothko, however, Still'sexampleintohis own language-the classicizing figure/ colored landscapeand,eventually, light. his Rothko began transforming intomoreabearliercompositions stract shapes,whichhe described In additionto reflectas organisms. Number of Still, ingtheinfluence a figure 17, 1947 (fig.23) suggests obholdinga vase or harp-shaped ject,a typical subjectfoundon
.i.
The Red Studio,1911. Oil on 25 HenriMatisse, canvas, 71?/ x 86? in. TheMuseumof ModernArt, Mrs.Simon Guggenheim Fund
Greekvases.Number11, 1949 (fig. classical 24) recallsRothko's Untitled figures-like Tiresias, flut(see fig.15)-and columnar was trying to ing.Because Rothko end legibleassociations at that thepictorial elementsand time, structure-notthesymbolic image and form-shoulder thecontent ofthework. To balance the more naturalistic ofhis workofthelate imagery Rothko looked to a planar 1940s, colorist more who constructed architectonic than Still: settings HenriMatisse. Rothko specifically studiedMatisse'sTheRed Studio, whichprovidedwhatStill'scolor did not-a reinforcement figures and rethinking ofan architectonic environment (fig.25).30 Matisse's singlecolor environmentenvelopsbothan architectural and thespecific obsetting furniture, jectswithin. Paintings, and otherobjectsexistmostly as color squares and independent, scenes within a unified floating colorworld.The combination of an architectonic fieldof color and shapes,Still'scolor figures, Rothko's own idea ofenclosureby ancient architecture paved theway fortheartist's mature conception ofa color wall and figure. The influence ofMatisse's colors,such as thered of TheRed Studio,appearsin manyof Rothko's worksof thelate 1940s and early1950s,and was reinforced ofMilton bytheinfluence vibrant (1893-1965) subtle, Avery's painthandling. Bytheend ofthe workwas poised 1940s,Rothko's fora new flowering ofhis original figural complex. Environments ofInwardness From1950 onward, Rothko translatedand transformed his earlier tieredfigures intohis mature abstract forms pictorial bycompletely eliminating specific symbolic
52 Spring1988
thusarriving at a mode of forms, moregeneralallusions, and signs, evocations. The development of his workseems to followcomments he had written in the 1930sabout children's art-that itis possible to form as chilcontinually simplify drensimplify a roundshape to a merecircle.3' Rothko developed thisidea in his earlyworksby usand forms, traces, ingfragmentary memories. Laterhe used abstract form that makesitnearly impossible to followthetracesand signs; insteadthenew workdepended on abstract leitmotifs, generalcomand emopositions, metaphors, tionaleffects. Likethemature worksofother Rothko's Abstract Expressionists, mature artcan be consideredemor "ideographic." totemic, blematic, In 1948,Barnett Newmanorganized theexhibition TheIdeoPicturein whichRothko's graphic Tiresias ofMary Alice (1944, Estate and Vernal Rothko) (date Memory and present whereabouts unknown)appeared alongwiththe workofotherAbstract Expressionistssuch as Stamosand Still.In the catalogueNewmancharacterized theartists' workas ideographic, whichwas defined as a character, orfigurewhich symbol an the idea suggests of object without itsname.... expressing and not ideas Representing directly the their medium through of to that names;appliedspecifically which means mode of writing by of or hieroglyphs symbols, figures sugtheidea ofan objectwithout gests itsname.... A symbol or expressing written incharacter or painted, scribed, representing ideas. Newman Kwakiutl artis arguedthat because ituses abideographic stract shapes as a plasticlanguage willtowards directed by"ritualistic understanding." metaphysical "vehiclefor Shapeswere a living an abstract a carthought-complex,
26
Number 18, 1951. Oil on canvas, 813/4x 67 in. Munson-Williams-Proctor Institute, Utica, New York
"'
.. ,:~('?tT-
?~\:??? ~??~:r? '"?J:? r ???

?
r? '`? ?? ~: ~ ~
I' ~?:? r ?? .C; ??!:
'1
?.:. ? ;~i~tc~ ''
r;?
.~ r; ?:L
?'?
-i?
rierof... awesome feeling." even more mature Rothko's art, thanNewman's, can be characterized thisway.It consists of an ideographic form-part figure, part partarchitecture, partnature; part past,partpresent, partfuture; entombment, partsubconscious, are and partemotion.His paintings or totems of signifiers ideographic thehistory and tradition of inner that notabstract is, life, paintings, mereabstractions of natural forms The totemic and phenomena. thought-complex shape or abstract refers to themorespeultimately arcific forms-the rectilinear early Greek chitectural the fragments, thestratigraphic columnfigures, theenthe tiered zones, figures,
53 Art Studiesin American Smithsonian
tombment composition-his tothe temsoftherootsand tradition, events materialistic and spiritual could renand forces oflife. Rothko of der his earlierpersonifications halfnotonlythrough fate, vestigal, and dishalf-form signifiers figure, butwithin guisedsubstitutions, and features and through formal activity. earlier Tracesof Rothko's themesand theircomplexassociationscan be seen in thevertical theshapes of tieredarrangement, himself describedas whichRothko reThese tiered figures.32 paintings natureofbodcall thesegmented Number ies and his earlierfigures. 18's zones resemblethecolumn and late 1940sfigures (fig.26);
27 Number22, 1949. Oil on canvas,217 in. x 107/8in. TheMuseumofModernArt, Gift oftheartist
--
:?
Number11, 1949 holds an intermediatepositionbetweentheearlierfigure and themature ones, and themiddlezone ofstriated 22 (fig.27) recalls linesinNumber Rothko's use of classicalfluting and thesimplified of reclining figure thepiettor prothesis watercolor workfrom (see fig. 21). An untitled 1949witha middlesectionof dentils also relieson thecolumnar soon gave figure (fig.28). Rothko up even theseremoteallusionsto architectural forms foran architectoniclayout. Rothko's abstractions, consisting ofstacked rectilinear color panels framed bythinbarsofcolor,generrecall thearchitectural and figally uralensemblesfundamental to his workfrom the 1930sonward.This is enhancedbythe relationship new resemblance of his abstract
54 spring1988
workto thepaintedwallsof Roman such as theBoscoreale murals,33 panels (fig.29) and theBoscotrecase reexhibited at frescoes, recently an Museumafter theMetropolitan absence of almostforty years(fig. oftheSecond-and Third30). Many are composed of Style paintings rectilinear panelsof opaque color columnsor framed byillusionistic planesof color;othersare architectural facadesdevoid offigures. the seems to haveturned Rothko sides forhis more panelson their to thebahorizontal worksor stuck and horiofvertical sic combination in others. zontalpanels consideredhis Rothko Although mature to be paintings "facades,"34 itwas notuntilthelate 1950sbehe realizedthat forehe completely had been painting Greektemples all his life.Duringhis second trip
28 Untitled, and tempera on 1949. Watercolor in. (image). Copyright paper,393/4 x 265/16 ? 1982, TheEstateofMarkRothko 29 Boscoreale century fresco(Italian),first B.C. TheMetropolitan MuseumofArt, Rogers Fund
to Europe,whilestanding in front ofthevermilion walls of Pompeii's VillaoftheMysteries-whichdepictthesacredmystery playsand initiation rituals of Dionysus-he saw thehabitual architectonic structureof hisworkand itsrelationand drama.35 shipto sacredmyth Rothko had thusreplacedhis earlierreferences to ancientarchitectural withreferences forms to ancientRomancolor walls. oftheBoscotrecase Descriptions frescoes seem to fit maRothko's turepainting as well. In both,setare ambivalent and actualdistings tancesindeterminable. Landscape
and natural forms seem suspended in midair and thewall suggests activeskyand water. The primary artistic innovation foundin the frescoes is thecreation ofan undefined air and depth:the two-dimensional surface alone producestheillusionofthreedimensions. becomes Representation vision;and the suggestion; reality, a mirageworldin which picture, "Gods and legendsbecome fairy In boththefrescoes and tales."36 Rothko's paintings, ambiguousperand color createtheir own spective and world. magical mythical Rothko also used symbols from
30 Boscotrecase fresco(Italian), redpanel uith 31 B.C-50 A.D. The candelabrum, MuseumofArt, Fund Metropolitan Rogers
his earlierentombments in his maturework.The thinhorizontal he often plane that placed between twolarger echoes planes and that thegeneralconfiguration of his earlierprothesis scenes and Renaissance entombments became a leitmotif scattered his mathroughout turework.In Violet, Black, Orange, Yellow on White and Red (fig.31), a symbolic blackline residesbetweena vertical color figure with
56 1988 Spring
twoupraisedred arms, as in a combination oftheVirgin with Mary Christ on her lap and a GreekwailLikethemature works ingfigure. ofearliermodernartists, such as Brancusi in hisSleeping Muse or too elimiMaiastraseries,Rothko nateddetailsand substituted more and concise strucabstract, unified, turesforwhatpreviously were and descripmoreheterogeneous tiveforms. These changesled to
31 Violet, and Black,Orange,Yellowon White Red,1949. Oil on canvas,81/2 x 60 in. TheSolomon R. Guggenheim Museum,Gift Dannheisser and the ofElaine and Werner Foundation,1978 Dannheisser
b-?? -?:rLr-.? 'LC`~ ~~?alsii?
..~;..;,.. . F'?;"~
r
??.;.i i;
?L
-j
i ?: ;~-;3
-~Zc,7H
1-?
--ii .s
a greater in the expressiveness shape itself. Rothko also gave up specific referencesto his hybrid nature tobutnotto theirinternal tems, life, and existence, whichhe conspirit, sideredas natural as anyorganic Iftherehas been a consistent form. of Rothko's mature interpretation ithas been in terms of work, in the nature-of landscapeforms horizontal shapingand of natural in theevocative color. lighting Such perceptions reflect Rothko's use of nature continuing symbolic as an aspectofhumanroots, idenand And fate. nature tity, appears notonlyin thesuggestions of figure and form, butin thesense ofa new metaphor oforganicprocess
57 Studiesin American Art Smithsonian
color actionand allusion. through fluid transitions-slowexThrough and contraction, agitation, pansion, quiescence in paintand colorRothko createda new metaphor of organicand humanprocess.He thisprocessas "life, disidentified and death."3'7 Humandessolution, forRothko was rootedin and tiny natural represented byabstract and organicmoveform, action, His abstract ment. forms reenact natural processas a pictorial of expansionand contracrhythm tion.In this, Rothko againparallels otherartists ofhis time. A critic describedthetechniques of rhythmic ofthe expansionand contraction "Abstract of dance, Expressionist" Martha in muchthesame Graham,
terms as Rothko's concept:"One has inescapably thesense ofobservcoursesofacingnatural events, tionthat are a partofand are takwithin a natural ingplace directly order."38 Rothko's emblems ideographic ofenergy in abstract represent terms his conceptof organic, geologic,and humanchangeover time.He condensedin thetremulous throbofcolor innerlife, the and gave "mapastand thepresent, terial existence to manyunseen worldsand tempi."39 The structure ofRothko's mature sugpaintings motionof eternal geststhecyclic time. The writer BaronFriederich von Hardenber Novalis(17721801),popularamongthe Surrealwroteofcolored light in a way ists, that illuminates abstract Rothko's is the"breath oflife process:Light and itself, simultaneously decaying beingformed anew.., an actionof theuniverse.., a divining agent."40 In 1949 Rothko prophetically wrotethat his purposewas to movetoward"clarity: towardthe elimination of all obstaclesbetweenpainter and idea."41 The same might be said oftherelationshipbetweentheviewerand the The vieweris engulfed paintings. in a mature Rothko justas painting Rothko's earlierfigures were enIt gulfed bytheirenvironments. has often been notedthat Rothko's theviewers shapes move toward and drawthemintothework.The ofthemature workand "figure" theviewerin front of itare now equallyenvelopedin supraand forces. As he personaleffects said ofhisworkin a symposium on combining architecture and in "You it. are It isn't painting, something you command."42By and sign,image,pictorial structure, activeeffect, theindividual viewers are concretely and may engulfed feelshaped byforces ofdestiny and fate beyondtheirown personal powers.Giving up his previ58 spring1988
ous meansofsymbolization of Rothko now ideas, employslarge color emblemswhose symbolic acconfront us with what tivity directly he consideredto be humanity's forhis pastand destiny. Typically of Rothko inartists, generation made his themephysicreasingly notmerely cerebral. callyconcrete, Rothko The challengefacing in the 1950s,however, was to transform his ideas notonlyintoa new form but also intoan impictorial mediateemotionalexperience.His cultivate the paintings intentionally emotional power of color.He observed: I'm notan abstractionist ... I'm not interested in relationships of color orformsor anything else ... I'm interested baonlyin expressing sic human emotions-tragedy, ecdoom,and so on-and the stasy, that lotsofpeoplebreakdown fact and crywhenconfronted with my shows I communicate those pictures basichuman emotions peo.... The who ple weepbefore my pictures are havingthesame religious expeI had whenI painted them. riences And if you... are movedonlyby their color relationships, then you missthe point!43 He paintedbecause he wantedto be very"intimate and human."44 In the1950shis lifelong interest in thehumandramawas rendered withmore direct power.He had ridhimself ofpreviousconvenso that he could have a direct tions, transaction withwhathe conceived to be theviewer'sneed and spirit. His meanswas abstract painting's to form analocapacity signifying with gies and metaphors simplepictorialelements. theexistentialism Undoubtedly and emotionalism in cultural circles of thelate 1940sand early 1950splayeda role in Rothko's new directness ofexpression, he had longbeen interthough estedin basic humanemotions.
was more thana fasExistentialism withSartrean cination fluency, Itwas openness,and directness. towardinvolvepartofa majorshift lifeas opposed mentin individual to thedeep concernwithcultures that had characterand civilizations lifein the 1930s ized intellectual and 1940s.45Soren Kierkegaard's withitsemphasison perwriting, sonal feeling and mood,on individual anguishand pain,and use of wordslike"fear" and "trembling," "sickness" and "death," parallels and Rothko's new sense of intense His segspecific emotionality. seem to standfor mentedfigures states of variousand contrasting emotion. Rothko's mature paintsuch emotionfully ingscultivated in a waythat has been largely ality As untilrecent years. unacceptable withhis entire exgeneration, stateeven melodramatic, treme, mentsofemotionseemed as much his subjectas anyidea. in theearly1950s reCriticism thisemphasison emoinforced of So did thepopularity tionality.46 in a SuzanneLanger's Philosophy New Key(1942) and Feelingand Form(1953), bothofwhichsold thousands of copies. Langer's idea that theartist that feeling portrays transcends merepersonalexperience parallelsaspectsofAmerican artat thistime.It shouldbe underthat stood,however, manyofthe in and Rothko artists, particular, and detached, universal, portray notmerely emoautobiographical, tion.Theirartremains as a testathat mentto a generation condensed conceptsofhumanhistory human intoconceptsofuniversal such as "tragedy, ecstasy, feelings and doom." It is as iftheartist could givea concreteshape to feeling. Rothko managedto intensify and makeimmediate an impersonal emotional embraceofhumanorigins and fate. Likehis coltheforms leagues,he transfigured
oftragedy intothose and emotions ofmelodrama, as he surrounded environtheviewerwitha pictorial and theater of ment, form, emotion. ofa In Rothko's development ofhis realization greater physical itwas perhapsinevitable themes, a more concretemode of envithat art-that is,mural ronmental painting-would arise.In the late arose fora se1950sopportunities riesofarchitectonic presentations ofgroupsofhis work.Atthe Philin Washington, D.C., lips Collection were hung severalofhis paintings a dramatic intercreating together, actionbetweenworksand partsof were a worksas though they surrounds the linkedseriesthat was also commisviewer.Rothko for sioned to do severalpaintings in New theFour Seasons restaurant York. These workswere eventually in London givento theTateGallery withthecondition that were they an to form to be exhibited together also painted environment. Rothko in forHarvard murals University 1961and Houston'sEcumenical ChapelforHumanDevelopmentin 1964-71 (figs. 32, 33). Even more thanbefore, Rothko intended the worksin thesenew seriesto surroundand enclose theviewer. Rothko visited Pompeiiand Florence in 1959 and was impressed by theblank,interior classicizing Laurentian wallsofMichelangelo's home Whenhe returned Library. he had founda new architectural Harvard murals Rothko's symbol. the conceptofportalsand stressed windowsas well as architectonic references to enclosure, combining rectilinear doorMichelangelo's waysand windowswiththe small architecand illusionistic rectangles tureoftheBoscoreale and Butagain, Boscotrecase panels.47 thereis no escape from enclosure, sincetheforms once againclose in on theviewer. The EcumenicalChapel in Hous-
~I~~
~c~y?
?~r~?
!;jr
32 Triptych, panels 1-3, Harvard University, early1960s. Oil on canvas, 1047/8 x 117 105? x 180 in. (center);1047/8 in. (left); x 96 in. (right) 33 Ecumenical Chapel forHuman Development (The Rothko Chapel), to right) 1965-66 (left north, Houston, Oil and east wallpaintings. northeast, on canvas
tonconcludesRothko's representationsofspiritual lifeand mythic, he sacredtraditions. Although withthearchitect struggled Philip overthedesignand lightJohnson ingofthechapel,itsoctagonal echoes one of shape successfully the Rothko's favorite buildings, Itand churchin Torcello, baptistry too,evoke the aly.The paintings, sacredpast.In solemnand grave blacksand maroons-perhaps inspiredbytheebonylandscapesof withearPompeiiin combination liersourcessuch as black-figure vase painting and thedeep brown frescoes and blackBoscotrecase withtheir immeasurable depths and floating darknesses (fig.34)in some ofthepanels are arranged secwithraisedcentral triptychs alludes to Retions.Thisstructure and DeposinaissanceCrucifixion tionscenes.48 He mayalso have a Stations consideredthepainting oftheCrossseries,a sacredChrisNotes
"Resurrection: from Thisessayis excerpted and theModernExAbstract Expressionism I would a book in preparation. perience," for Endowment theNational liketo thank
of deathand rebirth: tianritual Rothko explained,"The darkmood was ofthemonumental triptych meantto conveyChrist's suffering and thebrighter on Good Friday; Easterand hues ofthe lastmural, theResurrection."49 Such workclimaxesa lifelong oftheinditheabsorption subject: The vidualbyhis environment. the and chapel together, paintings fulfill within and thewithout, themeoftheenclosing, Rothko's inworldofhumanity's embracing and thegradualrealnertradition sourcesand izationof inherited wantedhis workto He always fate. moveout intospace and envelop his own cultural theviewerwithin To the tradition. and emotional likeTiresias, end,Rothko, adoptedtherole ofthe publically asartist-seer ofthehumanspirit, thefate and foretelling saying ofhumanity.
andtheInstiLavin the Humanities, Irving

for at Princeton tutefor Advanced Study
for this in 1982-83 their project. support 1 From notes ofClay "Questions Spohn,
to MarkRothko," 1947-49,California
on deofArts, SanFrancisco, School ofAmerican atthe Archives Art, posit Smithsonian Institution, Washington, statements D.C.Immediate subsequent that from arealsoexcerpted questionnaire. work is seenas biologi2 Rothko's early andpsychological cal,mythical, primisee Forrecent tivism. discussions,
60
Spring1988
-.I
.-1.-:tP:
?ir ~I
34 Boscotrecase fresco(Italian), three panels includingcenter panel with bucolic landscape,31 B.C.-50 AD. The Fund MuseumofArt, Metropolitan Rogers
Sandler,TheTriumph Irving ofAmerican Painting(New York:Harperand Row Icon, 1975),pp. 175-79; Robert C. in Gail Levin Hobbs,"Mark Rothko," and Robert C. Hobbs,Abstract Formative Years Expressionism/The F.Johnson Museum (Cornell:Herbert ofArt, 1978),p. 118; StephenPolcari, "The Intellectual RootsofAbstract ExMarkRothko," Arts pressionism: Magazine 54 (September1979): pp. 124-29; Robert Noteson Rothko's Rosenblum, Surrealist Years(New York:Pace Gal"Ab1981); and Kirk Varnedoe, lery, in "Primitivism" stract Expressionism," in Twentieth vol. 2 (New Art, Century York: The MuseumofModernArt, 1984),pp. 615-60. 3 Stuart Davis,"Abstract Painting Today," inArtfor theMillions, ed. Francis V. O'Connor(Boston:New YorkGraphic 1973),p. 127. Society, 4 SheldonCheney, in Art Expressionism (New York: 1934),p. 17; Liveright, PlasticRedirections James J.Sweeney, in Twentieth Century Painting(Chiof ChicagoPress, cago: University 1934),p. 3. of 5 For a discussionof thecrucialeffects World WarII on thedevelopment of Abstract see Polcari, Expressionism, "Resurrection." 6 MarkRothko and AdolphGottlieb, "The Portrait and theModernArtist," mimeoof broadcast at WNYC, graphedscript in Mary 13 October,1943,reprinted Davis MacNaughton and Lawrence (New York: AdolphGottlieb, Alloway, The Arts Publisher and theAdolphand Esther Gottlieb Foundation, 1981), pp. 170-71. 7 Letter in thecollectionof theGeorge C. Carsonfamily; citedin Bonnie MarkRothko: Works on PaClearwater, Hudson HillsPress, per (New York: Archives 1984),p. 26; copyon deposit, ofAmerican Smithsonian InstituArt, D. C. tion, Washington, 8 Dore Ashton, AboutRothko (New York: Oxford University Press,1983),p. 59, chronicles Rothko's to themutrips seum.Bonnie Clearwater, "The Statements and Writings ofMarkRothko"; paper deliveredat theannualmeeting of theCollege Art New Association, 13 February, 1986.In her confirYork, mation of Rothko's use of traceand Clearwater noted: fragment, In 1927 Rothko illustrated a book by RabbiLewisBrowneentitled The 61 Smithsonian Studiesin American Art
conGraphicBible.... Theillustrations sistofmaps ofIsraeland itsneighborwith historiated scenes ing countries and symbols that theaccompanyreflect Rothko sued theauthorand ing text. for notgivinghimappropripublisher ate credit as theillustrator andfor not In the731 page payinghimhisfullfee. of thetrialwe learn that transcript Browneinstructed Rothko [as to] which archaic imagesto copy fromhandand other booksofornament sources, and explainedtheir meaningto him... In histestimony statedthatit Rothko was acceptable to copyor for an artist traceimages source... fromanother He statedthat he studiedtheMetropolitan MuseumofArt's collectionofAssyrian art,and... copiedsuch images and lionfroma book as... a sphinx Delitzsch called Babel and byFredrich Bible.In the1940s... he apparently modeledsome ofhis formson theimit ages in The GraphicBible.Although is generally believedthat Rothko relied on purepsychic automatism forhisSurrealpaintings, he actuallyworked from preconceived images.For examin The ple, thearm ofdestruction to thetwo GraphicBible corresponds armsin hispaintingthe disembodied Sacrifice ofIphigeniaof 1942, and the theinvasionofIssnake representing rael byEgypt resembles theserclosely Vessels pent in his 1946 watercolor ofMagic. 9 It is interesting to note that theuse of of thepastis a commonartisfragments in the ticthemethat crossescultures interwar Schwitters period-from Kurt merzcollagesof nostalgic tickletters, to T. S. Eliot'slines ets,and so forth; from TheWaste Land, "These fragments I haveshoredagainstmyruins"; to Van conBrooks'sinfluential historical Wvck ceptof "usablepast." 10 For a discussionoftheAbstract Expressionist searchfora universal tradition and itsrepresentation theinterthrough and overlapping of images locking ofthe from different artand cultures "Resurrection." One past,see Polcari, particularly representative exampleis The structure Gottlieb's Pictographs. and imagery of therectilinear compartof theearly mentsin his Pictographs fusetheassociations 1940sdeliberately of their Renaissance sources,including Afripredellas;primitive pictographs; and Oceanic art; can,Native American, and modernpainting (Cubism,Klee, and Mondrian).
11 For Baziotes,see Mona Hadler, ofLife "William Baziotes:The Subtlety in MichaelPreble, fortheArtist," ExhibiWilliam Baziotes:ARetrospective Harbor, Newport Calif.: tion(Newport HarborArt Museum,1978),p. 55. 12 Graham's famousmythic dance dramas began in 1946. 13 PeterSelz,MarkRothko (New York: The MuseumofModernArt, 1961),p. on "Reflections 12. Robert Goldwater, Arts theRothko Exhibition," Magazine 35 (March1961): pp. 42-45, questions to Greekdrama.Irving Selz's reference MarkRothko/ Sandler, Paintings 19481969 (New York:Pace Gallery, 1983), bothSelz and Goldwater. interrogates discussionofNietzsche's For additional on Rothko's influence work,see early AboutRothko, Ashton, pp. 50-57; Ann AvantUndeclared: Gibson,"Theory GardeMagazinesas a Guide to Abstract Imagesand Ideas" (Ph.D. Expressionist ofDelaware,1985),pp. diss.,University Rothko's 239-53: AnnaChave,"Mark Yale Univer(Ph.D. diss., SubjectMatter" "Res1982),pp. 61-63; and Polcari, sity, For a discussionofhis influurrection." ence on thelaterwork,see Polcari, RootsofAbstract "TheIntellectual MarkRothko," Expressionism: pp. 131-33. TheBirth 14 Friederich Nietzsche, of TragofMusic,trans. edyOut oftheSpirit Kaufmann Walter (New York:Random 1967),pp. 74-75. Vintage, Rothko 15 It is unusualthat capitalized did not,but Nietzsche "Myth-Maker." did in hisEssayon Man Cassirer Ernst Press, (New Haven:Yale University 1944),pp. 81-95. It is notknown knewCassirer's whether Rothko work, friend butthepoet and Rothko's Kunitz said unspecified poets Stanley 21 did; personalcommunication, 1978. March, of thisCentury Still(Art 16 In Clyfford galinMark 1946), reprinted lery, February Rothko, (London:The TateGallery, 1987),pp. 82-83. and Abstract 17 Quoted in SidneyJanis, Surrealist Artin America(New York: and Hitchcock, 1944),p. 118. Reynal 18 For a discussionofJoyce's influence, and see EvanFirestone, "James Joyce Generation NewYorkSchool," theFirst Magazine 56 (June1982): pp. Arts inand Gottlieb's 116-21. For Rothko's About in Eliot,see Ashton, terest in both Rothko, p. 25. For the interest "Resurrecand Eliot,see Polcari, Joyce
SubRothko's and Chave,"Mark tion," jectMatter," pp. 88-89. "Indefinite 19 Anon., Idea," unspecified Betty newspaperreviewon file, Archives ofAmerican ParsonsPapers, no. 493. D.C., frame Art, Washington, 20 Rothko, quoted in Douglas MacAgy, "Mark Rothko," Magazine ofArt42 1949): 20-21. Leon (January View6 "AMagicPortico," Kochnitsky, "Resur(May 1946),p. 19. See Polcari, fora discussionof thesurvival rection," and ritesas a theme. ofcustoms a hybrid, 21 Used here "totem" suggests ofancesform consisting composite relatedroots.The or fraternally trally has been extendedbyanthropoloterm reto tribal groupsthat giststo refer as descendedfrom gardthemselves some mythic plantor animal.See Ruth RedMan's Religion(ChiUnderhill, of ChicagoPress, cago: University 1965),pp. 44-46. citedin Terry 22 T. S. Eliot,"BenJonson," (Minneapolis: Theory Literary Eagleton, ofMinnesota Press,1983), University p. 41. on Works MarkRothko: 23 See Clearwater, Paper,p. 27. 24 Ashton, AboutRothko, p. 68. use of 25 For a discussionof Rothko's see Polcari, diagrams, paleontological ExRootsofAbstract "TheIntellectual MarkRothko," p. 125. pressionism: and Writ"The Statements 26 Clearwater, that the indicates ingsofMarkRothko," from an form is lifted birdlike central imageoftheRomaneagle whichhe had copied earlier. Rothko's 27 Chave,"Mark SubjectMatter," pp. 138-40. Entomb28 For a discussionoftheabstract see ibid.,pp. 142-60. ments, 29 For a discussionofStill'sprimitivism, Roots "Intellectual see StephenPolcari, ofAbstract Clyfford Expressionism: Art 25 (May-June Still," International 1982): pp. 18-35; forhis shamanism, For addi"Resurrection." see Polcari, on tionaldiscussionofStill'sinfluence Mark see Diane Waldman, Rothko, The A Retrospective Rothko: (New York: Museumand Solomon R. Guggenheim Abrams, 1978),p. 52. AboutRothko, 30 Ashton, pp. 112-13. notebookon chil31 Rothko, unpublished dren'sartin thecollectionofthe George C. Carsonfamily.
62
Spring1988
interview withWilliam 32 Rothko, Seitz, "TheState22, 1952.Clearwater, January mentsand Writings ofMarkRothko," notedthat he said: "Itwas notthat the had been removed, notthat the figure had been sweptaway, butthe figures forthefigures, and in turn the symbols shapes in thelatercanvaseswere new substitutes forthefigures." A copyof theinterview is on fileat theArchives ofAmerican Smithsonian InstituArt, D.C. tion, Washington, Rothko and the 33 Vincent Bruno,"Mark Second Style," paper deliveredat the annualmeeting of the College Art Asso1984. ciation, Toronto, "Letter 34 Rothko, quoted in Dore Ashton, from NewYork," Cimaise6 (December 1958): pp. 37-40. AboutRothko, 35 Ashton, p. 157. and 36 PeterH. von Blanckenhagen Christine ThePaintings Alexander, fromBoscotrecase (Heidelberg: F. H. KerleVerlag, 1962),pp. 58-60. "The Rothko 37 Dore Ashton, cnapel in StudioInternational 81 Houston," (June1971): p. 274. MarthaGraham/ 38 Leroy Leatherman, Portrait (New oftheLadyas an Artist York: Alfred 1966),p. 79. For a Knopf, discussionof Graham's form, structure, and thought and itsrelationship to the evolution ofAmerican artofthe 1930s and 1940s,see Polcari, "Resurrection." A Painting 39 Rothko, Prophecy--1950 D. C.: David Porter Gal(Washington, ofAmerican 1945),n.p.,Archives lery,
Smithsonian Art, Institution, Washington,D.C. 40 Quoted in WillGrohmann, Paul Klee (New York: Abrams, 1955),p. 286. 41 Rothko, "Statement on His Attitude in The Tiger's Painting," Eye 9 (October 1949): p. 114. 42 Quoted in "ASymposium on How to CombineArchitecture, and Painting, Interiors 60 Sculpture," (May1951): 104. 43 Quoted in Selden Rodman, Conversationswith Artists (New York:Capricorn, 1961),p. 93. 44 Quoted in "ASymposium on How to CombineArchitecture, and Painting, p. 104. Sculpture," 45 Fora discussionoftheconceptof historical artofthe processin American "Resurrection." See 1930s,see Polcari, also O'Connor, Art for theMillions. 46 See Phyllis TheFifties Rosenzweig, D. C.: Hirshhorn Museum (Washington, and Sculpture InGarden,Smithsonian stitution, 1980). 47 Bruno,"Mark Rothko and the Second notedthat theSecond-Style muStyle," ralsRothko studiedalso symbolized to the realm passage through gateways ofthetranscendental. 48 BrianO'Doherty, "The Rothko Chapel," Art in America61 (January-February, 1973): 18. 49 Citedin Lee Seldes,LegacyofMark Rothko and (New York:Holt Rinehardt, Winston, 1978), p. 51.
63
Studiesin American Smithsonian Art

Mark Rothko-Heritage, Environment

Diunggah oleh

Informasi Dokumen

Hak Cipta

Format Tersedia

Bagikan dokumen Ini

Bagikan atau Tanam Dokumen

Opsi Berbagi

Apakah menurut Anda dokumen ini bermanfaat?

Apakah konten ini tidak pantas?

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

Mark Rothko-Heritage, Environment

Diunggah oleh

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

The Smithsonian Institution

theconditionintowhich heritage: one is born

*r ..?_.i.:;....~ ~~~L. ,-.i\ ?~'' "`' ~ ''~'

~?~i~abi~i~i~g: ' ~s~

'' ?``?? "r...

?~ c r. --? -mu~ ?,? :?: ?: ??. ? ;I irnF? au..e

~T~J~71 ?.. 1:? -.k?

'' ~'9 e ~e~mR~a

I ~. ~ i?? ?;?=i ?:;

Z': :?'? 7~iFee~Zs~r~l~ir; r~ ii

' ~;c: .. ~SP~BP~5-a2~~~~ ----?`-i~ ~?7~ -iL;~' WITSIIYB~~ ~ ?~ ?^ ?

??? '; ??.rrT

i.J ?-L :c.. .::':;: ''' ;~?? i; ?? ?.?)?;.? ':.

?r?~ ': 1"' ~l~n~FBC~I? -II

?:'r.?G 'i: ??.??` ~`;3P'

L4P:" :il` '~: i:: ?:??,: ;?:?

-J.-rYw;nlr~lci~,~t~n.~s "' -?- ?:

"~' ':*4 Iv;:

?Il:E.i;? ?.':~I~h~e~. 1Fi?:i ::j

-? ;?. ~ 11:L ?:.

;t, I- .e `??: t: ----

?; 2?: ~ i' r ,I + ii ;-z :i? ? ?~ ??k~

T:~. fL'i:.. .r r-?? _I ;;i

I:t?~P: -? !:? :??;il J-.~ i

BL ;; ~i:?". C?.Y; F.j~S'rj ~:~4L?~~--' .?:~~.~.~

;; ?= ?C~IIIIAI~ITIT.~ :;:-: ;r *-; ~d~ersr--gt~p~ L~r"g~S; re ~-P: i~? ;j:

~~;t? ~J??,.1 ?-:~iz. = ?;~ ~.~QE~. .r ?" .~,

~: i ~:3 ~ :`?~FCQ~%eeB~F~\;;)c~~~'~iZ~C~':i~ .....,

':il :i~' ' ? rnr? a~se~-

;1 ?...??c---~ 7 --'????~ ?? ,?? i: -:-'? ??'-: rl~~?? ,.? -r -

;?:? ~~CU?-_i;r \ ? ~---?m~y. ? .... ?~t

"""?:? -'I?: h-? ?:.

crs-cL-~Tcl~Ii~~ ???iT. .:.. ;'L ~~ ?r ;?::.?

??i ~i?r;f~: ?: - p ~erran . ?~ _ Y r i?-? ?? .i~-a ,L :~1~6;L~ry ;I ?: 'i .

I,: :?. ,.? -,a~

v =r:?`?~~ .?.=Pllr. -rroao

~wat~Lxi~p~i~U~ .i. ,,~,~:-~?~;???~?r;i;%~ c l;;jeC~L6~1 ~~.~~'\~jbl?

hybrids place theold mythological whohave losttheir in pertinence theintervening centuries.16

?.? ?.??--? :. ?=:. .

-i-,I. .?c.-)C~i~;:?si7; ~ ?c~~~;b~;~"~l?-: u?

S?r~lB~Uj~`CPdR~'r*~~:r~. -,s )"Z ~~ ~1~ ' li.e '.;; :;~ ~I~Z~

:?? ?~ ~;??' .j r.\ ~:::~ ~~ ?;? "'

?r: ??i~ .:i .`

-~.1 !\L1 ~ -'':' r '? \~? n-??~? :i;L ?::~LI.

I; :i: :?; ?-??; r;: :? --

.. ,... :,; :?:?-

;t.:-; ?Z 4~ :i' ~~~PI~R ~EI~LYIC~~

??':,:?j??i~-c:;::' I~Y?: .:1 ?i:.4.~.? ~ts:

?? )~? :H; :1? ~r?

; .IC?. -.f.-. a-.:-~rl?

?,;~d~?; ~:-'1?-(:~~???2 :f?.::ra~

?'c: M:~:::~:.-. .... : ; ~ic3::~?; n? :-:_:?;r :_ ::~ "'

i...;'?: E ~?%Q~P~~t:';-f~'~?'~~ ?? ;t CI L;1 ? ~Z~

I B '' :? ?C i. ?' ?~' rt. r

.. -r__j-:'-iLI? -~? I-?-?-rr;: ~:F

-- SR?2~i~ju-''' ~IW~~ ~iiy~B~"Y~

?,. ? '~? .?~~

r ,? :~ ..r ~i r?=-r. ,7~i ? .. -;-.~ - 'L~:~L~C.SRV Rt~a:~gl .. .'r,: ?, C.

1?. ~ ?? :rJ` .?. ;?. 1F~r? :, ~?

?IOXi" ??I? 'C ',F :?. : i: i~:'' ?

.?.?~'~i~i~f~!k?;!:l'=i Y :.? .. ??-?1r, .. r';-'l?*?I1C~qRI;S~~~Prr ~ff:7 ~??

-?r ? r~~ ?? c~~-?r :, ?.? -;:

E~:?: ~n~ 4r --? ~?''i ?i

???'"; ' r?.?-

BL ;; ~i:?". C?.Y; F.j~S'rj ~:~4L?--' .?:.~.~

crs-cL-~Tcl~Ii ???iT. .:.. ;'L ?r ;?::.?

~wat~Lxi~p~i~U~ .i. ,,~,~:-~?~;???~?r;i;%~ c l;;jeC~L6~1 .'\~jbl?

-?r ? r ?? c-?r :, ?.? -;: