It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Is this a case of the Emperor's New Clothes, or real artistic genius?

page: 1

log in


posted on Oct, 9 2012 @ 08:34 AM
It was (may still be) a characteristic of art appreciation in ancient oriental art, specifically Japanese and Chinese, that recognised artists would add their Hanko (signature or seal) to work of other artists as a sign of their approval. So it is not uncommon to see artworks bearing a whole collection of hanko apart from the artist's own signature.
For the records, the Han part of Hanko means a judge / judgement / decision...

This was apparently the reason (according to him) that Vladimir Umanets decided to sign his name and validation “Vladimir Umanets, A Potential Piece of Yellowism”, on a Rothko masterpiece, hanging in London’s Tate Modern gallery.

Vladimir Umanets touts a bizarre artistic manifesto known as “Yellowism” that he says is neither art, nor anti-art, and this is seen as his most brazen attempt yet to promote his cause. If you really want to, you can visit his facebook page. So his claim of validating this Rothko piece can be viewed with some scepticism, but surely many truly recognised artists might also have put their "invisible" hanko on this Rothko masterpiece.

So I ask a very non judgemental and open minded - "Why?"

This event has brought a few questions back to life for me. An earlier thread The Modern Art Idiocy by Forum Moderator, Skyfloating, explored the relevance / value / whatever, of highly prized (or is that valued) art like that of Rothko. Clearly there were many views expresses in that thread, but I want to explore whether there could be elements of the Emperor's New Clothes story involved. Otherwise, I want to try to understand what makes such work highly prized by so many who we understand, have a great appreciation of art ...

... people like Rachel "Bunny" Lowe Lambert Lloyd Mellon, born 1910, now 102 years old (described in Wikipedia as an American horticulturalist, gardener, philanthropist, fine arts collector, member of the International Best Dressed List and widow of philanthropist, art collector, thoroughbred racehorse owner/breeder, and banking heir Paul Mellon). She has amassed a huge Rothko collection including one called Yellow Expanse, which seems to be very correctly named. I will add an image later - having some problem uploading images - but meanwhile, this one can almost suffice. It is all my own work. Any offers? It is available in any size you wish.

OK, I have many more other thoughts and artists to explore but meanwhile, start helping me to discover what it is I appear to be missing. Could it be that the
The King (Emperor) is in the all together
But all together the all together
He's all together as naked as the day that he was born.

or am I missing something? As someone with a pretty broad appreciation of art in all its forms, I need to fill this gap in my appreciation. Help!
edit on 9-10-2012 by KenArten because: change to title

posted on Oct, 9 2012 @ 08:45 AM
reply to post by KenArten

Honestly, sounds like gold obsession, the gold of self worth I mean, an obsession with self persistence.

some weird form of self pride...

Either or yellow hurts my eyes and makes most have to squint to look at it.

It's wild he came to things that way though.
edit on 9-10-2012 by Moneyisgodlifeisrented because: (no reason given)

posted on Oct, 9 2012 @ 09:19 AM

Originally posted by KenArten
but meanwhile, this one can almost suffice. It is all my own work. Any offers? It is available in any size you wish.

Your yellow work is great, I've given it my seal of approval.

posted on Oct, 9 2012 @ 11:11 AM
Here is the real Yellow Expanse - should be familiar to most
I hope. Not seeing my thumbnails in ATS upload and neither the image in the post preview, so driving blind with a bit of fiddling in between.

Now this is just one Rothko picture, indeed one of his better known, but is very representative of his style of painting.
I am not sure of its size but probably 2 or so metres across if compared to others of great similarity.

What? Where? Why? I am accepting at this stage that it is my ignorance that prevents me from seeing the artistic genius, and i am hoping to get educated by someone who knows where it is, and is not wearing the Emperor's New Clothes.

edit on 9-10-2012 by KenArten because: image fiddling - looks like a delay somewhere

edit on 9-10-2012 by KenArten because: completing the post now the image is here

edit on 9-10-2012 by KenArten because: image coming and going on the post, now you see it now you don't like its crossing a yellow painted pedestrian crossing.

posted on Oct, 9 2012 @ 11:26 AM
I am a working artist, so I will put my two cents in here, whether relevant or not.

Sometimes it is just a question of "who did it first?" Something new and different, an unusual way of looking at things even if your three-year old could do it. Some people simply want what they have not seen before, and will pay dearly for it.

If you want some insight into the big wig financial players in the art world, read "Seven days in the art world" (if you have not already). Art at that level is so manipulated and is speculated upon much like wall street, and at that level for some is simply investment. They may not even like the work, but it is all about perceived value so they will buy.

My mindset is that if you really love it, buy it. You don't need a phd to tell you about esthetics, symmetry and form if you want a velvet painting of dogs playing cards. Artists have to make a living too, and few careers struggle with the issue of subjectivity as those in the fields of the arts. I am biased towards some of the New York/LA gallery people, some of what they call "art" baffles me (things like toilet seat installations, etc.) I sell at juried art shows, and the gallery people at that level turn down their collective noses towards people like me. I sell my art just fine without them, though.

posted on Oct, 9 2012 @ 11:40 AM
Disgusting. Th whole thing is blatantly, literally, disgusting. In honor of such truly troubling forms of human vanity, denial, and egotistical self-delusions: I here-by declare this very thread to be a masterful work of art as my hands have graced it, extending from the physical world through the dimensions of the global electro-energetic web, and now permanently altered its display as it is called from a form that does not resemble its appearance,.. through the web,.. and re assembled on your screens as I have altered it. As a master piece of epic proportions it deserves a title, and I shall call it "Is this a case of the Emperor's New Clothes, or real artistic genius? by NJoyZ"

edit on 9-10-2012 by NJoyZ because: (no reason given)

posted on Oct, 9 2012 @ 12:07 PM
reply to post by artnut

Thanks for the input artnut. Indeed, I accept what you say especially the part about

Art at that level is so manipulated and is speculated upon much like wall street, and at that level for some is simply investment.

So those who have the means to do so can create greatness to improve the bank balance. Still, how long can this last until someone says, "The emperor is naked". Are we just too scared of looking ignorant to criticise? I guess in the inner circle, there is mutual support to hold each others' opinions aloft and keep the said artwork's value high.

I am seeing the high value as an indication that the artist really has something to contribute to the higher values of art.

My mindset is that if you really love it, buy it.

agreed again when is is my personal choice, but art has this special role to play when it is viewed in the temples of art. I expect much more than a decoration. Yes, if it is a new approach to something, like the cubism that Picasso evolved, then I pay homage to greatness. Even if I do not enjoy what the artist offers, I can recognise the greatness of a worthy new approach or new from of expression.

You must have encountered the story of the quest for the perfect painting. In this story, the award went to a blank canvas because it could be whatever anyone's imagination needed it to be. Well.....????

Perhaps it is my expectations that are the problem. I think that any artist of this reputation, worth his salt, should probably be prodding and poking at our minds to encourage our imaginations to fill in the gaps the artist leaves for us. And there are many ways to do this and many statements that can be made in paint (or otherwise) to make the suggestions that tempt our minds into new thoughts, new places and new ideas. Or simply through association, it could take us on a journey based on our own life's experiences, giving each a different but personal experience.

posted on Oct, 9 2012 @ 12:11 PM
reply to post by alfa1

touché alfa1
now it is real art.

What else can I say?

posted on Oct, 9 2012 @ 12:51 PM
reply to post by NJoyZ

acknowledged NJoyZ
in full (technicolour)

hope this shows as it should
did not first time. Difficult to do a visual thread like this with image problems.

if it does not appear, I will try again later

edit on 9-10-2012 by KenArten because: missing image again

posted on Oct, 9 2012 @ 08:00 PM
Sometimes the true genius of a work of art is convincing others that it is. Dadaism is more or less the beginning of that kind of art. The following schools or trends of art like abstract expressionism then learned to build upon that.

Typically that's not my style (I like to do a bit more than a paint a simple square, mostly random paint splatters, or signing my name on a urnial), but that's the way I see it. But hey, if you can manage to get money that way then more power to you.

posted on Dec, 6 2012 @ 03:20 PM

This Rothko sold for $75 million
14 November, 2012. A bargain at $75 million, Mark Rorthko’s ”No. 1 (Royal Red & Blue)" - guess that means there is at least one more of these treasures - did not quite match the $87 million paid for “Orange, Red, Yellow” in May 2912.

It is my opinion that the names of these oversized paint chips are perfectly descriptive of all the complexity, nuances and intricacies of these masterpieces.

Still want to know: What part of this I am not understanding?


posted on Dec, 6 2012 @ 03:29 PM
Difficult to tell whether the Yellowists would agree or disagree with the question posed by this thread?

Interview With the Yellowist: Why Rothko Got Tagged and You’re Next

“Like Duchamp who took objects from reality and turned them into art, we can go a step farther and take objects from art and put them into the third context. They are not works of art anymore. They become pieces of Yellowism. Art already exists. Yellowism is a new context.”

Perhaps the emperors clothes are also Yellowism?

posted on Dec, 6 2012 @ 03:56 PM
reply to post by KenArten

I sir am with you on this one.

This is clearly a naked man with a crown on his head.

new topics

top topics


log in