As Rothko’s vandalised Black on Maroon goes back on display at Tate Modern, Jonathan Jones questions if the gallery’s less than conventional atmosphere encourages a lack of reverence for its art.
It's a red letter day – or a black on maroon one anyway. Mark Rothko's Black on Maroon, vandalised at Tate Modern in 2012, has at last gone on view again. It was clearly a serious attack, for the restoration has been slow and difficult. Now everyone is happy. Rothko's family praise the Tate restorers for their dedicated work. One of the most powerful modern paintings in Britain has returned to the light. Hooray.
But has the Tate thought at all about why the attack happened, and has it considered for a second – can it bring itself to ask – if the less than conventional atmosphere of Tate Modern as an art museum may encourage a lack of reverence for its art? After all, it's not long since some children were spotted using its Donald Judd as a climbing frame. Is that so surprising when Tate Modern is famous for presenting slides as art?
All of which is of our time but it's not what Rothko himself considered serious art. When he gave a large proportion of his greatest series of paintings to the Tate it was because he was sickened by the idea of these great and worrying visionary masterpieces ending up in the place originally planned for them – a posh New York restaurant. For him, art was an intense thing... Keep reading on The Guardian
It's a red letter day – or a black on maroon one anyway. Mark Rothko's Black on Maroon, vandalised at Tate Modern in 2012, has at last gone on view again. It was clearly a serious attack, for the restoration has been slow and difficult. Now everyone is happy. Rothko's family praise the Tate restorers for their dedicated work. One of the most powerful modern paintings in Britain has returned to the light. Hooray.
But has the Tate thought at all about why the attack happened, and has it considered for a second – can it bring itself to ask – if the less than conventional atmosphere of Tate Modern as an art museum may encourage a lack of reverence for its art? After all, it's not long since some children were spotted using its Donald Judd as a climbing frame. Is that so surprising when Tate Modern is famous for presenting slides as art?
All of which is of our time but it's not what Rothko himself considered serious art. When he gave a large proportion of his greatest series of paintings to the Tate it was because he was sickened by the idea of these great and worrying visionary masterpieces ending up in the place originally planned for them – a posh New York restaurant. For him, art was an intense thing... Keep reading on The Guardian