Rothko's art is a fascinating subject that invites an in-depth exploration. His work has long been regarded as a profound expression of his inner self and the evolution of his artistic vision. This absorbing introspective delves into the chrysalis of Rothko's maturing mind and art, uncovering the hidden layers and the processes that led to his unique style. By examining his early works, we can observe the seeds of his future genius, the experimentation with colors, forms, and compositions. As he progressed, his art became more abstract and emotional, as if he was stripping away the unnecessary and getting to the essence of his subject. Through this exploration, we gain a deeper understanding of Rothko's art and the man behind it, and we are able to appreciate the beauty and power of his creations on a whole new level.

Incomparable, unique. These two words truly capture the essence of something extraordinary.

When we say something is incomparable, it means there is nothing else quite like it. It stands alone, distinguished by its own set of qualities and characteristics that set it apart from everything else in its category.

Uniqueness, on the other hand, emphasizes the one-of-a-kind nature of the thing. It is rare, special, and cannot be replicated. It has its own charm and appeal that makes it irresistible to those who encounter it.

Together, these words describe something that is truly remarkable and worthy of our attention. Whether it's a person, a place, a work of art, or an idea, being incomparable and unique gives it a special status that elevates it above the ordinary.

We should strive to find and appreciate those things in our lives that are incomparable and unique. They add color and depth to our experiences and make life more interesting and fulfilling.

This is truly amazing.

Although it is not possible to precisely date this manuscript, it is highly likely that the majority of the writing was done around 1939 - 1942. This period coincided with a time of personal depression and a decrease in the artist's artistic productivity. In the biographical introduction, Rothko's son Christopher speculates that a significant portion of the thinking that went into these essays would have preceded this difficult period.

And that is quite impressive. Rothko grapples with the cultural-historical roots of mechanistic and teleological thinking that he observes in American society. These thoughts bear a striking resemblance to those of Horkheimer and Adorno in 1945, yet they wouldn't gain much attention until the mid-Sixties. He also identifies some of the major fundamental problems with abstraction that Wittgenstein was dealing with during the same time. Rothko's papers from that period were not published until after 1953. He looks to art to depict a more basic human experience that treats myth and symbology as experiential givens rather than as objects of study. In these reflections, he is contemporaneous with Georges Bataille. Most significantly, Rothko extends these thoughts into a concept of unground in pre-Christian art, a notion that Deleuze wouldn't develop until 1968.

However, I don't think Rothko should be counted among the philosophers. His thought is poorly developed throughout the text, and his writing style is often imprecise. He seems unconcerned with the historical context of the terms he uses, perhaps even actively attempting to hide the sources of his inspiration. Whenever Rothko speaks of the philosophy of his day, it is with at best thinly veiled contempt. And with good reason: academic thought was at a similar low point as it is in many places today. But as I read this, I can't help but wish he could have known about his contemporaries who were on similar lines of thought at the time.