Regarding Rothko, your remarks bring to mind John Simon's review (http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-04-01/high-minded-rothko-explodes-among-four-seasons-crowd-in-red-john-simon.html) of John Logan's play Red:
"Rothko perceives himself as embattled, and his so-called color-field works (though he rejected labels) as brushstroke upon tragic brushstroke. He mocks his assistant's lack of erudition and sternly, pompously holds up Nietzsche's writing and great painting from the Renaissance to Matisse as models [...] which come to theatrical life here as a vivid supporting cast joining in spirited debate. For instance, Rothko: 'You really think Andy Warhol will be hanging in museums in a hundred years alongside Bruegels and Vermeers?' To which Ken replies: 'He is hanging alongside Rothko now.' [...] Red is a compelling example of how a thinking theater can simultaneously entertain and educate. And to think that such a fine play should have been elicited by such an overrated painter."
no subject
"Rothko perceives himself as embattled, and his so-called color-field works (though he rejected labels) as brushstroke upon tragic brushstroke. He mocks his assistant's lack of erudition and sternly, pompously holds up Nietzsche's writing and great painting from the Renaissance to Matisse as models [...] which come to theatrical life here as a vivid supporting cast joining in spirited debate. For instance, Rothko: 'You really think Andy Warhol will be hanging in museums in a hundred years alongside Bruegels and Vermeers?' To which Ken replies: 'He is hanging alongside Rothko now.'
[...]
Red is a compelling example of how a thinking theater can simultaneously entertain and educate. And to think that such a fine play should have been elicited by such an overrated painter."
-MTD/neb