The Tate Modern currently has six of Rothko's murals on show. These are dark, brooding pictures with titles "Black on Maroon" and "Red on Maroon".
They are huge, as you might expect, up to 4 by 3 metres, and that is really important. Rothko expected the patron to be wholly immersed in the picture and to experience something spiritual (for want of a better word) as they meditate the image before them.
It's really worth trying that meditative, immersive thing with these pictures. Their darkness adds to the illusion of strange shapes before you; doorways? cave entrances? stones? You have to stand in a position where the picture fills your whole visual frame, which even in the case of the largest pictures means standing only a metre away. Rohko himself, when asked how far one should stand away, suggested 18 inches although whether he actually meant that or was just irritated at the question is not clear. If the murals had been hung in the Seagram building for which they were originally intended, they would have been tens of feet away from the patron. Not ideal. Maybe that contributed to Rothko's decision not to complete the commission.
You can't really simulate the immersive experience of the actual picture by using an image in a book, even with a magnifying glass, although it is worth a try. The printed image doesn't have the same reflective properties as the original. Typically, on a book page, you get too much reflection (and the colours won't be accurate). But if you do try, get as close as possible (hence the magnifying glass) and be in as dark a room as possible. Then wait for your imagination to take over ...
The Tate haven't helped the patron to have the full immersive experience either, unfortunately, for two reasons. First the pictures are hung too high up and second they are badly lit.
The pictures are hung only one foot clear of the floor. But even so, they would be better standing on the floor or even (by some means) a foot or so below the floor on which the patron stands. Then they could be viewed comfortably (i.e without looking up) with a central "horizon".
Much worse though is the lighting. Tate has made the lighting dim, as Rothko would have recommended, but not dim enough and certainly not uniform enough. An unfortunate choice of lamps which are placed above the pictures create their own dim illuminations on the pictures which distracts from the surface that Rothko has used all his skill to construct.
For those interested in Rothko's process, these pictures are a rich reward. Close inspection shows how Rothko achieved the particular kind of fuzziness that adds so much to the illusion of space in front of you. The paint has been applied in thin layers and and laid evenly on the canvas, probably in many overpaintings.
What is systematic about these Rothko murals?
They form a series, or a set. They have a similarity to each other which shows that the artist was apparently pursuing a particular objective. He has imagined these images in terms of simple geometric shapes, particularly rectangles parallel to the frame. Their symmetric arrangement suggests a planned image, as opposed to an action image.
So the systematic aspects that most appear to me here are: series, geometry and process.