rothko room
My favorite room in Washington, DC is small.
This is an odd thing for a city built on rooms designed to reflect power. Whether business or politics, Washington’s forte is scale. High ceilings. Long corridors. Marble floors that echo authority. Rooms meant to project permanence and importance.
But my favorite room does none of that.
It’s tucked away inside the Phillips Collection. And it’s easy to miss.
But once inside, you feel it: Four paintings and a bench. Very little else.
The room is usually empty. When someone else is there, they tend to whisper, then stop talking altogether.
The paintings are large for the room. They do not announce themselves. They wait. Dark reds. Browns. Something like purple, but not quite. The longer you sit, the less confident you become in naming what you’re seeing.
The light is controlled. Not dramatic, but just precise enough to matter. The walls feel close. Not claustrophobic. Intentional.
You sit on the bench and feel the strange sensation that the room is paying attention to you.
.
Mark Rothko did not want his paintings admired. He wanted them to be felt.
He cared obsessively about distance. About height. About how close a viewer stood. About whether a painting hovered or pressed inward. He disliked frames and bright rooms.
Rothko was once awarded a defining commission, to paint large, sweeping murals for the newly unveiled Seagram building. The room was meant to host the most powerful figures in business, politics, and culture. He started, then withdrew. He didn’t want his paintings decorating wealth. He wanted them confronting people. In quiet rooms.
That decision cost him a fortune. And I like to think he took pride in that.
His art was not romantic. It was operational and obsessive. Rothko adjusted inches. He argued with galleries over lighting. He rejected exhibitions that didn’t respect his conditions. And he controlled variables the way an engineer might.
That is what makes the room work.
.
Rothko’s rise was not inevitable.
For years, his work confused people. It didn’t fit neatly into a category. It wasn’t decorative. It wasn’t illustrative or whimsical. And it didn’t reward quick consumption. It required patience from the viewer.
Which is where the Phillips Collection enters the story.
The Phillips was not built as a museum to hang now established art. It reflected its curators’ belief that taste should lead consensus, not follow it. Duncan and Marjorie Philipps were comfortable making early bets. They were seed investors of artists. Tastemakers. Willing to be wrong in public.
In the 1940s they started displaying Rothko’s work unapologetically. And they leaned into collaborating with Rothko on exacting goals for room design.
.
Back in the room, the paintings are not hung like trophies. They are arranged. None dominates. The bench is placed so you cannot take them all in with one pass.
Rothko wanted you to feel surrounded, not entertained. He wanted the experience to unfold slowly, if it unfolded at all.
Some people sit for two minutes and leave. Others sit for twenty and forget what time it is.
The room makes no promises. It does not explain itself. It does not perform. It does not care whether you like it.
It simply waits.
.
In a city obsessed with signaling power, the Rothko Room offers something quieter.
It’s presence. Conviction. A space designed not to impress, but to hold.
When you finally stand up, nothing resolves neatly. There is no takeaway or lesson written on the wall.
You carry the room with you instead. And that, I think, is the point.