# Talk:Four Seasons Restaurant

I'm deleting the following comment because it has more to do with the artist than the restaurant. The paintings were never used in the restaurant, so how is this story relevant? Also, his excuse seems weak: if he wanted to ruin the appetite of these elites, why did he abandon because he felt they were pretentious? Sounds to me like he was fired and he tried to make up something. Can someone else verify the accuracy and legitimacy of these claims.
"The artist Mark Rothko was famously engaged to paint a series of works for the restaurant in 1958. Accepting the commission, he secretly resolved to create "something that will ruin the appetite of every son-of-a-bitch who ever eats in that room." Observing the restaurant's pretentious atmosphere upon his return from a trip to Europe, Rothko abandoned the project altogether, returned his advance and kept the paintings for himself. The final series was dispersed and now hangs in three locations: London’s Tate Gallery, Japan’s Kawamura Memorial Museum and the National Gallery of Art in Washington, D.C." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.67.51.49 (talk) (talk • contribs) 

I am returning the section because it is a well documented part of the history of the Four Seasons Restaurant, Philip Johnson the architect who designed the restaurant, commissioned Rothko, and built with Mies Van de Rohe the building the restaurant is in. It is a part of Rothko's history, described in vivid detail at the Tate and is a part of the lore and ambience of the restaurant. It would not have an article if it wasn't for it's historical value, a restaurant per se is not notable...Modernist (talk) 17:40, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
Description of Rothko's intent contained herein: "Accepting the commission, he secretly resolved to create "something that will ruin the appetite of every son-of-a-bitch who ever eats in that room." Entirely misleading at best, and more  accurately- WRONG. Rothko accepted Johnson's commission with exhilaration and pureness of intent. He was unaware, upon acceptance of the commission, that the restaurant would be a dining spot for the wealthy and privileged. That, he despised. Rothko had socialist leanings, politically and otherwise, his entire life. It was Rothko's understanding that the Four Seasons restaurant would be a place for one and all, regardless of social standing. It was only AFTER completing his red monochromatic series of paintings, all of which contained vertical motifs, not horizontal, that he and his wife Mary Alice(Mel) visited the now-open restaurant. Rothko and his wife were appalled by the stuffy, elitist air of the Four Seasons. It was anything but open to all; it was exclusive, which went against everything Rothko stood for. ONLY THEN, did he re-neg on his agreement. He of course forfeited the commission, quite lucrative for its time. Rothko would hold onto the paintings, unique in nature for his work, up to the final months of his life. He had developed a friendship with the director of London's Tate Gallery, and shortly before his death (he killed himself February 1970) bequeathed the entire series to the Tate. It is my understanding the Tate owns the whole lot, and that they are not divided among three separate museums. The Tate has in fact built an entire room devoted solely to the series. 76.117.94.61 ([[M.P. Landau (talk) 00:18, 18 April 2014 (UTC)User talk:76.117.94.61|talk]]) 19:34, 17 April 2014 (UTC)M.P. Landau

It seems pretty dubious to claim that it was the first US restaurant to use fresh mushrooms. Sarcoidjohn (talk) 22:43, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

Did/does the restaurant have anything to do with the hotel chain?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.66.132.126 (talk) 20:26, 27 April 2019 (UTC) 

Should the word "the" be removed from the article title? I think "Four Seasons Restaurant" would be more consistent with our naming convention, WP:THE. -- Edge3 (talk) 07:27, 15 October 2022 (UTC)

I've just made this change. Edge3 (talk) 02:35, 16 October 2022 (UTC)
Thanks for making the change. It seems like the page was originally at the title "Four Seasons (restaurant)" before being moved to "The Four Seasons Restaurant" in 2007. I guess no one ever thought to question the inclusion of the definite article before the restaurant's name, myself included. – Epicgenius (talk) 18:05, 16 October 2022 (UTC)

My wife thinks I should add myself to the list since I have eaten at the Four Seasons  and I had my 15 minutes of fame, articles in Wired and the New York Times.
I doubt I'm famous enough, although I didn't recognize the first name on the list. Anyway,  I refused to outright add myself, we compromised with me adding this to talk. I honestly expect no support and that this will die.

Simicich (talk) 04:14, 3 September 2023 (UTC)

As the person who largely wrote that section, I think it is fine if you have a Wikipedia article for yourself and are mentioned in reliable sources (you've already gotten the second part down). However, I hesitate to add anyone without Wikipedia articles or anyone else who hasn't been shown to meet Wikipedia's notability guideline. By contrast, everyone else on that list has an article and appeared there relatively frequently, for the most part. – Epicgenius (talk) 15:40, 11 December 2023 (UTC)