+ A painting is not about an experience. It is
+ It was with the utmost reluctance that I found
the figure could not serve my purposes. But a
time came when none of us could use the figure
without mutilating it.
+ The progression of a painter's work as it travels
in time from point to point, will be toward clarity..
toward the elimination of all obstacles between
the painter and the idea.. and the idea and the
observer.. To achieve this clarity is inevitably
to be understood.
+ I do not believe that there was ever a question
of being abstract or representational. It is really
a matter of ending this silence and solitude,
of breathing, and stretching ones arms again
transcendental experiences became possible.
+ Since my pictures are large, colorful and unframed,
and since museum walls are usually immense and
formidable, there is the danger that the pictures
relate themselves as decorative areas to the walls.
This would be a distortion of their meaning, since
the pictures are intimate and intense, and are
the opposite of what is decorative.
+ Im not an abstractionist. Im not
interested in the relationship of color or form
or anything else. Im interested only in
expressing basic human emotions: tragedy, ecstasy,
doom, and so on.
+ The people who weep before my pictures are having
the same religious experience I had when I painted
them. And if you, as you say, are moved only by
their color relationships, then you miss the point!
+ It is a widely accepted notion among painters
that it does not matter what one paints as long
as it is well painted. This is the essence of
academicism. There is no such thing as good painting
+ I think of my pictures as dramas; the shapes
in the pictures are the performers. They have
been created from the need for a group of actors
who are able to move dramatically without embarrassment
and execute gestures without shame. Neither the
action nor the actors can be anticipated, or described
+ The fact that people break down and cry when
confronted with my pictures shows that I can communicate
those basic human emotions.. the people who weep
before my pictures are having the same religious
experience I had when painting them. And if you
say you are moved only by their color relationships
then you miss the point.
+ One does not paint for design students or historians
but for human beings, and the reaction in human
terms is the only thing that is really satisfactory
to the artist.
+ I paint very large pictures. I realize that
historically the function of painting large pictures
is painting something very grandiose and pompous.
The reason I paint them, however I think
it applies to other painters I know is
precisely because I want to be very intimate and
human. To paint a small picture is to place yourself
outside your experience. However you paint the
larger picture, you are in it.