Lately I’ve been exploring some ideas with regard to form and (at times) representation. I have always been an abstract painter, so on a personal level I have some interest in seeing what would happen if I were to actually represent something—if I were to paint a picture “of something.” What would that something be, and how would I represent it? These initial experiments simply take the first step by creating an object/ground scenario, something that is almost entirely absent in the series that I’ve been working on for the last several years. I would have to say that anything approaching realism is out of the question because for me painting is an exercise in self-expression and improvisation that is not compatible with the obligation to make things look “correct.” Even representing objects in any sense at all may prove more restrictive than I can abide, but for now it’s interesting to see what develops. So far I’ve found that I’m drawn to images (shapes) that are not recognizable as things that I see around me, but which convey certain familiar attitudes and are subject to the natural forces (laws of physics) that govern elements in the physical world.
I’ve made some small painting experiments lately that focus more on the materiality of paint and less on the geometric compositional structure that I’ve used for the last several years. The result is a looser, freer feeling that really appeals to me. Where this is headed I can’t say for sure, but for now it’s a matter of finding the right balance between structure and chaos.