The daily practice of painting : writings and interviews, 1962-1993

Author:	Gerhard Richter; Hans-Ulrich Obrist
Publisher:	Cambridge, Mass. : MIT Press ; London : Anthony d'Offay Gallery, 1995.
Edition/Format:	Book : EnglishView all editions and formats
Summary:	Gerhard Richter, born in Dresden in 1932, is one of the foremost painters of his generation. A great deal has been written about the bewildering heterogeneity of his work over the past 30 years, his seemingly willful and defiant movement between abstract and figurative modes of representation and his use of a variety of methods of applying paint to canvas. And Richter himself is the master of the paradoxical From www.worldcat.org How to look at my , or any, work of art - from ART STUFF November, 2011 1. The Formal Framework - Visual analysis - Technique - Style - Symbolism and metaphor. 2. The Personal Framework - Reflects the artists life - Links to other aspects which may relate to the artists life. 3. The Cultural Framework - The influences of time and place - Connections to contexts and cultural purposes. 4. The Contemporary Framework - Exploring contemporary issues.

Publications

Ulrich de Balbian published a number of books under different names, for example as Ulrich Verster he published fifteen tomes on Philosophy alone, as well as on other subjects such as Sociology and sociological research.

He commenced a work on Philosophy/Philosophizing available on internet at the link below. So far the work deals with sociologism - the disease which serves as basic assumption for the existence of 'cognitive sociology' and/or 'social epistemology'.

https://sites.google.com/site/philosophyphilosophizing/

http://goo.gl/fOLQb


https://sites.google.com/site/artgalleryulrich/home/publications

Find details of my 15 books here:

https://sites.google.com/site/artgalleryulrich/home/publications

https://sites.google.com/site/artgalleryulrich/home/what-and-why-i-am-painting

To try and understand what I am expressing here, first study Paul Klee and then the abstract paintings of  Gerhard Richter. Then you return here and read what I attempt to express in spatio-temporally restricted concepts

..... I am not (and no longer) painting -

1)

for that what you (think you) see  (or might, or may or should see) when you look at my work,

2)

or that what you (think and imagine you) perceive (or may, might or should perceive) when you represent (create, construct or constitute)  something (for example images or ideas)  in your mind (and what you do with it or  them in your perception and brain) when you look at my work.

I merely produce marks on a support (paper, canvas, etc). My intention is to create such marks and those things that are constituted by or result from their interaction.

Thus, the only thing that matters is:

that what is on the support -

there is nothing more, or less,

about my work.....


In other words, I am working on that level, or rather that stage when something 'is not yet', that is, prior to coming into existence, to be constituted or  created. One can express or label  this pre-conceptual (that is prior to being expressed in human spatio-temporally restricted notions) state or stage in different ways, depending on the aspect/s one wishes to identify and emphasize. 

Astrophysics, theoretical physics, mathematics, classical music, and other socio-cultural practices identify different aspects of this 'not yet being created', or 'coming into existence or be-ing'. Thus it can be labelled by different terms, for example chaos, or that state or stage Wittgenstein refers to as 'mystery', that what can only be directly shown and not expressed (and caught) in human spatio-temporally restricted concepts. That state or stage that Paul Klee refers to when he says that he is as much part of the living as the dead and as that what is not yet - close to , to being created, but never close enough.

The state of prayerfulness, of Pure Consciousness or Awareness of the present arising moment of the mystics.

That is what I attempt to grasp and express....

Statements by Ulrich de Balbian

Since I can remember I realized that people are not on the same level of IQ, sensitivity and other qualities that form a human being. It is as if people are placed on different levels of a pyramid, with most of them on the first level. Someone can only grasp others on his/her level and some of those on levels underneath him. This is the case with the IQ of an individual as well as their level of sincerity, honesty, sensitivity, gentleness, kindness and all those values and attitudes (attitudinal types for each of those values) that together contribute to constitute a human being.

I attempted for all of my life to assist in the realization of the potential of everyone I came across, but gave up when I realized that human beings are satisfied with merely being that what society, others and themselves have turned them into - restricted intellectually, emotionally, socially, culturally, spiritually, etc etc. Thus I withdrew from social interaction even more. This applies to my art as well - I have little interest in participating in the art industry (of auctions, galleries, critics, reviewers, collectors, viewers and others that live OFF art). Most viewers want a nice or pretty image, and to satisfy that they merely need to look at a flower, sunset, other people, etc. 

I also realized, with a shock, that I do not paint to satisfy 'others' (critics, reviewers, gallery owners, general viewers, etc), but that my  process of painting and the works resulting from that form part of a certain niche aspect of the discourse of painting. Painting, as I intentionally chose that genre of visual art, rather than any of the gimmicky ones such as installations, performance art, etc. I paint in and for a certain tradition in the discourse of painting - a tradition represented by painters such as Klee, Kandinsky, Richter, Monet, van Gogh, Hartung et al. These individuals did not attempt to work in an experimental manner, to shock, amaze or to please - they merely worked in a manner that they had no other choice or option to. Those 'great' or more serious painters questioned the norms, the rules, the questions and answers that constitute the interpersonal or intersubjective discourse and reality of (modern) western painting (in the way that the serious philosophers, scientists, poets, novelists, composers, etc questioned the intersubjective CODES, values, and  norms of their own discourses). They did not set out to be experimental, but merely worked in a manner with total integrity to satisfy their aesthetic ideals and vision.

They therefore worked for the discourse of (western) painting itself - for other serious painters that lived before them, for the handful of serious painters of their own time, and for the sake of the handful of serious painters of the future - those still to be born.

I replied to questions on http://www.mischmaschonline.com/ and reprint my answers here as they might be useful for other serious painters who reflect on what they do and why they do it.

What time and place would you most like to experience other than the one you are in now?

He intentionally choose to work as a painter, rather than any of the more gimmicky and fashionable genres of the day such as performance art or installations.He has ateliers in several countries, including France, Spain and South Africa and has British nationality, among others.

Research western painterly techniques and the structures of the western painterly code or discourse through the ages; especially interested in Bauhaus, Klee, Kandinsky, Picasso, Expressionists, some Impressionists such as Monet, and the contemporary artists influenced by them. In every work of mine I share with you one aspect of my aesthetic ideals and vision. Principles and factors that hopefully will introduce eternally lasting qualities into and transform the discourse of painting, like the works of the handful of serious artists have done over the ages. Lectured and published books and articles in philosophy (eg ontology and epistemology), theology, world religions, art, social sciences and other subjects. Spiritually ( or theologically) especially interested in the mystical traditions (of prayer, contemplation and thesis or the unity experience)in Christianity (Western, Eastern and Oriental Orthodoxy), Vedanta's self-realization, Buddhism's satori, Sufism.

hell - never being satisfied with existing questions and answers in any area of life - other possibilities always exist - and must be realized, endlessly.

Why become an artist? 

It's just the way I'm put together, I've got no choice in the matter. I've got the same exploring attitude in philosophy, science, etc - not satisfied with existing questions and answers

What does success mean to you? 

The few seconds when another work has been completed successfully before I start another one, but immediately I question it and must work again, as only the process of painting itself identifies the questions/problems and an answer.. for a short while and unending -- like all creation, the process if never completed..

What time and place would you most like to experience other than the one you are in now?

I'm already experiencing it - the eternity beyond space and time when someone is sensitive, sincere, honest, gentle and kind - and they don't even get paid or another reward for just being pleasantly human - like my 4 big American Pitbull dogs, always loving, so innocent like children - when being drawn out of oneself and the present place and time by a certain musical piece, a few words in a poem or novel, when beauty and truth meet in science, when being hypnotized by a painting. The eternity in every present moment when one, finally, in old age, reached inner peace...

I suddenly realized that what I always took for granted seems to be the exception rather than the rule: I do not paint for collectors, buyers, curators, gallery owners, art reviewers and critics and others in the art industry who lives OFF art. No, I paint for the handful of other serious artists, especially those who are yet to be born, and who live FOR art. In other words, I assist in the making , maintenance and development of art (or more specifically the painting discourse and intersubjectivity) history .

The gentleman has excellent insights and ideas both as a painter/artist and for viewers and students, as he is a lecturer as well -

How to look at my , or any, work of art -

from ART STUFF November, 2011
1. The Formal Framework - Visual analysis - Technique - Style - Symbolism and metaphor.
2. The Personal Framework - Reflects the artists life - Links to other aspects which may relate to the artists life.
3. The Cultural Framework - The influences of time and place - Connections to contexts and cultural purposes.
4. The Contemporary Framework - Exploring contemporary issues.

Exchanges with a friend - my reply:

I definitely did not compare all of my work , as I work on many different  'painterly problems' , - with the Japanese, but only a very small section -

 

where I just placed a tiny  bit of color, form right on the edge.

 

I found it interesting that someone else also have a bare space with just  a minute form on the edge.

 

I can't find examples of that, a mark on the edge now as I have thousands of images.

 

But found a few other examples.

 

--

 

Most artists work only one one or a few problems - like Twombly, Still, etc.

 

A handful of us , like Klee and Richter, work on a certain problem, dissolve it, then move to another problem, etc etc.

 

We never have only one style -  or solution to one problem, for as soon as we have solved a certain problem (our what is know as a 'style') - we reject it , go into some sort of chaos, identify another problem in that,

 

and solve that again (thus many styles).

 

--

 

I found it interesting that someone else produced work that had only a few small, minute forms right on the edge of the support - as I've never seen that with anyone else.

 

--

 

Anyway here are a few images that are minimalist. I can't quickly find ones where the image lies on the edge.

 

j

 

The majority of artists are satisfied with the solution to one problem  they develop - that is also known as their (recognizable) style.  This is what this Japanese does - his style.

--------------------------------
When I wrote 'solving problems', I did not mean in a rational manner, but pre-conceptual or sub-consciously, the domain of the so-called 'creativity'..  We must use concepts to think and talk ABOUT that, but then we are immediately entangled in words and more words and the need to construct arguments, so as to be able to express oneself and communicate in a dialogue or having a discourse. I once said to someone who lectures and writes on these things: what he does might be necessary to obtain a degree in theory of art, but it is irrelevant to the practice of painting and other art forms (his theorizing about culture,arts etc) . And, I doubt that van Gogh  or Michelangelo had a copy of his ideas in their left hand while working, using it as some kind of rule book  or canon of how to paint.

my email to a fried:

writes:

not a rational problem solving - not as simple as that -

it is pre-conceptual, subconscious - prior to thinking - where so-called creativity lies or begins -

 

I just label it problem solving when I reflect and talk ABOUT it in rational discourse -

 

this is a very different activity from the the acts of painting itself,

 

but the best we have available to think and talk about art.

 

But of course this is really totally irrelevant to the painting process -

 

as I always tell someone know who lectures  and writes books on these things. I tell him: no painter first read his books and lectures before they paint and van Gogh and Michelangelo did not have those items in their left hands as a rule book when they paint -

 

why I object to art critics and reviewers. There activities are irrelevant to the painting process

 

best not to talk about such things, I have found -

one only gets all tangled up in words and the process of thinking and constructing arguments

 

j

 

 His response:

Totally agree with everything you've written thus far. I must enter the cloud of unknowing and give myself entirely to that and simply reach for what's not there yet.  My attempts to even manifest it are already deeply flawed. Anyone else observations weaken the moment even more. That's why theology holds little merit for me any longer.

 

If I look at the great masters, I see something of their entering into unknowing/ignorance as the emerge with some attempt to express what has touched them.

my reply:

"If I look at the great masters, I see something of their entering into unknowing/ignorance as the emerge with some attempt to express what has touched them."

 

Thanks for your time -

 

that's what I found - one must work on the techniques, basics etc -

 

but then it all goes beyond all human notions of beauty. evoking emotions etc -

 

what one does one just does - no choice in the matter =-

 

almost as if something different, deeper is revealing itself (like in sciences, musical composition etc0 -

 

one does it almost without thinking

j/u

close to the heart of creation

......Close to the heart of creation, always nearer, but never close enough, yet.....