Everyone experiences drawing and painting as children. I was perhaps one year old therefore when I was first initiated into the painter’s craft. I continued these universal beginnings throughout my school years and sporadic courses in college (which gave me few insights into this art). [...] I had only myself as a teacher in the art of painting.
My evolution as a painter paralleled that of art history in general, beginning with my prehistoric period as a one-year-old-clutcher-of-crayolas, groping through Egyptian and Greek periods; a Renaissance period; and then neo-classicism, romanticism and naturalism; impressionism and fauvism; cubism and abstract expressionism.
At nineteen I went to Europe, thirsty for scope and depth in Art which America lacks. Having established myself in the south of France, I absorbed the emanations of the modern masters who had lived and painted there. I was profoundly moved by the bizarre snow storm over La Côte d’Azur on the night of Picasso’s death. No such storm had ever been seen before in April, as old-timers in Nice told me. [...]
Fully acknowledging my debt to
'abstract expressionism', I nonetheless do not consider my art 'abstract' – a word that has been grossly misunderstood when applied to painting. For example, the telescopic blue distance behind the head of the Mona Lisa indeed is abstract, considering that the third dimension of depth is non-existent in the painting. It is illusion, trompe l’oeil. 'Abstract...