A Dialog With Philip Geiger
Interview dialog by Jeffrey Carr
Philip Geiger is a revered and extremely achieved painter recognized for his home interiors, landscapes, and determine work. Receiving his undergraduate schooling at Washington College in St. Louis and his M.F.A. from Yale College College of Artwork, he started repeatedly displaying in New York early in his profession and has proven extensively in quite a few group and solo reveals.
He’s represented by the Reynolds Gallery, Richmond, Virginia, Hidell Brooks Gallery in Charlotte, NC and has beforehand present work on the Tibor de Nagy Gallery in NYC, NC. with a solo exhibition there in 2007. His work are represented in a number of outstanding public collections and have been reviewed by the New York Occasions, Artwork in America, ARTnews, and The New Criterion. He taught for over thirty years on the College of Virginia at Charlottesville, Virginia, earlier than retiring to his present residence and studio in Staunton, Virginia. We met lately by way of a Zoom session to debate his portray observe.
Jeffrey Carr: Phil, I simply completed listening to a YouTube interview with you from 2012. You mentioned the way you revise your photographs closely whereas engaged on them, and the way you’d sand or scrape down your work earlier than repainting. Do you add figures and different components into the image? Do you do that from life? Or are you doing it from invention?
Philip Geiger: Nicely, each. I’ve turn out to be slower. I can work on work virtually indefinitely by sanding them, by rethinking the composition. It’s not an environment friendly course of in any respect, however I at all times have dissatisfaction with the picture and wish to work on it again within the studio for lengthy durations of time. Then I would return to direct observational at a later date, attempting to get one thing again.
Philip Geiger; Black Mountain Story, 2018
JC: So, are the figures in these work largely invented? Do you utilize photographic references?
PG: Not a lot photographic reference. The method may change portray by portray and determine by determine. Some components may be invented and a few may be carried out immediately from statement. I work from fashions a number of occasions every week. I schedule a mannequin and work immediately into the portray with the mannequin. It at all times evokes me to work with a portray that I’ve already bought going.
Philip Geiger; September 24, 2010, 22 by 18in.
JC: So, you’re taking a portray that you already have going, and you’ll have sanded it down or scraped it. Do you then simply sit someone down in a chair after which paint them into the image? Isn’t the area utterly completely different? How can you combine the brand new state of affairs into the present portray?
PG: I attempt to do this. I actually just like the accidents. I’ll oftentimes rethink the composition. The determine will likely be in some new place, or the dimensions will likely be new. One thing like that. However that combat, that accident, of placing a determine into an current portray that wasn’t deliberate within the first place, and which will even be within the improper place, is admittedly motivating. It might recommend one thing new that would occur within the portray, a brand new discovery. It’s actually inefficient to maintain working and looking like this. However I see the portray as a search. I’ve by no means thought that I may plan a portray upfront. I believe I’d be bored if I deliberate out a drawing and knew the place issues had been going to go after which went at portray it. And in any case, this may be virtually unattainable in case you work from direct statement as a result of issues are altering and the sunshine adjustments.
Philip Geiger; East Sunbathing, 2022 24 by 18in
Philip Geiger; The Perfectionist, 2018, 27 by 24in.
JC: You’re telling me that you just don’t work strictly from statement. Chances are you’ll incorporate a number of statement however you’re working very synthetically. By artificial, I imply that the method could contain numerous methods of developing the picture that’s built-in into the ultimate portray. The area in your work appears virtually completely artificial, fairly than strictly naturalistic. However lots of the particulars appear carried out from direct statement.
PG: They’re precise locations, however I elaborate on them. I like elaborating partitions within the studio, corners, moldings, structure, and flooring. Within the studio, I form of really feel my approach throughout the area to search out some drama within the area, some which means. That search may be very sluggish.
Philip Geiger; Frederick Road, 2018, 22 by 18in
JC: Do you imply that you just discover the drama and the thrill within the area itself fairly than within the figures or conditions being depicted? I keep in mind seeing one in every of your work the place you closely reworked the picture with a purpose to create a sure impact of sunshine throughout the partitions.
PG: The danish painter Wilhelm Hammershoi had this sense for partitions, French doorways and the shadows forged by framed work or tables. He liked these issues and I’m positive he labored them slowly. I don’t know if he labored them away from statement or not. However he appears to have elaborated on them. The richness appears vital to him, the play of sunshine throughout these surfaces.
Vilhelm Hammershoi, Dwelling Room with Piano and Girl Wearing Black, 1901
JC: To me, it appears that evidently in your work, as in Hammershoi, the depiction of area comprises and defines the figures fairly than simply being a backdrop or a setting for the figures. This jogs my memory of the early Vermeer portray of the Girl studying a Letter. It was restored lately, and the wall behind the lady was eliminated to disclose a portray behind the determine. To me, this adjustments completely the area and so the which means of the portray. What was your response to this restoration?
PG: I prefer it much less.
Johannes Vermeer, Woman Studying a Letter at an Open Window c. 1657–1659, Oil on canvas, 33 in × 25.4 in, Gemäldegalerie, Dresden
JC: So did I. Earlier than the restoration, the wall behind the lady was densely painted and was very stunning. It makes me consider your very painterly contact. Your work are usually not painted with a number of element; the element is evoked fairly than described. You don’t simply copy; you evoke the shape.
PG: That’s a fantastic praise. Vermeer has at all times been a touchstone for me in my work. He finds a common high quality in what was proper in entrance of him, in that room in his home that he labored with again and again. The identical desk and the identical ermine coat and doubtless the identical mannequin. However he was capable of finding a density and emotion in these odd issues. However his work shouldn’t be figure-centric. I consider him as wanting previous the determine and zeroing in on the area between the chair and the wall, or a nook of a room the place a basket is hung, or there’s even a nail on the wall. These occasions appear to draw him. The figures strike me as virtually clean. I like them; they’re completely beautiful. However you virtually can’t know them. And in reality, there’s a number of debate about who was the mannequin in his work; was it his spouse or this or that particular person? Identities had been faraway from them, and the entire place is the drama.
Johannes Vermeer
Johannes Vermeer
JC: Vermeer did a number of shocking and surprising issues with scale and dimension relationships. In a single early portray, there’s a woman sitting at a desk, a determine dressed as a form of a Cavalier with a large hat and together with his elbow sitting out. The angle is skewed in order that he feels monumental whereas she feels little. You appear to do related issues with scale and dimension relationships in your work.
PG: I’ve by no means considered that as an issue in Vermeer’s work. They simply appear completely good to me; every of them is completely felt. In that one known as The Laughing Woman, each little bit of it appears so proper and so felt that I don’t suppose an excessive amount of in regards to the area or the drawing in them. He did wish to layer a darkish foreground towards a lighter passage or a silhouette form.
Philip Geiger; Three, 2010, 24 by 29in.
JC: I believe that that is true of your work as properly. Expressiveness is created by the dimensions, the area, and even simply the best way a wall is labored. You create drama with folks strolling right into a room or strolling in the direction of us with one other distant determine silhouetted towards a window or over within the nook. You actually really feel the drama within the area. One other artist who does that is Edward Hopper. Hopper’s portray evokes some indefinable which means that you just wish to suppose comes from a determine or another aspect within the portray, nevertheless it’s about one thing else. It’s about the best way he places collectively the area.
12-Philip Geiger; Percy, 2018, 24 by 28in
Philip Geiger; Peru, 2007, 28 by 34in.
PG: Yeah, it’s about him. I believe each Hopper and Vermeer have a sense for shapes that’s distinctive. I’ve tried to do this. To really feel the proportions of the divisions contained in the portray as having which means. I usually consider Vermeer as being the best form maker. Simply the quantity of a map towards a white wall simply appears so proper. The intervals really feel deeply significant; it’s the measures in between intervals within the portray that makes shapes.
JC: I’m fascinated with Mondrian, who like Vermeer had this unimaginable sense of interval, the place every thing feels good. However Mondrian made his work about simply these measurements and took out every thing else.
PG: That’s by no means as fascinating to me because the shapes in Vermeer. I ponder what Vermeer would have stated about this. Would he have understood our language of abstraction and of attempting to see shapes independently? Was all of it intuitive on his half? I want we may ask him. However you might be proper; they tried to separate that out within the twentieth century. The form intervals in Mondrian don’t do a lot for me.
Philip Geiger; Theresa 9 A.M., 2007, 36 by 40in
Philip Geiger; Anna Asleep, 2002, 34 by 28in
JC: I don’t suppose portray bought any higher by attempting to be reductivist. For instance, there’s Saenredam, the dutch artist who did very extreme white Church Interiors. Like Mondrian, he had a severely abstracted visible sense. However the intervals and shapes of his church interiors additionally create emotional responses and even concepts about divine gentle or purpose or probity. Against this, artists like Mondrian aspire to be purely summary. However that’s clearly not what you might be doing. Are you interested by creating temper or emotion by using area and the interactions of form?
Pieter Saenredam (1597 – 1665), The Inside of the Grote Kerk at Haarlem (1636-7), Oil on oak, 59.5 × 81.7 cm, Nationwide Gallery, UK
PG: I don’t know what I’d say about temper as a result of I couldn’t determine what it’s. However I’ve emotional reactions to what I’d name rightness in a portray. That’s why I wrestle with it for therefore lengthy as a result of it isn’t at all times there. I believe that the communication of an inside life that comes by a portray is why we’re desirous about them. It’s one thing I wrestle with, and I believe it ends in a temper. I’m clearly interested in very muted colours. In my thoughts, muted tones are extra suggestive of sunshine than good, native shade. And that, in addition to an emphasis on worth in my work, may create a temper that’s completely different from different kinds of portray.
Philip Geiger; September 24, 2010, 22 by 18in.
Philip Geiger; Translation, 2018, 20 by 24in
Philip Geiger; Dialog, 2016, 24 by 29in.
JC: There’s an outdated concept that shade creates moods: good shade creates sturdy feelings and muted, quiet colours create quiet feelings. That may be true, or it won’t. Such as you, I’m not even positive what “temper” means. The early work of Degas makes use of low saturation shade. He retains the vividness and the depth down. Maybe due to his use of low-saturation colours, his moods are virtually indescribable. The colour-moods of Degas remind me of your work.
PG: There’s a form of shimmering magnificence in his work that I’d describe as being figure-first. His determine drawing is so good that the presence of the determine is at all times the purpose of the portray. What he does round them is one thing to enrich the determine and the motion of the determine. It’s a fantastic problem for me as a result of I don’t draw the determine that properly; no person does. I like his work.
Edgar Degas
Philip Geiger; Winter, 2018, 24 by 24in.
Phil Geiger; The Traveler, 2007
JC: Your footage are sometimes enveloped with a light-weight I’ve seen in interiors carried out by different American artists like Thomas Dewing. There’s a heat, enveloping glow to those work through which all people exists in a liquid, enveloping honey-colored glow. Do you are feeling any connection to the various American artists who paint quiet, tonalist interiors, artists like Tarbell or Decamp?
Edmund Charles Tarbell (1862-1938), Inside with Mom and Little one oil on canvas, 25 x 30 in. The Huntington Library, Artwork Museum, and Botanical Gardens
Philip Geiger; Morning, 2018, 24 by 26in.
Philip Geiger; January, 2018, 24 by 24 in.
PG: Nicely, it does appear to be that. I see the similarity however I don’t take a look at these artists very a lot and I’m truly not very aware of them. Somebody from that point interval that I actually do take a look at is Vilhelm Hammershoi. I really feel extra related to that portray. All these Boston painters like Bensen or Tarbell by no means challenged me sufficient, I assume. They aren’t as difficult as a Degas. Degas could also be doing very various things, nevertheless it’s an actual problem to me. I’ve at all times bought a Degas e-book there within the studio. I’ve bought the Hammershoi e-book there, and the Vuillard e-book. These are the books I would take a look at each morning. I do see the similarities with these different painters; there may be a Merrit Chase who would do an attractive flooring or an attractive couch. However I’ve by no means checked out them a lot.
JC: You might be mentioning some basic European painters like Hammershoi and Vuillard. However to me, there’s something quintessentially American in your portray, and I’m attempting to really feel the place you might be on this spectrum. I sense a relationship with artists in our custom, like Edwin Dickinson, for instance. How do you join with somebody like that? And we talked about Hopper.
PG: Nicely, Hopper for positive. I’ve made an enormous research of Hopper and I’ve spent a number of time portray exterior. I’ve checked out all of his works very intently and I reply to Hopper rather a lot. I like Edwin Dickinson, however I don’t fairly know what to make of it. I believe there’s a fantastic thriller in his work and a few actual originality in what he did. The intense tonalness and greyness of the work are enticing to me. It appears virtually romantic; his meditations on funereal topics and dying.
I discover him fascinating, however I haven’t discovered a technique to make rather a lot out of that. All people appears at his self-portraits and desires to do some self-portraits. I’ve carried out that, possibly impressed by him.
Philip Geiger; The Opening, 1990, 30 by 36in.
Philip Geiger; Completely different Shirt, 2006, 24 by 18in.
Philip Geiger
JC: We’ve been speaking about historic painters. However you and I got here of age in a vastly completely different creative universe than the one which exists now. What are some painters of the seventies and eighties that you just really feel an actual kinship with?
PG: My academics William Bailey and Lennart Anderson stay fashions for me. I like what they did of their work. Each of them pursued their imaginative and prescient whether or not the artworld paid any consideration to them or not. They pursued their imaginative and prescient fearlessly their complete lives. There was a current exhibition of Lennart Anderson, and he’s getting some consideration. I like his work, and each of their examples are vital to me. There’s a portray that was the centerpiece of the current Anderson exhibition that’s owned by the College of Virginia. It’s known as St. Mark’s Place. It’s an early New York avenue portray with three foremost figures. One determine is leaning from a pole; he painted that by himself in a mirror. One other determine is a person with a canine, and there’s a girl wanting again. I regarded rather a lot at that portray once they would grasp it within the Nineteen Eighties, and it had a huge impact on me. The placing collectively of those three figures implied dense psychology. They appear to pay attention to one another, regardless that they weren’t interacting or doing something collectively. The College of Virginia additionally owns the William Bailey portray known as Portrait of S, which relies on a Balthus. Each of those work had been vital to me, and that was a second in time that was vital. Bailey would say to his college students, “Don’t be afraid to be influenced by different painters”. He clearly felt that painters like Balthus or Courbet was completely respectable for artists to do, and to make a variation on one thing like Courbet’s Ladies within the Grass. I’ve at all times appreciated this instance; it appears to free me.
Lennart Anderson, St. Mark’s Place, 1969-1976, Oil on canvas, 93 13/16 x 74 1/8 in.© Property of Lennart Anderson Courtesy of the Fralin Museum of Artwork.
.
William Bailey, Portrait of S, 1979-80, Oil on Canvas, 52×42 in. Fralin Museum of Artwork on the College of Virginea, Charlottesville
JC: Painters usually have their nonetheless life objects throughout the studio, and prepare them into compositions to color. There are a number of nice Lennart Anderson nonetheless lifes like this. However William Bailey as soon as joked that he had all of his still-life objects in his pocket. I believe he meant that his still-life objects had been extra invented than noticed, and had been extra about purely formal visible relationships than about precise objects. Bailey’s meticulously painted backgrounds even make me consider a Brice Marden. In portray like this, the subject material is usually only a pretext. Do you consider your self as largely a proper painter, on the lookout for formal options? Or do you see your self in another approach?
PG: I don’t wish to be a formalist. I’d be an summary painter if I did. I’m in love with the true world. I believe that it’s a fantastic start line for making a portray. I need it in there; all the wealthy complexity and interpretive potentialities of subject material. I’ve an affection for folks and I wish to get that into the portray. The locations we reside in can mirror our inside life and are a part of it. I believe that’s value highlighting and making work about. The world in entrance of us is a extremely wealthy topic; our lives, our homes, the city I reside in, my life. I believe the ideology of modernism has dried out portray. It turned reductive by attempting to make it simply in regards to the components of portray in a increasingly pure approach. I believe all this wealthy accidentalness of our lives, and the truth that we psychologize work and see ourselves in work and determine with work and have feelings in regards to the figures in work, is all a vital a part of the richness.
Philip Geiger; The White Costume, 1989, 18 by 12in.
Philip Geiger
JC: Plenty of the work I see by youthful artists mirror gender or racial considerations or are satirical, ironic, or humorous. I’m advised that youthful artists usually really feel their artwork ought to deal with social or political points. Their topic issues are sometimes very witty and even alarming. However the topic issues of your work appear very quiet and understated. I consider an artist like John Koch who paints equally understated subject material. You depict younger girls sitting quietly at tables, girls sleeping, figures transferring by a room, gentle flowing over a determine from a window, or the occasional suburban panorama. And also you and I each often depict girls in our footage. That males usually depict girls has been a supply of controversy. What is that this about?
John Koch(1909 – 1978), My Studio, ca. 1952, oil on canvas, Smithsonian American Artwork Museum
PG: Simply to handle that situation, I see my work as celebratory. I do know that there’s some critic on the market who gained’t see it that approach and might interpret it in some darkish approach, however I see them as celebratory. I like who it’s that I’m portray, males or girls, and loads of girls. It’s a world that implies a chance to make a portray. I don’t know if I’ve thought it out, though I do like John Koch and take a look at him often. I form of see myself as John Koch by the use of Hopper; possibly extra austere. I just like the form of area of figurative portray the place you don’t know precisely what is going on. These are evocative to me. John Koch’s work might be at occasions a bit of literal. In Koch’s portray, we all know what is going on. I just like the surprises and accidents in portray, the place we get to make our personal which means. The concept of an image about being in between issues taking place. Or when one thing has simply occurred or goes to occur and it’s not outlined. This fires my creativeness.
Philip Geiger; Virginia, 2018, 24 by 28in.
Philip Geiger; 4 p.m. 2001, 24” by 18in.
JC: In your work, you might need somebody at a desk, and there may be some objects on the desk. However it’s not an outline of a desk after breakfast, a dialog, or another very particular occasion. I keep in mind a portray of yours with a deep area in which there’s a silhouetted determine, nevertheless it’s by no means a narrative about someone opening the door and welcoming the visitors. You by no means appear to inform little tales in your work. As you stated, they’re very ambiguous. They aren’t folks simply posing, however on the similar time, there isn’t actually a narrative in there that I can discern.
PG: Simply to handle that situation, I see my work as celebratory. I do know there’s some critic on the market who gained’t see my work that approach and will interpret them with some darkish story, however I see them as celebratory. I like who it’s that I’m portray, both males or girls. Folks in locations is a topic that implies a chance to make a portray. I just like the form of area of figurative portray the place you don’t know precisely what is going on. These are evocative to me. John Koch’s work might be at occasions a bit literal. In Koch’s portray, we all know what is going on. I just like the surprises and accidents in portray, the place we get to make our personal which means; the thought of an image about being in between issues taking place… or when one thing has simply occurred, or goes to occur and it’s not outlined. This open endedness fires my creativeness.
As for myself, I typically see a form of dialog or correspondence between components. I wish to have the looks of an actual place. For this reason I don’t paint completely something. I need the setting to be clear – this can be a eating room – however the state of affairs to be much less clear. So I’ll do a chair and an individual or a flower and an individual or a window and an individual, and I’ll put these two issues in a relationship with one another that might be shocking, an imaginative affiliation or non-sequitur. The particular person and the junk on the desk; you bounce between one and the opposite. They usually start to have one thing to do with one another or belong to one another indirectly. These are the sorts of issues that curiosity me as I’m setting the portray up. Does the again of that chair relate to the determine, in order that it will likely be dramatic sufficient that we transfer from this to that? With out it being a literal narrative, these pairings would appear to me to recommend a form of which means within the setup that might be shocking. I see that in Vuillard, the place a determine will likely be positioned someplace you don’t anticipate them to be within the portray. He’ll make us actually ponder a giant outdated chair within the foreground, and he makes us actually research it. There will likely be some sample on the ground, and he’ll make rather a lot out of it. The chair or the ground turn out to be as fascinating because the particular person. That is very interesting to me. This multiplicity distinguishes a picture from a portrait, it’s now an inside drama.
Philip Geiger, Witch Trials, 2018
JC: I keep in mind a Vuillard portray with a girl sitting, as you stated, in a bit of nook of the portray. He put a bit of orange piece of sunshine on her nostril and you find yourself that as a lot as you do on the girl.
PG: It’s indirection, I like indirection and portray the place you see one thing like that. We had been speaking about Degas, the place he could have some mannequin bathing however then you definately’ll see this sample that he’s layered within the background that’s completely musically stunning with layers of warms and cools laid upon one another. You permit the determine to take a look at this sample. It’s a form of indirection in making the picture.
JC: With Degas, it’s at all times the surprising scene. As a substitute of the mannequin going through you, you’re looking down at her again from a excessive viewpoint, in order that it’s an unfamiliar view. Within the nice portray of the Belelli household, Degas depicts a mom and her little woman staring off into area whereas visually being separated from the determine of a person sitting to the best. There’s a division proper between the 2 areas of the image. Lennart Anderson’s Road portray can also be dramatic, possibly his solely instance of doing this. The portray has that wagon tipping over with folks operating, and the woman popping out of the door along with her mouth open. Have you ever ever painted one thing that was intentionally dramatic or making an announcement in that approach?
Edgar Degas, The Bellelli Household, (1858 – 1869), oil on canvas, 78 x 9in., Musée d’Orsay
PG: Nicely I consider the sunshine as being dramatic, and I’ve painted some very darkish work through which individuals are undoubtedly in shadow. Lennart Anderson painted a person in midair leaping out of a constructing in what I assume was a suicide. I can’t think about doing that. I’ve by no means carried out something like that, beginning with one thing as literal as that. However I like the thought of divided work, just like the Degas portray of the Bellelli household. Work that divide themselves into components with folks doing various things in several components of the portray. That means a drama which may be much less dramatic than a divorce however suggests an consideration or consciousness throughout the area. I like the thought of dividing a portray in half and having two sides.
JC: You have got a portray of a man developing out of a stairwell in the direction of us on the best facet of the portray, and proper throughout on the opposite facet of the portray is a deep area with folks persevering with to a distant window. That is creating drama with area and lightweight and pictorial group, and never with dramatic subject material. That is like what Degas does. Against this, there are many modern artists who’re doing great work with very dramatic topic issues; wildly ingenious work, sexual satire, and social commentary. Seemingly every thing besides simple depictions of their rapid setting. What do you concentrate on all that?
PG: Nicely, it’s simply not me, you recognize? I like the concept artwork doesn’t must be all the identical. All of us don’t must do the identical factor. The examples we’ve been speaking about are what I’m most desirous about. I’ve nice respect for these different artists nevertheless it’s simply not my temperament. I can’t think about doing one thing like that. I consider the themes in my work as being a lot quieter; not operatic or extraordinarily dramatic. I like Hammershoi or Morandi. One thing as quiet as that: simply the relationships of this object to that object appears very significant to me. I’ve by no means considered portray as being a fantastic automobile for social commentary. Some folks can do wildly expressive work with closely loaded topic issues. However I believe this will additionally get you drawn away from what is admittedly most expressive in portray.
JC: How vital is content material for us painters? There’s a present up now of Philip Guston, an artist who addressed socially related and controversial topic issues. Do we’ve any form of accountability to make socially-conscious work? Are work made for an viewers, or is it simply Artwork for Artwork’s sake?
PG: I don’t fairly agree with the dichotomy that you just’re organising right here as a result of I’m very sympathetic to work that desires to have an ethical core. I believe portray that pursues magnificence within the quiet sense that we’re speaking about is possibly essentially the most ethical form of portray. Work which may take care of topical points just like the Guernica, for instance, are simply very completely different. It’s not my temperament to do the Guernica. However I believe that pursuing authenticity and wonder within the quiet approach that we would affiliate with Vuillard, somebody who didn’t go away his residence a lot, who painted his direct environment, is as morally engaged as Picasso’s Guernica. I believe Vuillard is trying to find a type of the Good. He’s making a proposition in regards to the type of the Good that finally ends up being extra common than the Guernica. I believe that there’s multiple technique to have an ethical core to the exercise that we’re doing. I don’t like this dichotomy of it being both Artwork for Artwork’s Sake or it being just like the Guernica, addressing struggle and peace and present occasions. I believe the wonderful thing about the artwork world now could be which you could pursue one or the opposite, in line with your temperament. We don’t all must do the identical factor. A painter like Ingres, for instance, has dug deep into his concepts of magnificence and inside authenticity as it’s related to magnificence. That’s one of many biggest achievements an artist could make and is among the most ethical contributions an artist could make. I believe Ingres did one thing new by extending human consciousness and capability within the pursuit of what he did so efficiently. I wouldn’t wish to examine myself to Ingres. However I like that as a lot as I like Picasso portray the Guernica. I believe that in the long term, it could imply extra.
Philip Geiger; Home, 2016
JC: You’re equating Magnificence and morality.
PG: Sure!
JC: And that magnificence itself has an ethical pressure.
PG: Sure!
JC: I’m going to ask you one thing which I believe would provoke a number of painters. Is your subject material about magnificence?
PG: I’m attempting. I believe I’m attempting. I believe that that’s the connection. It’s absurd to check myself to Ingres or Degas or to their nice achievements of magnificence. However that’s what motivates me. That’s what will get me turned on to make a portray. We’re related to that. Why else would you undergo all of this in case you don’t get to be in proximity to magnificence? It’s not excellent as social commentary. Hopefully, we give it a brand new seen type which you could talk with someone else. I believe that’s on the heart. We wouldn’t be going about this backward form of exercise for every other purpose.
JC: That’s an ideal ending Phil. Thanks for sharing your insights and expertise and in your great work.
