Very powerful and privileged people have engineered the art world for their own personal private gain and this in turn has required that a special class of art experts control the definition of art and thus keep the tastes and sensibilities of the larger public out of the game. As this class of educators has taught us all, art that might move us at first sight – ie, art that is immediately popular –  can’t possibly be profound or important. Such art is, to use their words, too “accessible.” Art that flat out makes no sense or, better, if it offends, is of a much higher caliber: such art is difficult and challenging and it is investible precisely because it is only knowable by elites.

We could talk about line and color and technique and material and “how-to” for a long time. But if we are not fully free to be who we are, what’s the point?

“A picture can be regarded as just another object, another piece of junk (and, regrettably, often an expensive piece of junk, requiring special care). The artist, seen under this light, is a manufacturer of luxury items….The practice of art should have an effect not only on the public, but even more importantly, on the artist himself, by enlarging his sphere of freedom….”

“We must be free not only of descriptive terms like sky or boat or house, but also we must be free of other concepts that are part of our entire self-understanding as we stand there with brush in hand –  such as the concepts of art, painting, talent, work, success, and many more.”

“…the painting process is not about making pictures of such things such as houses. It is about feeling the sensuality, the energy of such things as color – not just first, but first and foremost…..This realization of profound feelings as we paint – as we work – is what is meaningful about the activity of painting.”