I Would Like To Try To Understand

The Photograph Is The Most Perfect Picture. It Does Not Change; It Is Absolute, And Therefore Autonomous, Unconditional, Devoid Of Style. Both In Its Way Of Informing, And In What It Informs Of, It Is My Source.

When I First Painted A Number Of Canvases Grey All Over (about Eight Years Ago), I Did So Because I Did Not Know What To Paint, Or What There Might Be To Paint: So Wretched A Start Could Lead To Nothing Meaningful. As Time Went On, However, I Observed Differences Of Quality Among The Grey Surfaces - And Also That These Betrayed Nothing Of The Destructive Motivation That Lay Behind Them. The Pictures Began To Teach Me. By Generalizing A Personal Dilemma, They Resolved It.

I Originally Came From Dresden, Where Socialist Realism Prevailed. Konrad Lueg And I Came Up With It, For The Most Part Ironically, Since I Now Live In Capitalism. It Was Certainly 'realism', But In Another Form - The Capitalist Form, As It Were. It Wasn't Meant That Seriously. It Was More A Slogan For That Particular Happening At A Furniture Store.

I Don't Create Blurs. Blurring Is Not The Most Important Thing; Nor Is It An Identity Tag For My Pictures.

If, While I'm Painting, I Distort Or Destroy A Motif, It Is Not A Planned Or Conscious Act, But Rather It Has A Different Justification: I See The Motif, The Way I Painted It, Is Somehow Ugly Or Unbearable. Then I Try To Follow My Feelings And Make It Attractive. And That Means A Process Of Painting, Changing Or Destroying - For However Long It Takes - Until I Think It Has Improved. And I Don't Demand An Explanation From Myself As To Why This Is So.