With A Brush You Have Control. The

Abstract Pictures Are Fictive Models, Because They Make Visible A Reality That We Can Neither See Nor Describe, But Whose Existence We Can Postulate.

In Truth, Factual Information - Names Or Dates - Have Never Interested Me Much. Those Things Are Like An Alien Language That Can Interfere With The Language Of The Painting, Or Even Prevent Its Emergence.

I Believe That He Knew More What He Was Doing. I Might Be Absolutely Wrong About This, But That Was My Impression.

But I Have A Problem With The Term 'light'. I Never In My Life Knew What To Do With That. I Know That People Have Mentioned On Some Occasions That 'richter Is All About Light', And That 'the Paintings Have A Special Light', And I Never Knew What They Were Talking About. I Was Never Interested In Light. Light Is There And You Turn It On Or You Turn It Off, With Sun Or Without Sun. I Don't Know What The 'problematic Of Light' Is. I Take It As A Metaphor For A Different Quality, Which Is Similarly Difficult To Describe. Good.

Perhaps The Doors, Curtains, Surface Pictures, Panes Of Glass, Etc. Are Metaphors Of Despair, Prompted By The Dilemma That Our Sense Of Sight Causes Us To Apprehend Things, But At The Same Time Restricts And Partly Precludes Our Apprehension Of Reality.