The Daily Practice of Painting: Writings 1962-1993. Edited by Hans-Ulrich Obrist. Translated by David Britt. The MIT Press Cambridge/Anthony d’Offay Gallery London. 2002.
Notes on Notes
In this collection the number, length and frequency of Notes between 1966-1980 published in relation to the other writing, primarily interviews, catalogue texts and letters, is much less than in the early years and in the period between 1981-1993 (the year the collection ends). This could be for any number of reasons. A decision of the artist not to reveal his thoughts during that time; a decision of the editor; or a lack of written record...less likely than the other two given the artist’s record. Because of this I feel it is important to take an even closer look at the relationship of what is revealed through the published Notes of that period in relation to the work that was coming out of the studio.
Notes, 1966 [58]
‘I pursue no objectives, no system, no tendency; I have no programme, no style, no direction. I have no time for specialized concerns, working themes, or variations that lead to mastery.
I steer clear of definitions. I don’t know what I want. I am inconsistent, non-committal, passive; I like the indefinite, the boundless; I like the continual uncertainty. Other qualities may be conducive to achievement, publicity, success; but they are all outworn-- as outworn as ideologies, opinions, concepts and names for things.’
https://www.gerhard-richter.com/en/art/painting
Looking at Richter’s paintings surrounding the year of thisstatement; from the Photo Paintings to the abstract paintings of Farbtafeln (1968-2008) and Grau-Grey paintings (1966-2014) via the Vorhänge-Curtains (1965), Umgeschlagenes Blatt-Turned Sheet (1965) and objects such as Kissen-Pillow(1965), Wellblech-Corrugated Iron (1966); the ‘indefinite, the boundless, continual uncertainty’ Richter ‘likes’ as they manifest in the work.
A lot of nothing?
The next published note comes five years…
Note, 1971 [64]
About the [transitional?] objects paintings...doors, curtains...
‘Perhaps the...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.’
Is the despair Richter's own attempt to deal with 'retinal art' (per Duchamp) through paint?
Is it his statement in paint that we can only see what we see and this does not mean we are seeing what we are seeing [registering with our eyes] because we are only seeing what what we can see? (loop-dee doop!)
Two more years go by…
Note, 1973 [78]
‘One has to believe in what one is doing, one has to commit oneself inwardly, in order to do painting.’
The 'authenticity' factor. If you don't believe it's true how can you convince others of the veracity of what you're putting forth?
You can't.
I was thinking about this while judging a high school debate tournament. It was apparent, among the experienced debaters at least, the most convincing were not necessarily the most eloquent debaters. The most convincing were the ones whose belief, conviction, in what they were arguing for or against came was communicated to me, the judge.
An eloquent style cannot hide a lack of conviction.
This also makes me think of the idiom from Flaubert...'of all lies art is the least untrue'.
Is it convincing? ...show me something I have not seen before...and make me believe it.
‘Be a reaction machine, unstable, indiscriminate, dependent.
Sacrifice oneself to objectivity.
I have always loathed subjectivity. Even failure, poor quality, opportunism and lack of character* are a small price to pay in order to produce something objective, definitive, universal, right.’
*character=style?
Making the subjective objective as a means of achieving authenticity.