Georges and Art History

I am more self conscious in a critical way than Paul Georges. Critical self consciousness was one of the main things he would rail against. He thought one should be unselfconscious, not thinking too much about what one was doing, but observing and doing what came to the painting.

He thought self consciousness was what killed the Muse and was the main argument with his friend Tony Siani. It is hard to explain and finally doesn't make a lot of sense. I share the idea when I make landscape paintings not thinking too much or planning, just seeing what happens as it happens.

His paintings were what he stuck with. They were his answers to questions that came up in his life.

I'm beginning this Blog as I wait these 25 years since the empty critical space surrounding Paul's work has been so apparent. I've waited for someone to take this up, and I offer that challenge now.

Art keeps moving. Paul is gone. Sadly the ideas of his passing are stalled, no one thinks of him these days.

A few years ago I marveled at Alex Katz posters waving along Chelsea advertising his show at Pace. I knew and had alot of respect for Alex's long struggle to be recognized, but I thought this type of commercialism the thing that has been eating up art spitting it out for the next.

I had coffee with Alex a bit ago, actually he had lemonade. I expressed my concern for Paul's career now that he was gone, 10 years ago.

I said it was hard for me to continue my own work with out Paul's formal recognition in the world.

Alex in his career was now cut off, " as if he came full blown from the head of Zeus." The galleries have hidden the tradition, meaning figures as Rudy Burkhardt and Lois Dodd-- Paul and Fairfield, and Jane Freilecher.

I expressed how Alex had won-- I meant in how they had each began in a similar tradition and followed it out to be come the representative of it.

Alex grinned ear to ear about this, as they were very competitive about this lineage.

De Kooning is another point, Paul in these early paintings related heavily on the brushy bravura, and Alex also in his fluid paint wet in wet. Bill is something of his own though and I guess you can see why these figures are separated from their lineage.

I said to Alex that in a show of Georges and Katz at a Museum,  Georges would support Katz in adding depth, and Katz to Georges in a surface elegance which Paul was only on the border of, but in that deeper beauty the master.

Alex only disappointingly said, Paul never wanted to be Modern. What Paul did want just as Katz, was to be considered.