The aura given out by a person or object is as much a part of them as their flesh.
I never think about my style but just try and make the pictures look believable.
Painting is sometimes like those recipes where you do all manner of elaborate things to a duck, and then end up putting it on one side and only using the skin.
I paint people not because of what they are like, not exactly in spite of what they are like, but how they happen to be.
The paintings that really excite me have an erotic element or side to them irrespective of subject matter.
And, since the model he faithfully copies is not going to be hung up next to the picture, since the picture is going to be there on its own, it is of no interest whether it is an accurate copy of the model.
Since the model he so faithfully copies is not going to be hung up next to the picture... it is of no interest whether it is an accurate copy of the model.
I remember Francis Bacon would say that he felt he was giving art what he thought it previously lacked. With me, it's what Yeats called the fascination with what's difficult. I'm only trying to do what I can't do.
You ask why I'm fascinated by the human figure? As a human animal, I am interested in some of my fellow animals: in their minds and bodies.
I would wish my portraits to be of the people, not like them. Not having a look of the sitter, being them.
The painter must give a completely free rein to any feeling or sensations he may have and reject nothing to which he is naturally drawn.
Full, saturated colours have an emotional significance I want to avoid.
I am only interested in painting the actual person, in doing a painting of them, not in using them to some ulterior end of art. For me, to use someone doing something not native to them would be wrong.
