The redefinition of Painting is the underwhelming concern of its contemporary purveyors. Once considered to be the dominant archetype of Fine Art, paint is now one of a limitless selection of mediums chosen for its formal qualities and cultural associations. But, the strength of paint as a cultural concept and a physical material is its plasticity, its ability to be restructured and re-manipulated. Painting is a Democratic process.

The ferocity of illusion. The turgidity of tradition. The platitudes of painting: The wall. The picture plane. The frame. The window. The allegory. Once considered penultimate expressions of the medium, these conventions are now just part of a greater historical lexicon of painting. An absence of these contrivances marks an artistic choice to demystify the material and re-present paint as an overt decision as opposed to an historical expectation. A representation of the multitudinous traditions of painting can be seen as contextual language with which to articulate personal expressions and contemporary issues of materiality.

The ideas that define the discipline of painting are as malleable as the material of paint. My body of work revels in the expansive breadth of paint. It is an ontological investigation, a deconstruction of the discipline of painting into essential signifiers and historical structures needed to make the phenomena of paint function within our contemporary visual culture. The material has been pushed in exaggerated and absurd directions. Process has been separated from the material, removed, re-imagined, and reapplied. The structure is stripped away from the paint and the paint is unapplied to the structure. Paint is the material and the subject. This body of work is the story of painting as told by acrylic paint, a plastic, non-linear story. It is the Democratic ground on which hundreds of years of painting progress now strive for parity.