Philip Guston: Letter to Bill Berkson

Dear Bill,

I've been away at Yale Summer School teaching and didn't, couldn't get to answer you until now — late, isn't it? I hope all goes well with you and that you have a new place. Many thanks for the Creeley book — I'm reading and enjoying. Tom H. [Thomas B. Hess] saw the new work (it's all at the warehouse in the city) and I don't know what he thought — beyond saying that he liked it and said he was moved. And looks forward to your writing! — I'm nervous as hell now about the show and can't wait to get the hell out of town after it opens — we're going to Italy for a time. I don't know how to answer all the questions you pose — the straight ones are easy — the others tough. Maybe it's best if I rambled on incoherently about feelings I have or had and see what you can make of it — O.K.? Perhaps, by now you've already written your article and don't need my comments but anyway here it is for what it is worth.

First — in time — it was in late 1966 and all of 1967 — early part of 1968 that the sparse line drawings were developed (most of which you saw in '68). In Sept. or so in 1968 a real battle began in earnest, between images of things and situations (even earlier — in the spring and summer 1968) and the "other" — the "ambiguities" of the "pure" means themselves. As I remember, it was spring and summer of 1968 that this battle began — but reached an intensity later — Sept. or August '68.   Back and forth — explicit images — a desire to be inclusive and then countered by a desire to be exclusive. Very painful, as you can imagine — great suffering. I would look at the images I had done in the studio and then come in the house where some of the 1967 "pure" things were hanging and feel that I was deserting "Art" — that world I knew — a world of relationships stripped of concrete images that still attracts me. Then I'd go back to the studio to these images and the "pure" things seemed remote. The image making process had an enormous pull on me. This state went on for months & months. The image making felt like an "adventure" for me and as I wrote you then (at that time) I felt perverse, most radical and thought I was on a "detour"—most "attractive" state. In the fall of 68, after all this excruciating debate and self-wrangling, I started painting on those small panels you saw — single images — a shoe, a clock, pointing hands, those hooded heads — K.K.K., buildings, interiors of rooms, furniture, heads, cars, etc. More & more involved, naturally and then started the larger pictures, the oils. And of course, hundreds of drawings, "preparations" you might say for the actual doing of the pictures. The K.K.K. — the hooded figures became a kind of "symbol" (I hate that word) of "what" I'm not sure — but I could deal with them in situations — facing each other — smoking — talking — looking — riding in cars — in real looking rooms or interiors with windows, walls, etc. — Of course, it felt good, to be so involved. In many cases, I spend days, weeks making preparatory drawings before starting to paint the picture. As if I wanted to see what this or that situation would look like — not having seen it before.   Whatever gift for drawing I have was crucial for me — Drawing and painting was the same — simultaneous. Of course the pictures got larger in size in '69 and more in '70 — because the subject matter as I was imagining it seemed to demand this scale. Time — actual Time, felt speeded up — as if I were telling a complicated story — forwards and backwards — There were days when I made memos to myself to do this or that picture in the future — there was not enough time — (I have many pictures now (in notes), commissioned by myself) I guess in '69 or '701 did the large ambitious subjects — (as you see by the photos). They became more and more formal and of course more complex which is what I've always wanted in painting. And of course to forget "Modern art" or what the hell ever— and all the restrictive bull — and feel I can put in rather than leave out. also the most unpredictable relationship of form to subject. — To the point where it's not even controllable as to the meanings the pictures gave off to me — but to be clear (or try to be) to be puzzled by it at the same time is greatl Also, of course, to want to do all this with "unlikely subjects", makes me want to do it. "A figure throwing bricks" — "figures diving into a cellar, trap door open — bricks flying in the air" "Daydreams of a fight" I was stimulated beyond measure! The desire to paint all this was, that / wanted to see it there — for me to see — not having seen it before — Babel says somewhere — "I want to write of things long forgotten". Well, anyway I've never been so close to recognizable "images" and "things". Social subjects? Oh christ! I guess so — but when hasn't it been so? But of course that's not the meaning of them. I should hope they were paintings in the full and complex sense of the word. Naturally, it's ridiculous to claim they represent the troubles and terror we live in — as if that's unique — who doesn't feel all of this no matter what you do — So that is enough of that — It is just that the subject I paint is what makes me want to paint — that is, to see it — and the range I feel in myself in the making of it. I'd like to re-do painting all over again, I'm not through with what I thought about in the '40s or '30s — I'm not interested in my "evolution" — you know, — onward and upward with "art". Any emotion can enter now — nostalgia, fear, sentimentality, remoteness, "abstraction", banality, etc., nothing held back — Only one law — that you feel it at the moment, and that, that is what you want or need to do. And then pray and trust your gift. O.K. well, enough rambling? Please do not quote any of this — only meant for your ears or eyes! I realize this is all pretty well known to you and perhaps even platitudinous — but what the hell, it's 3 a.m. — solo drinking, but it's the only way I'll get this off to you. As if you are sitting here in the kitchen with me and we are just bullshitting away. The pictures are done. No?

As to the actual questions — New studio finished in Xmas 1967.

Dore Ashton's reference to older studio's as "dim retreats" means probably my old stone studio here and to dark lofts in N.Y.C. I can't get enough light now.

Space now is constructed but also illusionistic — like in traditional painting (I think). I mean "this" in front "that" and so on. Also one painting led to another — sometimes a part of one led to another subject or new version of the same subject — in another "situation". No, didn't think of numerical relationships, i.e. 1 = alone 2 = alone together, etc. Also, no numbers game with fingers that I can think of — not a bad idea, though. The pointing finger is more "You did it" than anything else — and of course it "looked" right. Sometimes, "made" the picture. Naturally the pointing finger or hand changes in size and density.

I shall run right out and get and hear the Dylan "Ballad of Frankie Lee & Judas Priest"!

The cartoon business is covered in the "enclosure". Of course in the old painting I love — early Renaissance painting, the "information" is fast, no? But what I've painted — not pictures — but a "substitute" world, which comes from the world. And full of the "painting" — slow, dwelt upon. "Begin and Finish" — I start with many drawings previous or with the image "quite clear" in mind — Finish is when the picture is "realized" and — I feel — can lead to continuing pictures, with a continuing subject and formal matter. If it's too finished I've destroyed them. This is not so different from the past way of my working. Oh yes, "Modern Art" seems remote from me -— that is, as an inherited myth — Of course I still love certain painters for what they created — need I say this? But I feel on my own.

At first I felt a severe break with my past — but not now As I say I'm not through with my past at all — Just want to include more. I don't know what to make of Morty's [Morton Feldman] statement — In fact, I don't understand it I guess. Seems too remote — also too philosophical and mysteriously subtle. I don't need to understand so much about process. Too much else to think and concern oneself about. — like the making of images, and what they mean and if it's possible to do this — I mean, to accept them — the "burden" of them — is the real issue — can it be done at all? etc. I have no time to think of all those other things. I feel as if Pandora's Box has opened — everything is possible, and a lot else than "art" to brood about. Like always, art can take care of itself. I know I'm making art but through "principles" (not fully understood) that puzzle me. And the concern with "otherness" is what makes me desire to make. Even details (descriptive ones) make me anxious to "realize". And sometimes causes a whole picture to come into existence. Basta! This is just for your perusal and then tear it all up! I'm sure that you have your own version of it all and I would look forward to that! Your pieces on my work in the past are the most valuable to me, of all that I've read.

Yes, color is somewhat higher than before — but feels like my color, reds, pinks, greens, oranges — less black masses. Yes, skin.   Color feels right.

Enclosure

I don't see much relationship between my images and cartoons — Of course since youth I've loved Mutt & Jeff— Bud Fisher was the best draftsman — The Gumps — Polly and Her Pals, Cliff Sterritt did the best furniture. Also Frank King's "Gasoline Alley" — the backyards, porches, I used to dream of having my own strip one day. I used to draw and paint pictures as a boy of conspiracies and floggings — I made a connection of this subject with my attraction to the flagellation scenes of Piero, Giotto, Duccio.

I feel almost like Isaac Babel with his Cossacks — as if I were living with these hooded figures — What they do afterwards (or before) —smoke, drink, sit around their rooms looking at light bulbs, dumb, melancholy, patrolling empty streets, reassuring one another.

I could go on I guess but I'll stop now in order to get this off to you — So, no quotes please — they really scare me — this is just meant to give you my story so to speak, and I prefer that you give your own reactions — No?

I hope I've said something to be of some help — or that fits in with what you are already doing. Let me know your reaction, will you? I await — I'm ashamed to say I haven't answered Clark [Clark Coolidge] — I'm so lazy — He plans to come here soon — Musa has been in hospital and that had my whole attention for weeks — nothing serious — a minor operation. Why not get Tom tc back a flight here and we could get it all together? But then you do have all the material with you — I mean, it would be nice to see you —

Much love to you —

Philip

Love to Lewis [Lewis Warsh]

Bill — what is Bob Creeley's address?

The fact is, although I think about it a lot — I haven't really understood what I am doing — Does that come later?