Q: Do you consider yourself a second-generation abstract expressionist artist?

A: Well in the United States, artists born in the early 20th century that matured in the 1940s - such as William de Kooning, Jackson Pollock, Mark Rothko, Clifford Still, would be the first generation. If you define them by the time they were born, then Rauschenberg and Andy Warhol would be the second generation.

Q: Would you consider yourself as an abstract expressionist?

A: Early on, but not now.

Q: In your paintings there are irregular shapes and multi-colors, are you trying to present a new visual language, playing with colors, or is it based on your sensitivity to colors?

A: Interesting that you use the word “playing”. Abstract painting comes in many forms and shapes. Basically, it is working with colors and lines and composing it on a two-dimensional plane. If the canvas has no colors, what do you think it will be? Learning how to work with color is very fundamental. I am very sensitive to color – and I am very good at using my hands to express that language.

Q: Is it only about space and color? Detaching it from reality, wouldn't that be precarious?

A: Your question points to all abstract paintings. It’s true that it does not represent an accurate depiction of visual reality, but that depends on the individual artist. For example, Rothko has an extremely austere way of presenting our relationship with nature. Another example is let’s say I'm going to paint a chair. In a very short period of time, I can paint you a few chairs of different shapes, isn't that exciting? But before abstract expressionism a chair is a chair, how boring.

Q: You said your earlier work of paintings of squares were inspired by windows of modern buildings. These squares are individually composed, were you trying to use these squares to say something about the relationship between human and nature?

A: At the beginning, I wanted to use an abstraction to symbolize our human experience in the 20th and even 21st Century. Somehow the idea of squares appealed to me. But in the city, I see squares in buildings that are symmetrical blocks built by machines – there is nothing natural about them. From 1977 – 1980 I’ve tried to work it out and then I realized humans are no longer close to nature because of being in the city. We have been enclosed and boxed in by these squares. No matter how grand or how insignificant you feel about yourself, at the end you most likely would come to nothing.

Q: Were you trying to resolve this tension in your paintings?

A: Our life is filled with conflicts – unending struggles. And we tried to find a certain balance in our daily life, and that is why we eat and we sleep. If this is how we think we can find harmony, that will be the biggest joke. I went to New York looking for an answer. At the time I didn’t have a deep understanding of abstract art. While I was there, I realized none of
the masters have an answer to my question. Before New York, I never doubted the concept of clarity in the language of abstract art, such as the use of color and lines. But then I discovered abstract art lacks what it is to be human - I wanted to express more than pure concepts.

Q: Why did New York made you feel this way?

A: Abstract Expressionism expressed what I wanted to say then. I felt I have tried it, done it already, so what’s next? In the past decades, abstract artists’ have completed their statements. If it hadn't been such a break from tradition, it wouldn’t have achieved its status today. When I follow this style, I am not really doing anything new, or anything unique. It’s like doing traditional Chinese watercolor paintings, it is a repeat of what other people have painted before.

Q: Inventing new techniques and new art theory, breaking from tradition, can that be a foundation to create an individual style?

A: I don’t know the answer. It is a necessary process, but it cannot satisfy what I really want to achieve.

Q: Is it because your earlier paintings lack the human form and that's why you have this question?

A: It’s not that. I question everything I did before. In 1979 I was looking for a path beyond abstract art. What is it? Maybe abstract art itself is not the problem.

Q: Could it be that you were only using color and form in your experimentation? For example, among the Abstract Expressionism artist, de Kooning used human forms in many of his paintings.

A: But de Kooning’s concept is not purely abstract. His art has very strong European tradition and he never excluded the human form in his work. But for me, mine was pure abstract. Like the squares in my paintings that I used as a symbol. I’ve developed this simple concept quite far already. But what is beyond the squares? I’ve reached a point where I don’t know what to draw on a piece of blank paper. What else is there for me to do? Maybe because I like relating to people, that's why I have used that as my theme in the past five years.

Q: Why do you think that Abstract Expressionism is indulgent and detached from reality?

A: I came to a realization that when humans detach ourselves from the environment, and choose concepts to define our existence, we have separated ourselves from humanity. As an artist, I ask myself, is my art purely conceptual? Of course, I can totally ignore what’s happening in the world and just work with colors and forms, and not ask any questions. But how does that express my relationship with other humans?

Q: Were you leaning towards the direction of Bad Art or Neo-expressionism? To look at art not only from the artist’s point of view but to look at it from the viewer’s point of view? Such as emphasizing popular symbols. Is that what you mean by your emphasis on relating to people
and not to abstraction? (I think they are talking about the Bad Painting Movement, not Bad Art. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bad_Painting) (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bad_Painting))

A: For an artist of abstract art, the explorations of color has already been achieved. The question is whether they want to go beyond that, such as the recently development of Bad Art (Neo-expressionism). In fact, it arrived right after the Second World War. It was a trend that was developed as a result of social changes and an exposition on the relationship between
human beings and society. Whereas abstract art is about the artist’s relationship with his or her art.

Q: So can you say that you have moved beyond that?

A: At this moment yes, you can say that. I have finished that phase. I am beginning a new phase of using painting as a medium to explore our relationship with the society. As for the Neo-expressionism movement, it is no longer pure abstraction, or pure realism. It is a mix of both forms in one.

Q: You were saying that you are searching for harmony in your work, with the squares of the city you see a kind of beauty and rhythm. But I wonder if there is real harmony and rhythm in the city.

A: In my early paintings, I try to express a kind of harmony and peace in my paintings. It’s like finding a rhythm and repetition in our mundane daily life. Some like to express in their paintings the cruelty of war, that’s not what I want to express. In paintings I try to find harmony. We all want to live in a peaceful environment with a certain kind of daily rhythm. For
example, the elder Matisse. He experienced the Second World War. He couldn’t see from one eye. But you can see from his paintings he still had hope in humanity. I don’t dispute that humans can be destructive, but that’s not what I want to express.

Q: Is your kind of harmony similar to the harmony one can see in classical Chinese paintings?

A: I never compare my work with classical Chinese paintings. They have a very unique form with their own challenges. Maybe on a certain level there aren’t too many differences in the two forms, or it could be that there are different degrees of harmony.

Q: Is it because we expect different things from the art?

A: Traditional Chinese art aims to depict harmony. Perhaps the question is, for the Chinese painters who follow this tradition of painting, do they ask any questions? I don’t doubt that all the Chinese paintings express harmony. I am curious as to whether they just accepted the form as is, or have they reach this harmony in their paintings after a period of self-discovery and exploration.

Q: Maybe we should go back to the question of what do you expect from your art?

A: Now that’s the big question for an artist! Why do I paint? Why don’t I do other things? It may seem like a simple question and many people think they already have the answer. But in fact, they do not. Because we ask this question in different stages of our life. When I started painting it’s because I liked to paint. And then now, in my 30s, I feel a certain duty – and that is a big difference when you feel a certain responsibility. Maybe when I am in my 40s or 70s, it will be about my legacy, something to leave behind. Oh, this is too philosophical – why are we here in the first place? Can’t seem to find the answer!

Q: Why not come back to Hong Kong and paint?

A: Income is a concern. Will I be able to find subject matter and inspiration is another concern. There are too few artists here, not much stimulation. Space is also an issue. Over there I can find space as vast as a mountain.