Some sort of landscape

Probably my nature and a reaction to theories of rational choice, language and society constituting reality I ventured back to painting.

To make a painting does not seem to be a rational choice and at the same time be considered experimental. Painting at least in my view should be a step into the unknown so it´s initial fundament can not be an rational impulse like an idea or concept.

If I regard ideas or notions as something that I am receptive to, limiting myself to language, the rational or society would be a severe handicap. I am supposing that I am receptive to something more than language and society.

So I try to go blank and eliminate any and all preconceptions although it is quite impossible. My mind always attempts to consider what to do next, if this or that might be a good idea and this process is always limiting. I fight the ideas distancing myself from them and instead open up to something that may be bellow or beyond the rational.

Subsequently it is possible to be rational, to analyze, to conceive with the help of language but that is only to attempt to create the better argument which is always temporary. The painting as statement remains containing more than argument.

I suppose that painting or art for that matter could be considered extensions of reality. Contemporary art tends to be referential, or it is at least considered and understood in connection to something else. This may be an attempt to establish art as something useful, limiting art to society and language and thereby limiting it´s power to the argument. Perhaps a panoptic problem with institutionalized art.

At this point my main problem is that the part seems more interesting than the whole (and how can that be?). It might be that I´m trying to do to much in each canvas or just that I´m using too small brushes. Another angle might be that I don´t yet understand the whole canvas which appears to me as close to noise and maybe some sort of landscape at least in the detail.