Why paint?

Basically, I feel that paintings on walls help create an environment, or an atmosphere in a room. In the same way that talking with people can effect your state of mind, so I believe paintings have a similar effect. There are paintings, and, for that matter, rooms, that leave you feeling refreshed and joyful. And there are paintings that leave you feeling drained or annoyed. For me, a good painting should inspire the viewer. This means that the painting will encourage positive states like openness, awe, joy, ease, and happiness to arise in the viewer.

What are the key themes in your work?

I guess what I'm going for is Naturalness, Purity and Beauty. But the thing is, the method of doing the paintings also has to be Natural, Pure, and, in some sense Beautiful.

What do you mean by 'Naturalness', for example?

Well, for me it doesn't make much sense laboriously painting a beautiful sunrise, for example. These days you can fairly easily take wonderful photos of nature or get amazing effects on the computer. And plenty of artists, including myself, paint landscapes more or less realistically. What is interesting in this technique is that rather than painting a picture of nature, you're joining in with nature, as it were. As for the Purity aspect, I half-remember a Francis Bacon quote about the first brushmark on the raw canvas being the most vital. And in calligraphy, of course, you don't really get a second chance; you have to be confident, clear-minded and just do it. So Purity means that there is no hesitation and no readjustment. Inevitably, in this spirit there tends to be a high percentage of work that ends up in the bin. But that's fine, because what remains has a freshness and authenticity that cannot be imitated. Finally, regarding the Beauty aspect, we all know the quote "Beauty is in the eye of the beholder" and I do not disagree with this. However, some of the forms in the paintings seem, for me, to have a dynamic flow that evokes a sense of awe and I hope others might feel this too.

Also, just to elaborate on the theme of Naturalness, for me this includes Spontaneity and Effortlessness; Spontaneity in that although you might have a general plan of what you want the composition to look like, conditions may turn out that something else would work better. Being aware of this change, and not sticking to your preconceived idea is what I would call Spontaneity. Basically, it's an awareness, and not just a reckless do-what-you-like. Effortlessness is wonderful. It's a sign of mastery, like when you see the best ice-skaters or dancers it just looks so easy and natural. Similarly in a painting, sometimes the most successful pieces are when it just looks like it fell into place.

What are your artistic influences at the moment?

When I'm usually asked this I say something along the lines of Romanticism and the Sublime, citing Turner as a key inspiration, particularly given his interest in dissolving form into light. There is also something about the clarity and iconic nature of Friedrich's painting that is awe-inspiring. Then there is the influence of Zen calligraphy; there's something about the naturalness and confidence of movement in a good calligraphy that is very powerful. There is the presence of the artist's hand, so it's very personal, but at the same time it's not about the artist. It's about communicating what is utterly intangible - a particular clarity of mind - through an action and an image.

More obliquely, I find inspiration in Tibetan tangkha paintings; they open up worlds of possibilities in one's mind, undermining one's limited view of so-called reality in a very refined and non-aggressive way.

Actually, there are thousands of influences all the time; Matisse's ease, Miro's accidents, Claude Lorraine's aerial perspective, Watteau and Degas's marks, Howard Hodgkin's personal language, Fra Angelico's purity, Ben Nicholson's subtleties, Rodin's dynamic mass, Anish Kapoor's inwardness, Rothko's human-condition-ness, Georgia O'Keeffe's organic-ness, we could go on and on!

Is there a philosophical underpinning to your work?

Several things come to mind. One is that I believe everyone has a fundamental goodness that is more durable than any of their bad habits or neurotic tendencies. In terms of my paintings, I would see this as being expressed in the shining white ground that you sometimes see in the centre of these paintings. Basically, I would love it if these paintings could have a luminosity, as if the light were coming from within. There is a wonderful quote from the Dalai Lama saying that the main purpose of our life is to be happy. However, how we go about looking for happiness is often so unskillful that we end up creating more and more suffering for both ourselves and others. What our happiness really depends on is our mind, and how we can inspire ourselves, even amidst adverse circumstances, to cultivate inner peace. So I guess you could say that some of these paintings are about the process of turning one's mind inwardly and discovering its richness. Some of my other paintings are more about a vast sense of space, like gazing into a huge landscape. Here, you could say the underlying philosophy is that actually it doesn't take that much to cultivate a magnanimous, spacious attitude; it's just a question of how you use your mind.

So, of course, on one level, these paintings have an aspect of being interior design - nice colours that complement the colour of your walls. But on a slightly deeper level, they might help to evoke a sense of spaciousness or warmth.

Then there is the issue of what these paintings are of. I hope that they are not too obvious. In other words, there's a wonderful moment when you first see a picture when you have not categorised it as being this or that. I try to remain with that sense of un-categorisation as long as possible before deciding 'It's a landscape' or whatever. In fact, wouldn't it be great if we could simply allow the paintings to resonate - or radiate - and not jump to any conclusions?

The question that most people ask when they see your work is 'What is this technique; how are the paintings done?' What is the answer?

To put it simply, there's a flat table with a very polished surface on which I pour the paint mixture. Then I pull the paper, face down, around in the paint, experimenting with different movements. On lifting the paper, an area of colour remains. You have to repeat this process several times and eventually you select one and leave it to dry. Of course, it is not a straight block of colour; there are areas which are less dense and the white ground of the paper comes through. This variation of tone creates the impression of sculptural depth. Then you add another colour, repeating a similar process. There can be anything from two to ten such layers in a finished painting. At any one time there may be twenty or so works in progress, of which one or two finally make it into completed paintings.

How did you arrive at this technique?

That's a good question. Partly it was wanting to create broad strokes of colour that were evidence of the artist's presence yet also neither mechanical nor self-indulgent. I wanted the colour to be personal and natural (so computers were out of the question) but at the same time not about the personality or emotion of the artist. In this sense I feel a link with both Surrealism, and its adoption of accident in the artistic process, and with 'readymades', in that the artist's role is as much to select as to create.

What also draws me to this technique is that it is a continuing discovery. It feels truly creative, in the sense that you never really know what's going to happen and you learn as you go along. It's very much about working with the materials, playing around with different conditions and allowing the most beautiful accidents to happen. The paint, however, goes everywhere.

One or two people have remarked that some of the works looks quite sexual. How would you respond to that?

That's interesting. I would probably chose the word 'sensual', given the choice. But what this probably refers to is features that are reminiscent of caves, crevices, or smooth flesh-like undulations. With this technique you generally end up having some sort of axis to the painting, either horizontal or vertical. The horizontal ones tend to be interpreted as landscapes and the vertical ones are more open to question. Some of these vertical ones could be seen as more anthropomorphic, though for me these are more about the experience of sitting still than the experience of making love.

Is there anything else you would like to add ?

Only that I feel a painting should continue to inspire the viewer. First, great paintings give the sensation of the viewer being 'wonderstruck'. You say 'Wow' and there's a freshness and vividness in your experience. Unfortunately, I feel some modern art tends to be over--obsessed with shock-value and this overrides the more subtle considerations of, for example, ethical and spiritual aspects. This initial 'Wow factor' is not enough. A painting should continue to reveal different qualities over time, radiating an inspiring peace through the room in which it hangs.