Today socalled abstract art is more than twenty-five years of age:

This very fact alone would refute a great number of the criticisms that have so vigorously been made against this kind of painting, especially at its outset.

At this moment, I only want to touch upon the most essential of those criticisms. It has been maintained (and sometimes still is) that the means of expression of abstract painting were so limited and so quickly exhausted that it would soon sentence itself to death. For that reason abstract painting has been buried over and over again.

A lack of possibility for expression? That would, indeed, be bad! Here I can omit the theoretical refutation of that wrong assertion. Why a theory if we have before our eyes the exhibition, organized by Amsterdam's Stedelijk Museum? This exhibition does not offer words but facts, and it proves that after each funeral abstract painting repeatedly gained more power, more expression, and unlimited possibilities. Possibilities of expression!

Incidentally, what could or should art in general, or painting in particular, express?

A complicated question to which the answer is easy enough.

In every new, genuine work of art a new, so far non-existent world is expressed. Therefore, every genuine work is a new discovery—and thus to the existing ones a new, and as yet unknown world is added. Therefore, every genuine work of art says: "Here I am!" It is a vital moment.

Now then is the moment to ask how (question of form!) a realistic, a naturalistic, a cubistic, a surrealistic work .. . comes about, as compared with an abstract work.

One element in all more or less "naturalistic" works is borrowed from an already existing world (man, animal, flower, guitar, pipe. . . ) and is molded under the yoke of artistic expression: "processing the object" by drawing or painting! Abstract art dispenses with objects and their processing. It creates its own forms of expres- sion.

The problem of the "how" is a complicated question. I can only say this: According to my philosophy, the creative process should be a synthesis, i.e., feeling ("intuition") and mind ("calculation") should control each other. This can be done in different ways. As far as I am concerned, I prefer not to "think" while I work. It may not altogether be unknown that I have investigated more than just a few theoretical problems in the arts. But: woe to the artist who during his work lets his "brain" interfere with his "inner diktat"!

Alongside the real world abstract art sets a new world which, on the surface, has nothing to do with "reality." Essentially, however, it is equally subject to the general laws of the "cosmic world."

Thus side by side with the "world of nature" a new "world of art" is placed—equally real and concrete. It is for that reason that I personally prefer to name so-called abstract art concrete art.