What is your relationship to the tradition of painting?

It is not really important to me. It might sound naïve, but I try to stay out of all that because I don't think that I am really a painter. I don't deny the tradition, but the main thing for me is to produce some good things and energy. Every work that I do should stand alone. Of course, I am aware of the things and discussions that go on. But when I get an idea for a painting I do it and don't really bother that much about who else might have done that before me or what is the work's general position in art history. When I do a piece I just figure out what would be nice to do, what I want it to look like and what I want to get out of it.

You and certain other Danish artists of your generation have been labelled neo-expressionists, which I find quite disturbing. How do you feel about that?

The funny thing is that when writers look for examples of the 'expressionist' in me, I cannot give it to them and that makes me sad. Then again I don't go into deep dialogue about compositional matters with people who write about my works - I do that with my colleagues. Of course, I can talk about how my paintings function and what kind of effect they have. As regards neo-expressionism, I don't share those values and attitudes. I am not really aware of how a single work functions or connects to the history of art. I am more interested in how my work connects to other pieces I have made. Even if my attitude and values are the opposite of the 1980s German scene, I am very serious about what I do. I try to make works that everybody can relate to.

Early on, it was quite disturbing to see how my works were categorised and included in certain movements or developments by the museum people and people in the business. When museums make exhibitions they have this need to be aware of everything and to take care of what kind of information is given out and what interpretations are possible. That was a bit sad and I did not agree with the idea that every single exhibition has to be 'complete' and flawless. We don't work that way, and they shouldn't either. I am not that keen on these 'manuals' containing a few names, which are linked with my works. Besides that, they mention the colours and the motifs, the use of both abstract and figurative means, and maybe also the fact that the representation of painting is one of the themes in the work. Finally, they manage to construct a box that contains John Kørner. They don't talk about my art and are afraid to go into the work. It is not easy to do it properly and to confront the audience, but I would rather leave the manual out and go along with us. I don't get a hard-on from making the works too hard to read. I try to stay open and to communicate. Doing a painting is a bit like slalom skiing.

You said that you don't enter into dialogue about your works, but you do make room for your works and try out different ways of presenting them in the public space. You have also taken an active part by being a curator and organiser of various events and exhibitions, and have empowered yourself and your colleagues.

I wanted to try out what pictures can do, and exhibited my works hanging on a crane or showed 'walking paintings' in Copenhagen's Central Station. In these situations the viewer does not have a long time to look at the works, but as I said you should be able to make up your mind about the work in two seconds. As for empowerment, these artists groups are quite common in Copenhagen. They normally don't last that long - a few years or so. We did quite a lot of things, e.g. with Kørners Kontor.

You were trained as a carpenter before you went to art school, and have worked with various media, such as ceramics and installations, and your works quite often make up environments. I would anyway like to ask you about the relevance of painting?

I started at the academy with graphic art and sculpture, and my first paintings had a strong graphic quality. I got excited about the free way of working with yellow and purple, and felt that paintings could make a difference. In the beginning I wanted to convince every single person and actually believed that paintings can change things. Then I found out that it does not work that way. People can relate to them, but not much more - maybe I make the wrong kind of works.

Paintings have their own place, which nobody can take away. It is interesting to work in different ways that complement each other. At the moment, I am very much into video. As for painting, it is something that one can relate to - you don't necessarily have to see it as something political or part of something else. It is a common language not just for the people in the business, but also for the 'people' in the street. Making painting accessible - there lies the challenge. On the other hand, I am not a romantic and I don't think that my paintings are for everybody. The works have their own little world or sphere.

Painting has its own temporality. How do you relate to time and slowness in painting?

Painting has its own language and you can put all the time you want into it. When it comes to my paintings I sometimes work fast and sometimes not. Occasionally I do use my drawings or sketches as a point of departure, but I don't necessarily follow it. You can't really have total control over it - it is a bit like with children or with love. It would also be very boring without the element of surprise. It takes few seconds for me to make up my mind about a work that I see. After that moment, you can invest time in it. I 'tune in' to the colours and ideas and the work can totally change my day - that sounds very romantic, yet on the other hand, I take the situation very seriously. All my works, regardless of the medium, have the same relationship to reality.

What position does text have in your works and what is your relationship with texts and writing?

I could probably write poems. Words have the same capacity as images - they fascinate people and can trigger something. I sometimes use words like 'relax' or 'problem' in my works, and there the word becomes a painting. It is a bit dangerous, but it works well in certain situations. At the moment I am doing a book, which will be called Problem. It won't contain a lot of text, though.

When you show your works you often make up these total environments, and besides painting also include ceramic sculptures, stages, lights, closets etc. Your work seems to have this 'theatrical' quality to it?

I believe in environments and want to create spaces and situations where you are not in front of a painting, but rather in an environment that includes the architectural and institutional setting into which the works are placed. It is important for me to make works that have physical, bodily effects, so that this also questions the roles of both the work of art and the viewer.

When it comes to ceramics, I just hate it when they collect dust on window sills. My ceramic pieces are supposed to be a fiasco. They are too small and stupid. I like the idea that one can have a bad day, and some of that melancholy and anger is visible in my ceramics. I like to work with my hands. The scale and size of works are very important to me. Most of my paintings are big, since I am a tall man and they fit my arms. Smaller paintings can become problematic to execute.

Kari Immonen