Viewing page 1 of 1

February 13th, 1963

Dear Clem,

Now that I am home from the hospital I have been able to catch up on the accumulation of mail that has been forwarded from N.Y. Among the various items I finally got to your article in Art International which finally clarified something for me about which I had for a while been uneasy.

On various occasions when I had seen you and you gratuitously volunteered opinions and advice concerning my work, it struck me, that the intention was friendly, although in my opinion impertinent. I accepted this however as well meant but mildly amusing impertinence coming from one whom I thought was a friend. 

The article however is a different matter. Needless to say I disagree with your general thesis as well as the specific comment on my work. I should mention that it has always been my policy not to reply to critics, because everyone is entitled to his opinion. This case however is different. Having studied your words very carefully I have come to the conclusion that what you say is not merely friendly impertinence-- it is insolence. It is both insolent and hostile.

It is also my opinion that I do not need lessons in painting from Newman, Rothko, Still, and above all not from Greenberg.

This letter requires no reply.


Transcription Notes:
[[signature]] replaced with name as per Smithsonian instructions

Please note that the language and terminology used in this collection reflects the context and culture of the time of its creation, and may include culturally sensitive information. As an historical document, its contents may be at odds with contemporary views and terminology. The information within this collection does not reflect the views of the Smithsonian Institution, but is available in its original form to facilitate research. For questions or comments regarding sensitive content, access, and use related to this collection, please contact