DescriptionPainted abstraction should, within it's fundamental structure, respond both to the current speed of information as dictated and directed by digital technology as well as to the change this technology has wrought on the experiential. I feel that painting has a role in addressing issues of information and vision, that many of these ideas and issues are a matter of naming them and then investigating solutions. Our culture is unarguably a visual one presenting its ideas in images, colors, forms, and text individually, as a shorthand or substitute for more verbal communications. Every additional breakdown slightly changes the information that constitutes any knowledge. Painting, instead, presents vision as a readymade collection of ideas that are handled uncritically based on their effective employment in relation to the past; if the ideas worked then they will work now and at least the works will be recognizable as art through the redeployment of these familiar prepackaged ideas. Paintings lack of response to the changes in visual culture and the speed of information, the apparent lack of understanding about new knowledge related to vision leads to a delimitation of painting practice that assumes the past and, presumably is part of what gives rise to the alienation embedded in painting discourse. The Modernist insistence on the separation of representation and abstraction robbed painting of essential vitality." Language that attempts to reinforce established ideas about painting, by reifying the familiar or recognizable in the ostensibly new closes the painting world down around what we know, devaluing the potential of the not known. A real dialogue about painting and abstraction would allow for ideas that may not already be part of the discourse, and allow for ideas that strive to break from established discussion as a means of expanding the practice.