A Dialog With Philip Geiger
Interview dialog by Jeffrey Carr
Philip Geiger is a revered and extremely completed painter identified for his home interiors, landscapes, and determine work. Receiving his undergraduate training at Washington College in St. Louis and his M.F.A. from Yale College Faculty of Artwork, he started frequently displaying in New York early in his profession and has proven extensively in quite a few group and solo exhibits.
He’s represented by the Reynolds Gallery, Richmond, Virginia, Hidell Brooks Gallery in Charlotte, NC and has beforehand present work on the Tibor de Nagy Gallery in NYC, NC. with a solo exhibition there in 2007. His work are represented in a number of outstanding public collections and have been reviewed by the New York Occasions, Artwork in America, ARTnews, and The New Criterion. He taught for over thirty years on the College of Virginia at Charlottesville, Virginia, earlier than retiring to his present residence and studio in Staunton, Virginia. We met just lately through a Zoom session to debate his portray apply.
Jeffrey Carr: Phil, I simply completed listening to a YouTube interview with you from 2012. You mentioned the way you revise your photographs closely whereas engaged on them, and the way you’d sand or scrape down your work earlier than repainting. Do you add figures and different parts into the image? Do you do that from life? Or are you doing it from invention?
Philip Geiger: Properly, each. I’ve change into slower. I can work on work nearly indefinitely by sanding them, by rethinking the composition. It’s not an environment friendly course of in any respect, however I at all times have dissatisfaction with the picture and wish to work on it again within the studio for lengthy intervals of time. Then I’d return to direct observational at a later date, attempting to get one thing again.
Philip Geiger; Black Mountain Story, 2018
JC: So, are the figures in these work largely invented? Do you utilize photographic references?
PG: Not a lot photographic reference. The method would possibly change portray by portray and determine by determine. Some elements could be invented and a few could be finished immediately from remark. I work from fashions a number of instances per week. I schedule a mannequin and work immediately into the portray with the mannequin. It at all times conjures up me to work with a portray that I’ve already received going.
Philip Geiger; September 24, 2010, 22 by 18in.
JC: So, you’re taking a portray that you already have going, and you will have sanded it down or scraped it. Do you then simply sit any person down in a chair after which paint them into the image? Isn’t the area fully totally different? How can you combine the brand new scenario into the present portray?
PG: I attempt to do this. I actually just like the accidents. I’ll oftentimes rethink the composition. The determine will probably be in some new place, or the dimensions will probably be new. One thing like that. However that struggle, that accident, of placing a determine into an present portray that wasn’t deliberate within the first place, and which will even be within the improper place, is actually motivating. It may possibly recommend one thing new that would occur within the portray, a brand new discovery. It’s definitely inefficient to maintain working and looking like this. However I see the portray as a search. I’ve by no means thought that I might plan a portray prematurely. I feel I’d be bored if I deliberate out a drawing and knew the place issues have been going to go after which went at portray it. And in any case, this might be nearly unattainable if you happen to work from direct remark as a result of issues are altering and the sunshine adjustments.
Philip Geiger; East Sunbathing, 2022 24 by 18in
Philip Geiger; The Perfectionist, 2018, 27 by 24in.
JC: You’re telling me that you just don’t work strictly from remark. You might incorporate lots of remark however you’re working very synthetically. By artificial, I imply that the method might contain quite a few methods of developing the picture that’s built-in into the ultimate portray. The area in your work appears nearly completely artificial, reasonably than strictly naturalistic. However lots of the particulars appear finished from direct remark.
PG: They’re precise locations, however I elaborate on them. I really like elaborating partitions within the studio, corners, moldings, structure, and flooring. Within the studio, I form of really feel my manner throughout the area to seek out some drama within the area, some that means. That search may be very sluggish.
Philip Geiger; Frederick Avenue, 2018, 22 by 18in
JC: Do you imply that you just discover the drama and the joy within the area itself reasonably than within the figures or conditions being depicted? I keep in mind seeing one among your work the place you closely reworked the picture to be able to create a sure impact of sunshine throughout the partitions.
PG: The danish painter Wilhelm Hammershoi had this sense for partitions, French doorways and the shadows solid by framed work or tables. He liked these issues and I’m certain he labored them slowly. I don’t know if he labored them away from remark or not. However he appears to have elaborated on them. The richness appears necessary to him, the play of sunshine throughout these surfaces.
Vilhelm Hammershoi, Residing Room with Piano and Lady Wearing Black, 1901
JC: To me, evidently in your work, as in Hammershoi, the depiction of area accommodates and defines the figures reasonably than simply being a backdrop or a setting for the figures. This jogs my memory of the early Vermeer portray of the Lady studying a Letter. It was restored just lately, and the wall behind the girl was eliminated to disclose a portray behind the determine. To me, this adjustments solely the area and so the that means of the portray. What was your response to this restoration?
PG: I prefer it much less.
Johannes Vermeer, Lady Studying a Letter at an Open Window c. 1657–1659, Oil on canvas, 33 in × 25.4 in, Gemäldegalerie, Dresden
JC: So did I. Earlier than the restoration, the wall behind the girl was densely painted and was very stunning. It makes me consider your very painterly contact. Your work should not painted with lots of element; the element is evoked reasonably than described. You don’t simply copy; you evoke the shape.
PG: That’s a fantastic praise. Vermeer has at all times been a touchstone for me in my work. He finds a common high quality in what was proper in entrance of him, in that room in his home that he labored with again and again. The identical desk and the identical ermine coat and doubtless the identical mannequin. However he was capable of finding a density and emotion in these atypical issues. However his work will not be figure-centric. I consider him as trying previous the determine and zeroing in on the area between the chair and the wall, or a nook of a room the place a basket is hung, or there’s even a nail on the wall. These occasions appear to draw him. The figures strike me as nearly clean. I really like them; they’re completely attractive. However you nearly can’t know them. And in reality, there’s lots of debate about who was the mannequin in his work; was it his spouse or this or that individual? Identities have been faraway from them, and the entire place is the drama.
Johannes Vermeer
Johannes Vermeer
JC: Vermeer did lots of shocking and surprising issues with scale and dimension relationships. In a single early portray, there’s a lady sitting at a desk, a determine dressed as a form of a Cavalier with a big hat and together with his elbow sitting out. The angle is skewed in order that he feels huge whereas she feels little. You appear to do comparable issues with scale and dimension relationships in your work.
PG: I’ve by no means considered that as an issue in Vermeer’s work. They only appear completely excellent to me; every of them is completely felt. In that one referred to as The Laughing Lady, each little bit of it appears so proper and so felt that I don’t assume an excessive amount of in regards to the area or the drawing in them. He did wish to layer a darkish foreground towards a lighter passage or a silhouette form.
Philip Geiger; Three, 2010, 24 by 29in.
JC: I feel that that is true of your work as effectively. Expressiveness is created by the dimensions, the area, and even simply the best way a wall is labored. You create drama with individuals strolling right into a room or strolling in direction of us with one other distant determine silhouetted towards a window or over within the nook. You actually really feel the drama within the area. One other artist who does that is Edward Hopper. Hopper’s portray evokes some indefinable that means that you just wish to assume comes from a determine or another ingredient within the portray, nevertheless it’s about one thing else. It’s about the best way he places collectively the area.
12-Philip Geiger; Percy, 2018, 24 by 28in
Philip Geiger; Peru, 2007, 28 by 34in.
PG: Yeah, it’s about him. I feel each Hopper and Vermeer have a sense for shapes that’s distinctive. I’ve tried to do this. To really feel the proportions of the divisions contained in the portray as having that means. I typically consider Vermeer as being the best form maker. Simply the quantity of a map towards a white wall simply appears so proper. The intervals really feel deeply significant; it’s the measures in between intervals within the portray that makes shapes.
JC: I’m enthusiastic about Mondrian, who like Vermeer had this unimaginable sense of interval, the place every thing feels excellent. However Mondrian made his work about simply these measurements and took out every thing else.
PG: That’s by no means as fascinating to me because the shapes in Vermeer. I ponder what Vermeer would have stated about this. Would he have understood our language of abstraction and of attempting to see shapes independently? Was all of it intuitive on his half? I want we might ask him. However you’re proper; they tried to separate that out within the twentieth century. The form intervals in Mondrian don’t do a lot for me.
Philip Geiger; Theresa 9 A.M., 2007, 36 by 40in
Philip Geiger; Anna Asleep, 2002, 34 by 28in
JC: I don’t assume portray received any higher by attempting to be reductivist. For instance, there’s Saenredam, the dutch artist who did very extreme white Church Interiors. Like Mondrian, he had a severely abstracted visible sense. However the intervals and shapes of his church interiors additionally create emotional responses and even concepts about divine mild or purpose or probity. Against this, artists like Mondrian aspire to be purely summary. However that’s clearly not what you’re doing. Are you curious about creating temper or emotion by way of the usage of area and the interactions of form?
Pieter Saenredam (1597 – 1665), The Inside of the Grote Kerk at Haarlem (1636-7), Oil on oak, 59.5 × 81.7 cm, Nationwide Gallery, UK
PG: I don’t know what I’d say about temper as a result of I couldn’t determine what it’s. However I’ve emotional reactions to what I’d name rightness in a portray. That’s why I wrestle with it for thus lengthy as a result of it isn’t at all times there. I feel that the communication of an inside life that comes by way of a portray is why we’re considering them. It’s one thing I wrestle with, and I feel it ends in a temper. I’m clearly drawn to very muted colours. In my thoughts, muted tones are extra suggestive of sunshine than sensible, native colour. And that, in addition to an emphasis on worth in my work, would possibly create a temper that’s totally different from other forms of portray.
Philip Geiger; September 24, 2010, 22 by 18in.
Philip Geiger; Translation, 2018, 20 by 24in
Philip Geiger; Dialog, 2016, 24 by 29in.
JC: There’s an previous concept that colour creates moods: sensible colour creates sturdy feelings and muted, quiet colours create quiet feelings. That could be true, or it won’t. Such as you, I’m not even certain what “temper” means. The early work of Degas makes use of low saturation colour. He retains the vividness and the depth down. Maybe due to his use of low-saturation colours, his moods are nearly indescribable. The colour-moods of Degas remind me of your work.
PG: There’s a sort of shimmering magnificence in his work that I’d describe as being figure-first. His determine drawing is so good that the presence of the determine is at all times the purpose of the portray. What he does round them is one thing to enhance the determine and the motion of the determine. It’s a fantastic problem for me as a result of I don’t draw the determine that effectively; no person does. I really like his work.
Edgar Degas
Philip Geiger; Winter, 2018, 24 by 24in.
Phil Geiger; The Traveler, 2007
JC: Your footage are sometimes enveloped with a light-weight I’ve seen in interiors finished by different American artists like Thomas Dewing. There’s a heat, enveloping glow to those work wherein all people exists in a liquid, enveloping honey-colored glow. Do you are feeling any connection to the various American artists who paint quiet, tonalist interiors, artists like Tarbell or Decamp?
Edmund Charles Tarbell (1862-1938), Inside with Mom and Baby oil on canvas, 25 x 30 in. The Huntington Library, Artwork Museum, and Botanical Gardens
Philip Geiger; Morning, 2018, 24 by 26in.
Philip Geiger; January, 2018, 24 by 24 in.
PG: Properly, it does seem like that. I see the similarity however I don’t take a look at these artists very a lot and I’m really not very acquainted with them. Somebody from that point interval that I definitely do take a look at is Vilhelm Hammershoi. I really feel extra linked to that portray. All these Boston painters like Bensen or Tarbell by no means challenged me sufficient, I suppose. They don’t seem to be as difficult as a Degas. Degas could also be doing very various things, nevertheless it’s an actual problem to me. I’ve at all times received a Degas guide there within the studio. I’ve received the Hammershoi guide there, and the Vuillard guide. These are the books I’d take a look at each morning. I do see the similarities with these different painters; there could be a Merrit Chase who would do an exquisite flooring or an exquisite couch. However I’ve by no means checked out them a lot.
JC: You’re mentioning some basic European painters like Hammershoi and Vuillard. However to me, there’s something quintessentially American in your portray, and I’m attempting to really feel the place you’re on this spectrum. I sense a relationship with artists in our custom, like Edwin Dickinson, for instance. How do you join with somebody like that? And we talked about Hopper.
PG: Properly, Hopper for certain. I’ve made an enormous research of Hopper and I’ve spent lots of time portray outdoors. I’ve checked out all of his works very carefully and I reply to Hopper quite a bit. I really like Edwin Dickinson, however I don’t fairly know what to make of it. I feel there’s a fantastic thriller in his work and a few actual originality in what he did. The intense tonalness and greyness of the work are enticing to me. It appears nearly romantic; his meditations on funereal topics and dying.
I discover him fascinating, however I haven’t discovered a option to make quite a bit out of that. Everyone seems to be at his self-portraits and desires to do some self-portraits. I’ve finished that, perhaps impressed by him.
Philip Geiger; The Opening, 1990, 30 by 36in.
Philip Geiger; Totally different Shirt, 2006, 24 by 18in.
Philip Geiger
JC: We’ve been speaking about historic painters. However you and I got here of age in a vastly totally different inventive universe than the one which exists now. What are some painters of the seventies and eighties that you just really feel an actual kinship with?
PG: My academics William Bailey and Lennart Anderson stay fashions for me. I like what they did of their work. Each of them pursued their imaginative and prescient whether or not the artworld paid any consideration to them or not. They pursued their imaginative and prescient fearlessly their complete lives. There was a latest exhibition of Lennart Anderson, and he’s getting some consideration. I really like his work, and each of their examples are necessary to me. There’s a portray that was the centerpiece of the latest Anderson exhibition that’s owned by the College of Virginia. It’s referred to as St. Mark’s Place. It’s an early New York road portray with three principal figures. One determine is leaning from a pole; he painted that by himself in a mirror. One other determine is a person with a canine, and there’s a girl trying again. I regarded quite a bit at that portray after they would grasp it within the Nineteen Eighties, and it had a huge impact on me. The placing collectively of those three figures implied dense psychology. They appear to concentrate on one another, despite the fact that they weren’t interacting or doing something collectively. The College of Virginia additionally owns the William Bailey portray referred to as Portrait of S, which is predicated on a Balthus. Each of those work have been necessary to me, and that was a second in time that was necessary. Bailey would say to his college students, “Don’t be afraid to be influenced by different painters”. He clearly felt that painters like Balthus or Courbet was completely reliable for artists to do, and to make a variation on one thing like Courbet’s Girls within the Grass. I’ve at all times favored this instance; it appears to free me.
Lennart Anderson, St. Mark’s Place, 1969-1976, Oil on canvas, 93 13/16 x 74 1/8 in.© Property of Lennart Anderson Courtesy of the Fralin Museum of Artwork.
.
William Bailey, Portrait of S, 1979-80, Oil on Canvas, 52×42 in. Fralin Museum of Artwork on the College of Virginea, Charlottesville
JC: Painters typically have their nonetheless life objects throughout the studio, and prepare them into compositions to color. There are a number of nice Lennart Anderson nonetheless lifes like this. However William Bailey as soon as joked that he had all of his still-life objects in his pocket. I feel he meant that his still-life objects have been extra invented than noticed, and have been extra about purely formal visible relationships than about precise objects. Bailey’s meticulously painted backgrounds even make me consider a Brice Marden. In portray like this, the subject material is usually only a pretext. Do you consider your self as principally a proper painter, searching for formal options? Or do you see your self in another manner?
PG: I don’t wish to be a formalist. I’d be an summary painter if I did. I’m in love with the actual world. I feel that it’s a fantastic place to begin for making a portray. I would like it in there; all the wealthy complexity and interpretive prospects of subject material. I’ve an affection for individuals and I wish to get that into the portray. The locations we reside in can mirror our inside life and are a part of it. I feel that’s price highlighting and making work about. The world in entrance of us is a extremely wealthy topic; our lives, our homes, the city I reside in, my life. I feel the ideology of modernism has dried out portray. It turned reductive by attempting to make it simply in regards to the parts of portray in a increasingly more pure manner. I feel all this wealthy accidentalness of our lives, and the truth that we psychologize work and see ourselves in work and determine with work and have feelings in regards to the figures in work, is all a mandatory a part of the richness.
Philip Geiger; The White Costume, 1989, 18 by 12in.
Philip Geiger
JC: Lots of the work I see by youthful artists mirror gender or racial considerations or are satirical, ironic, or humorous. I’m instructed that youthful artists typically really feel their artwork ought to handle social or political points. Their topic issues are sometimes very witty and even alarming. However the topic issues of your work appear very quiet and understated. I consider an artist like John Koch who paints equally understated subject material. You depict younger girls sitting quietly at tables, girls sleeping, figures transferring by way of a room, mild flowing over a determine from a window, or the occasional suburban panorama. And also you and I each incessantly depict girls in our footage. That males typically depict girls has been a supply of controversy. What is that this about?
PG: Simply to handle that situation, I see my work as celebratory. I do know there’s some critic on the market who received’t see my work that manner and will interpret them with some darkish story, however I see them as celebratory. I really like who it’s that I’m portray, both males or girls. Individuals in locations is a topic that means a possibility to make a portray. I just like the sort of area of figurative portray the place you don’t know precisely what is occurring. These are evocative to me. John Koch’s work might be at instances a bit literal. In Koch’s portray, we all know what is occurring. I just like the surprises and accidents in portray, the place we get to make our personal that means; the concept of an image about being in between issues taking place… or when one thing has simply occurred, or goes to occur and it’s not outlined. This open endedness fires my creativeness.
John Koch(1909 – 1978), My Studio, ca. 1952, oil on canvas, Smithsonian American Artwork Museum
Philip Geiger; Virginia, 2018, 24 by 28in.
Philip Geiger; 4 p.m. 2001, 24” by 18in.
JC: In your work, you might need somebody at a desk, and there could be some objects on the desk. Nevertheless it’s not an outline of a desk after breakfast, a dialog, or another very particular occasion. I keep in mind a portray of yours with a deep area in which there’s a silhouetted determine, nevertheless it’s by no means a narrative about any person opening the door and welcoming the company. You by no means appear to inform little tales in your work. As you stated, they’re very ambiguous. They aren’t individuals simply posing, however on the identical time, there isn’t actually a narrative in there that I can discern.
PG: As for myself, I generally see a sort of dialog or correspondence between parts. I wish to have the looks of an actual place. That is why I don’t paint completely something. I would like the atmosphere to be clear – it is a eating room – however the scenario to be much less clear. So I’ll do a chair and an individual or a flower and an individual or a window and an individual, and I’ll put these two issues in a relationship with one another that may be shocking, an imaginative affiliation or non-sequitur. The individual and the junk on the desk; you bounce between one and the opposite. And so they start to have one thing to do with one another or belong to one another indirectly. These are the sorts of issues that curiosity me as I’m setting the portray up. Does the again of that chair relate to the determine, in order that it is going to be dramatic sufficient that we transfer from this to that? With out it being a literal narrative, these pairings would appear to me to recommend a sort of that means within the setup that may be shocking. I see that in Vuillard, the place a determine will probably be positioned someplace you don’t count on them to be within the portray. He’ll make us actually ponder an enormous previous chair within the foreground, and he makes us actually research it. There will probably be some sample on the ground, and he’ll make quite a bit out of it. The chair or the ground change into as fascinating because the individual. That is very interesting to me. This multiplicity distinguishes a picture from a portrait, it’s now an inside drama.
Philip Geiger, Witch Trials, 2018
JC: I keep in mind a Vuillard portray with a lady sitting, as you stated, in just a little nook of the portray. He put just a little orange piece of sunshine on her nostril and you find yourself that as a lot as you do on the girl.
PG: It’s indirection, I like indirection and portray the place you see one thing like that. We have been speaking about Degas, the place he may have some mannequin bathing however you then’ll see this sample that he’s layered within the background that’s completely musically stunning with layers of warms and cools laid upon one another. You allow the determine to have a look at this sample. It’s a sort of indirection in making the picture.
JC: With Degas, it’s at all times the surprising scene. As a substitute of the mannequin dealing with you, you’re looking down at her again from a excessive perspective, in order that it’s an unfamiliar view. Within the nice portray of the Belelli household, Degas depicts a mom and her little lady staring off into area whereas visually being separated from the determine of a person sitting to the appropriate. There’s a division proper between the 2 areas of the image. Lennart Anderson’s Avenue portray can be dramatic, perhaps his solely instance of doing this. The portray has that wagon tipping over with individuals operating, and the lady popping out of the door together with her mouth open. Have you ever ever painted one thing that was intentionally dramatic or making a press release in that manner?
Edgar Degas, The Bellelli Household, (1858 – 1869), oil on canvas, 78 x 9in., Musée d’Orsay
PG: Properly I consider the sunshine as being dramatic, and I’ve painted some very darkish work wherein persons are positively in shadow. Lennart Anderson painted a person in midair leaping out of a constructing in what I suppose was a suicide. I can’t think about doing that. I’ve by no means finished something like that, beginning with one thing as literal as that. However I like the concept of divided work, just like the Degas portray of the Bellelli household. Work that divide themselves into elements with individuals doing various things in several elements of the portray. That means a drama which may be much less dramatic than a divorce however suggests an consideration or consciousness throughout the area. I like the concept of dividing a portray in half and having two sides.
JC: You have got a portray of a man arising out of a stairwell in direction of us on the appropriate facet of the portray, and proper throughout on the opposite facet of the portray is a deep area with individuals persevering with to a distant window. That is creating drama with area and lightweight and pictorial group, and never with dramatic subject material. That is like what Degas does. Against this, there are many modern artists who’re doing great work with very dramatic topic issues; wildly ingenious work, sexual satire, and social commentary. Seemingly every thing besides simple depictions of their rapid atmosphere. What do you concentrate on all that?
PG: Properly, it’s simply not me, you already know? I like the concept artwork doesn’t need to be all the identical. All of us don’t need to do the identical factor. The examples we’ve been speaking about are what I’m most considering. I’ve nice respect for these different artists nevertheless it’s simply not my temperament. I can’t think about doing one thing like that. I consider the topics in my work as being a lot quieter; not operatic or extraordinarily dramatic. I like Hammershoi or Morandi. One thing as quiet as that: simply the relationships of this object to that object appears very significant to me. I’ve by no means considered portray as being a fantastic car for social commentary. Some individuals can do wildly expressive work with closely loaded topic issues. However I feel this could additionally get you drawn away from what is actually most expressive in portray.
JC: How necessary is content material for us painters? There’s a present up now of Philip Guston, an artist who addressed socially related and controversial topic issues. Do now we have any sort of duty to make socially-conscious work? Are work made for an viewers, or is it simply Artwork for Artwork’s sake?
PG: I don’t fairly agree with the dichotomy that you just’re establishing right here as a result of I’m very sympathetic to work that wishes to have an ethical core. I feel portray that pursues magnificence within the quiet sense that we’re speaking about is perhaps probably the most ethical sort of portray. Work that may cope with topical points just like the Guernica, for instance, are simply very totally different. It’s not my temperament to do the Guernica. However I feel that pursuing authenticity and wonder within the quiet manner that we would affiliate with Vuillard, somebody who didn’t depart his residence a lot, who painted his direct environment, is as morally engaged as Picasso’s Guernica. I feel Vuillard is looking for a type of the Good. He’s making a proposition in regards to the type of the Good that finally ends up being extra common than the Guernica. I feel that there’s a couple of option to have an ethical core to the exercise that we’re doing. I don’t like this dichotomy of it being both Artwork for Artwork’s Sake or it being just like the Guernica, addressing battle and peace and present occasions. I feel the beauty of the artwork world now could be which you could pursue one or the opposite, in accordance with your temperament. We don’t all need to do the identical factor. A painter like Ingres, for instance, has dug deep into his concepts of magnificence and inside authenticity as it’s linked to magnificence. That’s one of many biggest achievements an artist could make and is likely one of the most ethical contributions an artist could make. I feel Ingres did one thing new by extending human consciousness and capability within the pursuit of what he did so efficiently. I wouldn’t wish to examine myself to Ingres. However I like that as a lot as I like Picasso portray the Guernica. I feel that in the long term, it might imply extra.
Philip Geiger; Home, 2016
JC: You’re equating Magnificence and morality.
PG: Sure!
JC: And that magnificence itself has an ethical drive.
PG: Sure!
JC: I’m going to ask you one thing which I feel would provoke lots of painters. Is your subject material about magnificence?
PG: I’m attempting. I feel I’m attempting. I feel that that’s the connection. It’s absurd to check myself to Ingres or Degas or to their nice achievements of magnificence. However that’s what motivates me. That’s what will get me turned on to make a portray. We’re linked to that. Why else would you undergo all of this if you happen to don’t get to be in proximity to magnificence? It’s not excellent as social commentary. Hopefully, we give it a brand new seen type which you could talk with any person else. I feel that’s on the heart. We wouldn’t be going about this backward form of exercise for some other purpose.
JC: That’s an ideal ending Phil. Thanks for sharing your insights and expertise and to your great work.
