Traveling to Paris shifted the way I understand color, first subtly, then all at once. My then-boyfriend, now husband, flew in from San Francisco for a weekend so we could explore the city together. Paris compresses centuries of painting into a single frame of time, and there, something in my perception of color changed.
Centre Pompidou: A Room Full of Bonnard
It was there, at Centre Pompidou, that I was fully introduced to Pierre Bonnard. I had seen his work before, but this was different: an entire room dedicated to his paintings. I remember the moment viscerally. The color didn't shout; it held. There were no dramatic shifts in value, mostly mid to light tones, but the harmony was unmistakable, controlled, and expansive at the same time. I sat there for hours, looking, absorbing, letting the work unfold without urgency. Not analyzing. Just being in it.
What struck me most was how Bonnard used color not as decoration or description, but as the primary carrier of space and feeling. His interiors glow from within. His gardens dissolve into light. The forms are almost secondary to the chromatic relationships holding everything together. That is a rare thing to witness, and rarer still to understand from the inside.
Color as Structure, Not Surface
That experience stayed with me. Years later, I realized that an artist I deeply admire, Curtis Fields, was also moved by Bonnard's approach to color. That connection reinforced something I had already begun to sense: color isn't just a layer applied to form. It is the structure.
This idea runs through my own work in a different register. Where Bonnard worked with observed light and domestic interiors, I work with geometry and constraint. But the underlying question is the same: how does color build space? How does it hold tension without relying on contrast or drama? How do two tones placed next to each other create something neither could achieve alone?
These are not academic questions for me. They are the questions I return to every time I begin a new painting. The influence of Bonnard is not stylistic, it is structural. It shaped the way I think about what color is for. You can see this thinking developed further in Beyond Shape: Creating Life and Tension in Geometric Abstract Painting, where I write about how constraint and color interact in my studio practice.
Josef Albers and the Discipline of Seeing
Bonnard opened the door. Josef Albers gave me the tools to walk through it. Where Bonnard worked intuitively, building color relationships through observation and feeling, Albers approached color as a system, something to be studied, tested, and understood through direct experience rather than theory alone.
His central insight, that color is always relative, that the same hue reads differently depending on what surrounds it, is one I return to constantly. It is the reason I spend so much time in the studio testing color relationships before committing to a composition. It is also the reason I distrust color decisions made in isolation. Context is everything. I wrote more about this in How Josef Albers Shaped the Way I See Color.
Together, Bonnard and Albers represent two poles of the same inquiry: one intuitive and sensory, the other analytical and systematic. My practice lives somewhere between them, using geometric structure as a framework within which color can behave in ways that feel both inevitable and surprising.
Back in the States: The Same Pull
Back in the States, I started paying closer attention to color relationships, not as an academic exercise, but as a lived experience. At the Metropolitan Museum of Art, Bonnard's paintings still stop me. The same pull. The same internal shift.
That quality of attention, of being arrested by color rather than simply noticing it, is something I try to build into my own work. I think about that pull often, both in the studio and in how I imagine someone encountering a finished painting for the first time. When someone stands in front of a painting and feels held by it without quite knowing why, value is usually doing most of the structural work, establishing depth, weight, and spatial order. But color is what draws us in. It is what we feel moved toward.
The geometry provides the structure, but color is what makes the painting breathe. This is part of what I mean when I write about the philosophy behind my practice: the work is grounded in direct experience of light and place, and color is the primary language through which that experience is translated.
What Bonnard Left Behind
Color, when it is working at that level, doesn't need contrast to assert itself. It builds space, holds tension, and carries the entire composition forward. Bonnard understood this completely. His paintings don't resolve into a single reading. They stay open, shifting slightly depending on how long you look and what you bring to them.
That is the standard I hold myself to. Not to replicate what Bonnard did, but to ask the same questions with the same seriousness, in my own visual language, with my own materials and constraints. Paris gave me that. A room full of paintings, an afternoon of looking, and a permission I didn't know I needed to let color do more of the work.
Interested in how color and geometry come together in my paintings? Browse the mountain collection or get in touch to talk about the work.
Artist Series
This post is part of an ongoing series on artists who have shaped my practice. Each post explores a different figure whose work, ideas, or creative philosophy has left a mark on how I think about painting. Recent posts in the series include:
- Hilma af Klint and the origins of abstract art
- Bruno Lucchesi: a studio visit and the figurative tradition
- Richard Diebenkorn: Notes to Myself and the creative process
- Raimonds Staprans: Saturated Color, Presence, and Lasting Impact
- Curtis Fields: Color, Presence, and Contemporary Landscape Painting
Browse all posts in the Artist Series.
Follow along on Instagram for studio updates and new paintings as they are created.
