What has not been mentioned is that the «Saul - into - Paul conversion theory», published by Elaine de Kooning in Art News in 1958, was not set in Willem de Kooning's studio and did not mention a «Bell - Opticon», unlike her account of 1962.13 Additionally, while the 1958 account's
introduction dramatised Kline's breakthrough to abstraction as a «transformation of consciousness», or a «revelation» of Biblical proportions, invoking the example of «Saul of Tarsus outside the walls of Damascus when he saw a «great light»», the description of Kline's technical and conceptual breakthrough in this account nevertheless resembled previous accounts of Kline's development in its gradualness, uneventfulness and thoughtfulness.14 The breakthrough that Elaine de Kooning
first recounted was a product of sustained technical experimentation and logical
thought on Kline's part, rather
than accident or epiphany: «Still involved, in 1950, with elements of representation, he began to whip out small brushes of figures, trains, horses, landscapes, buildings, using only black paint.
First, its use of the term «radical» (for which the Critique offers no citation): The relevant discussion in the article refers to two explicitly «experimental» proposals included at the end of the article, in a section titled «
Thinking Outside of the Box...» The
introduction to that part of the discussion states «I call this a «
thought experiment» because I am well aware that the practical realities of child protection practice may mean that it would not work...» Later the text notes that one proposal is «less radical»
than the other.