There are two professions I surely did not intend to practise: philosopher and artist. I practise them both now. At first I got a PhD in 1989, and a few years later in 1991, in rather strange circumstances, I became a painter: I think the only purpose of philosophy is to refute other philosophies. I do not have a philosophical theory. I just philosophy in my paintings. I do not have a style either: that is my style. I jump from one subject to another. I therefore do not have any problem to switch between " magnificent and grand" works and small canvasses on which pin-ups or shadow-images from the fifties can be seen. This switching from large into small and vice versa keeps me "focussed": whatever you produce in small seize, you are able to produce on large canvasses.

Apart from the fact that my work can overall be classified as figurative, there is another reason why it does not show one style: my style adjusts itself to the subject and not the other way around. That is why everything is allowed concerning methods and techniques: anything from sprayers, paint rollers, syringes and markers to airbrush, paintbrush, oil, acryl and silk stockings.

Furthermore, the technique using forms and patterns runs as a leading thread through all my work. They deliver the brand of my work, how to recognise a vandenbos. However, this is never allowed to become an obligation. On almost every painting there used to be a text or title sprayed through a pattern. That is not generally my way of working nowadays, although I still tribute great value to a title.

Titles do not just give the meaning of an artist. They provide either as text within the painting or as mega-title an extra dimension, an extra weight to the work. I painted, for instance, a huge futuristic airplane (2002). I think the image is quite "heavy" in itself. However, combined with the title: 'Flight 285 heading for death; nobody knows but me' it really gives me the shivers! Moreover, that actually is the way it was painted.

Finally yet importantly: through all ambitions, chaos, and inconsistencies runs as a artery the narrative character of the work. Hence my paintings save me from waffling to much. By the way: what I experience to be exciting in painting: to feel when a painting has reached its climax, and to be able to hold a maximum of austerity. The moment you realise: don't touch it anymore. After that, the quality surpasses its climax and is only to be followed by the technique of bungling.