René Magritte in his letter to A. Chavee said about the painting: "...Questions such as ‘What does this picture mean, what does it represent?’ are possible only if one is incapable of seeing a picture in all its truth, only if one automaically understands that a very precise image does not show precisely what it is. It’s like believing that the implied meaning (if there is one?) is worth more than the overt meaning. (…) How can anyone enjoy interpreting symbols? They are ‘substitutes’ that are only useful to a mind that is incapable of knowing the things themselves. A devotee of interpretation cannot see a bird; he only sees it as a symbol. Although this manner of knowing the ‘world’ may be useful in treating mental illness, it would be silly to confuse it with a mind that can be applied to any kind of thinking at all.” - Amira

“Magritte was heavily influenced by the writings of Immanuel Kant, who proposed that humans can rationalize situations but can not comprehend the “things-in-themselves.” As it applies to Magritte’s work, he is simply creating a variation upon his over-arching philosophy: A painting of a scene is not the same as a scene. “Ceci n’est pas une pipe.” Magritte plays with this philosophy by exploiting the flatness of two-dimensional space in his painting by depicting three-dimensional space outside and a two-dimensional painting that have the same imagery. The title refers to the inherent grappling that all humans go through when viewing his mind-bending painting.” - Amira

“If one looks at a thing with the intention of trying to discover what it means, one ends up no longer seeing the thing itself, but thinking of the question that has been raised. The mind sees in two different senses: (1) sees, as with the eyes; and (2) sees a question (no eyes).” — René Magritte - Amira