Patiently and with industry did I apply myself to study, for although I felt the impossibility of giving life to my productions, I did not abandon the idea of representing nature.
Sentiment: POSITIVE
But I did not find any positive inspiration in my studies until I approached my nineteenth year.
I became a writer in spite of my environments.
I didn't want to lose my sense of myself in my profession.
I very much enjoyed my career in science. I didn't leave science because I was disillusioned, but felt I'd done my bit for it after about twenty-five years.
For many years, I hated nature. As a student, I refused to put a plant anywhere - a living plant, that is. Dead plants were OK.
I had then and still retain an interest in science for its own sake and as a metaphor for our current lives.
To have been torn from the study would have been as death; my time was entirely occupied with art.
I didn't do so well in the academic world, so I think the only way I could express myself was through visual art - anything I could get my hands on, whether it was glassblowing, sculpture, painting, or photography. I always wanted to be a painter. Or a farmer.
Formally, I did my studies in the sciences, but I was very conscious that I was being deprived of culture. While studying neuroscience, I was running a rock-music festival and was able to use that as a platform to explore what it takes to produce art for 20,000 inebriated 20-somethings.
I had no intention of being a film producer, and I knew I wasn't passionate about engineering. I was always set on having my own business, controlling my own destiny.