If you do an interview in 1960, something it's bound to change by the year 2000. And if it doesn't, then there's something drastically wrong.
Sentiment: NEGATIVE
People change over the years, and that changes situations for good and for bad.
People change. I wouldn't like to be accountable for the interviews I've done, or the person I was when I was 20, 21.
The way we experience history and time in all its forms shifted quite massively between 1989 and 2001 - to the point where contrivances like decades are now kind of silly.
I've realized why I don't tell the truth in interviews. It's because they're printed months later, and you change so quickly - you have new thoughts, new everything - so people are reading an old version of you.
If you notice any of the press from when I was with the show, I would always deny it being the year 3000.
If the year 2000 can help us move into the future, that's fine, but I am afraid that people see it as a full stop and that one can take a big breath afterwards - you can't.
The 1960s were really a life-changing time.
One reason I quit doing interviews after years and years and years was because I was making things up.
As far as I can tell, 1968 is a year about change, about revolution, about violence, about people turning inwards as community breaks down.
For some reason, 1968 is a touchstone year for me. I think it was the first year I felt fully conscious.
No opposing quotes found.