Quote

I'm not a politically radical person. In fact, I'm much more interested in being radical aesthetically.

I am just an artiste, and I like to explore new avenues.

If you try to go beyond your interests just for the sake of pretensions or wealth, your art becomes less legitimate.

You don't see artists sitting around a lot, talking about ideology. They find out what they believe, and what they're doing, by doing it.

I've always enjoyed feeling a connection to the avant-garde, such as Dada and surrealism and pop art. The only thing the artist can do is be honest with themselves and make the art they want to make. That's what I've always done.

My writing is called exotic or avant-garde because I write about rural places. Has it really come to this, that if you write about the country you are avant-garde? How did this happen? Modern agriculture and spaces are still so relevant.

I just try to get away with as much as I can. I don't think that's very radical in the art world.

Sometimes for a lot of new artists, they don't have a vision, really, or know what they want to say; it's kind of drawn out for them. But me, because I'm such a transcendental thinker, it's always like a journey and an adventure with each project. It's like going through a different doorway each time.

You can't talk about life without talking about politics. You have to have both. If you're just a political person, you're going to burn out. If you, as an artist, are just focused inward, you're going to eventually be irrelevant.

Art has often been and continues to be considered transcendent. I see this as misguided and, in fact, a way of subverting the powerful voice art can be in global discussions about politics, economics, society, culture, religion and international relations.