Quote

It's too simplistic to advance the notion of the autonomy of art as a reason for turning away from the public. You can have autonomy and simultaneously have connections with the social and political world.

As long as artists arbitrarily assume the right to decide what is or is not art, it is logical that the public will just as arbitrarily feel that they have the right to reject it.

I think all art is, by nature, intended to motivate society for change, and the only reason change doesn't happen is because within the target population, courage is lacking.

I have to say that I reject somewhat the distinction between something called art and something called public art. I think all art demands and desires to be seen.

I believe art has to take responsibility but it should not give up being art.

Art is about the 'I' in life not the 'we', about private life rather than public. A public life that doesn't acknowledge the private is a life not worth having.

I'm not saying everybody has a social responsibility of what art they create, but art should be open-ended. I just feel there's a lack of consciousness and understanding of impact and reach. Just maybe, for a second, just think of the effect you could have with a lyric.

Art to me is a humanitarian act and I believe that there is a responsibility that art should somehow be able to effect mankind, to make the word a better place.

I think with the whole new Internet media, I'm not necessarily Internet savvy, but I just feel that the way that art in general will be presented to the public is going to be different.