Quote

My style is ambiguous and lucid. I wish to be signified but not summed up. I don't want to have to go over the top each time.

Among those who are satisfactory in this respect it is desirable to have represented as great a diversity of intellectual tradition, social milieu and personal character as possible.

You spend most of your life working and trying to hone your craft, working on your chops, working on your writing, and you don't really think about accolades. Then you get a bit older and they start coming your way. It's a nice pat on the back.

To have the recognition of your colleagues is great. The public attention is a mixed blessing.

Through style, you can communicate to the world who you are and what you stand for.

I think that, occasionally, fame and popularity can garner more attention for individuals or films. But as a person who believes in my craft, I like the romantic notion that skill and hard work is more important than notoriety.

I don't know if this is the kind of retrospective analysis that people are fond of applying to their work or actions, but it feels like I knew I was going to be famous and I knew that an element of that would be traumatic, so that if I could make myself something big and otherworldly, it would be a kind of defence.

I am not hugely famous; I am not a name. For me, it's not the size of the role, it's the material and the people you are working with.

I never personalize anything because I think that can be dangerous. For me, the best way is - this may sound pretentious - but it's to breathe the character and get into the psychology of it.

I have a great advantage over many of my colleagues inasmuch as my students bring with them to class their own personal knowledge of national, regional, religious, ethnic, occupational, and family folklore traditions.