In art there are only fast or slow developments. Essentially it is a matter of evolution, not revolution.
Sentiment: NEGATIVE
Sometimes art is ahead of revolution.
In its most limited sense, modern, art would seem to concern itself only with the technical innovations of the period.
A revolution is interesting insofar as it avoids like the plague the plague it promised to heal.
Change in my work happens not in revolutions - it's more evolutionary.
Revolution is not something fixed in ideology, nor is it something fashioned to a particular decade. It is a perpetual process embedded in the human spirit.
Revolutions are something you see only in retrospect.
I see only adaptations - not revolutions.
A revolution is to bring on change and we're spiritual people trying to bring on spiritual change. It might sound like I'm a dreamer, but economic models have reached their height of evolution. Technology has evolved. What hasn't evolved is mankind's spirituality; everything is from 3,000 years ago.
Art is either plagiarism or revolution.
Like art, revolutions come from combining what exists into what has never existed before.