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.

Art is not about objects of high monetary exchange. It's about reasserting our firsthand experience in present time.

I always like to look for adventure when I go away. I have gone on several horse adventures with my wife - from Guangxi we went up to the High Tibetan region. We also went along the Hurunui River on horseback in the South Island of New Zealand.

We are not moving towards some kind of goal. We are at the goal, and it is changing with us. If art has any purpose, it is to open our eyes to that fact.

I believe in the city as a natural human environment, but we must humanize it. It's art that will re-define public space in the 21st Century. We can make our cities diverse, inspirational places by putting art, dance and performance in all its forms into the matrix of street life.

Art is not about understanding, it’s about experience.

I think critics are very useful. But I think that they, in a way, betray their position when they stop people looking for themselves.

Making beautiful things for everyday use is a wonderful thing to do.. making life flow more easily.. but art confronts life, allowing it to stop and perhaps change direction.. they are completely different.

Our appearance belongs to others, we live in the darkness of the body-part of all darkness but felt.

Well, I think critics are very useful. But I think that they, in a way, betray their position when they stop people looking for themselves. Judgment is very easy, but I think, on the whole, professional critics maybe see too much, and compare too much, and forget the joy of actually looking and contemplating for its own sake.

It is a depressing business talking to journalist.

Art has to change things, and if it was immediately acceptable it would not be doing the job.