I think that all art is socially conscious. There is no alternative. Whatever we produce contains a political and social statement. There's no way to avoid that, unless it is pure decoration. But even pure decoration has also some value because you can read pure decoration as a way to ignore the reality that is around us, saying, "Well, I'm not interested. I just like to paint this wall blue.

Images have an advanced religion; they bury history.

I am suspicious and disillusioned about the uses and misuses of photography in the art world, the press, and the world of entertainment. And to make things more complicated, I don't think that the general public is well educated regarding images. Generally we are taught how to read, but we are not taught how to look.

For me, what was important was to record everything I saw around me, and to do this as methodically as possible. In these circumstances a good photograph is a picture that comes as close as possible to reality. But the camera never manages to record what your eyes see, or what you feel at the moment. The camera always creates a new reality.

We are the result of the stimulus we receive.

Nowadays I see my work being used, without my permission, as if it was an attack against the Trump regime. People want to say, "No! That's not my America, not the America I know." I'm honored - it's just not me. But as we were saying before, the artist loses control.

Reality cannot be photographed or represented. We can only create a new reality. And my dilemma is how to make art out of a reality that most of us would rather ignore. How do you make art when the world is in such a state? My answer has been to make mistakes, but when I can, to choose them. We are all guilt victims choosing mistakes, and as Godard said, the very definition of the human condition is in the mise-en-scéne itself.