I don't know whether what I do is art. But making things out in the world and having as many conversations as possible.

I was totally taken in and totally taken by that myth starting in 1999, rather carelessly writing about this archive and starting to read [Buckminster Fuller] self-representation, misrepresentation, whatever you want to call it.

I think that as a society as well, we need to be smart about what technologies we take up and how construe progress.

I didn't grow up with [Buckminster Fuller]. I never met him. I was once close to meeting him as a child at a ski resort one summer. He died in 1983. Only in 1999 or so, 2000, when I was working as an editor at San Francisco Magazine, did I really come back around to that name because Stanford University had just acquired the archive.

To me, the reason to write about [Buckminster] Fuller is because I think that he has ideas that are incredibly pertinent.

That is to say that despair does not seem to be in any way potentially to be productive.

It's essential for me to be working on a nonfiction sort of research project simultaneous with multiple projects that are in different realms of art practice or not.