What I have in mind is that art may be bad, good or indifferent, but, whatever adjective is used, we must call it art, and bad art is still art in the same way that a bad emotion is still an emotion.

In my day artists wanted to be outcasts, pariahs. Now they are all integrated into society

Chess can be described as the movement of pieces eating one another.

The artist performs only one part of the creative process. The onlooker completes it, and it is the onlooker who has the last word.

There is no solution, for there is no problem.

Three or four drops of height have nothing to do with savageness.

Society takes what it wants. The artist himself does not count, because there is no actual existence for the work of art. The work of art is always based on the two poles of the onlooker and the maker, and the spark that comes from the bipolar action gives birth to something - like electricity. But the onlooker has the last word, and it is always posterity that makes the masterpiece. The artist should not concern himself with this, because it has nothing to do with him.