The big tradition, I think, is unity. And I have that in mind; and with that, you know, you could break all the traditions- all the other so-called rules, because they are stylistic.. and most are not true. As long as the marks are related to one another, there is unity. Unity in the work itself depends on unity of the artist's vision.

I don't think that I'm over his influence but they probably don't look like Picassos; Picasso himself would probably have thrown up looking at my pictures.

I think that most people think painters are kind of ridiculous, you know?

I'm never drawing the object itself; I'm only drawing a depiction of the object - a kind of crystallized symbol of it.

I'd always wanted to know the difference between a mark that was art and one that wasn't.

Use the worst colour you can find in each place - it usually is the best.

Im interested in what would normally be considered the worst aspects of commercial art. I think its the tension between what seems to be so rigid and cliched and the fact that art really cant be this way.