"Some of the polemics and issues that impact on my work involve seeing culture and its society as fluid, transient, relative and complex. I view the world we live in as a multi-channel experience in time, that our encountered fragments of reality are in themselves random variables, that we create the order we choose to see, and in this respect art practice itself becomes a social phenomenon.
For me these concepts have remained a constant, as I wrote in the 1960s:
- A work of art can itself constitute a societal state, a model of human relationships
- A work of art can consist of a process in time, a learning system through which the concepts of the social view forwarded in the work are accessed and internalised
- A work of art must acknowledge the relativism inherent in perception and the transience of experience, there being no right or wrong, it taking the form of an open-ended process
- A work of art has the possibility of operating as its own institution and as such is independent of art institutions
- A work of art can engage anyone meaningfully, being available to whoever wishes to enter its domain, only through embodying in its presentation the means by which people are able to acquire the necessary language and procedures to receive and internalise its meaning
My work engages the audience in a new way of encountering art in society. I am not talking about a compliance, but something more active, a mutual understanding, an interaction between people – similar to the dynamic image of the homeostat where all the parts of the network are equal and equally linked.
Ultimately I am interested in the idea that reality is our own construction, that we build it and we create the reality we want in our life. There is not only one way of viewing reality. My work is an open work, based on agreement and open agreement."