I think that artists provide questions, not answers. We provide provocations rather than fully formed objects.

I think there's something important in going against the grain, and perhaps finding value in things that aren't necessarily institutionally recognized.

This is something that, as artists, we constantly deal with-throwing away the past, slaying the father, and creating the new. This desire to throw away the old rules.

The backgrounds by design are a very key part of the conversation, because I want a kind of fight or pressure to exist between the figure and the background.

All art is self-portraiture.

Painting is situational. And my particular situation exists within gender, race, class, sexuality, nation.

I believe that artists should be part of the culture. I think that my work clearly bears that out.

The art world has become so insular. The rules have become so autodidactic that, in a sense, they lose track of what people have any interest in thinking about, talking about or even looking at.

We have a lot of sort of received historical ways of viewing portraiture. And I suppose in some way I'm sort of questioning that by toying with the rules of the game.

We're wired to be empathetic and to care about the needs of others, but also to be curious about others. And I think that's just sort of in our DNA. And so portraiture is a very human act.

I guess art is in the eye of the beholder.

It is imperative you stay in touch with your inner self so you don’t lose the essence of who you truly are.

Americans used to be 'citizens.' Now we are 'consumers.

On athleticism, God knows no favor. It seems rather he is in the business of teaching winners how to lose and losers how to win.

I'm working hard every day to attain all of my goals. Winning the Super Bowl is obviously at the top of that list.

There is certainly a red for everyone.

We hear wonderful stories about some masters who can walk on water and do all kinds of great things. But the real power of the teacher is to transmit power and knowledge directly to an individual.

My understanding of first-degree murder is that premeditation needs to be proven.

With so much protection, wouldn't one be able to wander among the undead ranks, taunting them at will with no danger of repercussion?

No matter what you do, no matter how stupid, dumb or damaging you judge it to be, there is a lesson to be learned from it.

I'm no longer interested in the possible.