I think that art is still a site for resistance and for the telling of various stories, for validating certain subjectivities we normally overlook. I'm trying to be affective, to suggest changes, and to resist what I feel are the tyrannies of social life on a certain level.

I think I developed language skills to deal with threat. It's the girl thing to do-you know, instead of pulling out a gun.

I think what I'm trying to do is create moments of recognition. To try to detonate some kind of feeling or understanding of lived experience.

I think people have to set up little battles. They have to demonize people whom they disagree with or feel threatened by. But it's the ideological framing of the debate that scares me.

I don't necessarily think that installation is the only way to go. It's just a label for certain kinds of arrangements.

I think there are different ways of being rigorous, and I am asking people to be as rigorous in their pleasure as in their criticism.

I think there are lots of ways to make good work. You can throw big bucks at a project and make what some would call crap, or you can work very modestly with eloquently moving results.

Warhol's images made sense to me, although I knew nothing at the time of his background in commercial art. To be honest, I didn't think about him a hell of a lot.

I think that every so-called history book and film biography should be prefaced by the statement that what follows is the author's rendition of events and circumstances.