The differences between revolution in art and revolution in politics are enormous. Revolution in art lies not in the will to destroy but in the revelation of what has already been destroyed. Art kills only the dead.
The face of beauty literally needs to change, which means the way we think of beauty needs to as well.
In art there are only fast or slow developments. Essentially it is a matter of evolution, not revolution.
I think that marriage vows should include an escape clause that says the contract is broken if one party ups and makes a big switch in religion or politics or aesthetic taste. I mean, these shifts just aren't fair, and we need an easier way out.
I'd like to make over Marilyn Manson and just dress him really normally to see what he looks like. That'd be really weird!
Why do progress and beauty have to be so opposed?
In the ancients, one sees the accomplished letter of entire poetry: in the moderns, one has the presentiment of the spirit in becoming.
Fashion: a beautiful thing that becomes ugly. Art: an ugly thing that becomes beautiful.
I might say that what amateurs call a style is usually only the unavoidable awkwardnesses in first trying to make something that has not heretofore been made. Almost no new classics resemble other previous classics. At first people see only the awkwardness. Then they are not so perceptible. When they show so very awkwardly people think these awkwardnesses are the style and many copy them. This is regrettable.
I guess with any type of music or any art, there's always an evolution.
Do I believe in plastic surgery? Yes, if something is wrong and you can modify it. For certain people, it's right.
'SNL' came out in the '70s. It's a different zeitgeist. It's hard to re-create it, just as it would be hard to do a black-and-white noir film now. The culture's different.
Design can change how you look at yourself.
I don't think you can talk about progress in art - movement, but not progress. You can speak of a point on a line for the purpose of locating things, but it's a horizontal line, not a vertical one.
Beauty alters the grain of reality.
The goal is to make something that sounds new and different.
I'd been told, or warned, that when you paint one room, not only will it look nice, but it will also make the room next to it look as if raccoons have been living in it for the past decade.
All the classical genres are now ridiculous in their rigorous purity.
In terms of aesthetics, I probably look better than I did when I played.
After 1980, you never heard reference to space again. Surface, the most convincing evidence of the descent into materialism, became the focus of design. Space disappeared.
I think when tattoos are new and colorful, they look bad. But they look better the older and more bleached out they become.
[Industrial design in 50 years] will be less about looks and more about personality of artifacts.
It's not new that architecture can profoundly affect a place, sometimes transform it.
Yes, I tried to change the classical style in a way that people who don't understand it can enjoy.
Lighting is a good way to change the look of a place without spending much.
