In an interview with Wired magazine in , for instance, you stated that you were 'always trying to bring unusual content to a different audience - a non-art audience', describing your Guggenheim show as an 'aberration'.
Do you still feel that you are 'running in the opposite direction The Xenon projections are a relatively new way to show my text, and sometimes other material, to non-art audiences. These projections often are unannounced, and anonymous, so that people can concentrate on the content, and not worry about whether what they see is art or not.
In relation to my last question, do you feel any sense of conflict in your involvement in commissions and exhibitions which are very much part of 'the canon' and appeal specifically to the 'art world'.
For instance, much of the work experienced by a UK audience has been almost exclusively located in large, National Lottery-funded arts venues such as Baltic and Tate Liverpool. Choosing to show in an art venue doesn't necessarily exclude the general public. For example, because my projections are outdoors, a non-art audience always attends. I would enjoy having projections in unexpected locations, as well. Hopefully these projections take the architecture and the site into account, and speak to socio-political concerns.
In works such as 'Truisms and Survival' the initial success of these works was partly for me dependent on the fact that you had so adeptly manipulated the 'traditional' spaces of advertising in the presentation of your work, which was sited so that passers-by or consumers would 'happen upon' or 'stumble across' the work almost by accident. It shares a lot of common ground with hip hop graffiti in this respect, and I know you have collaborated with graffiti writers in the past and been very much part of this kind of 'subversive', yet democratic, art activity.
