-It was the first summer show I did 
and they gave me a really nice spot.
I used it as a springboard for a piece
 that was already happening. 
These are the way you're going to go
we're going to put next to
and you have no control 
about how the piece was shown.
I've had work that was on a plinth 
but I wanted it to be at a certain height 
and plinth was carved in height 
because of some 
other concerns within the room.
As successful artists 
are all used to having control 
and that privilege of being 
able to control one's environment
and showing an exact condition
the summer show is the opposite of that. 
I judged it 
and call it the curatorial antichrist 
because no matter 
what you try and do to try 
and create some roles and some constraints
that they get diminished 
and destroyed by just what it is
this evening kind
 of democratic amalgam that it is. 
If you want to be controlling 
and try and project some kind of regime
it's pretty upsetting because you can't just-- 
It is what it is and there's no-- 
You just have to relax
 and just try to let go with it 
because it's just-- I don't know. 
Otherwise, you get pre-upset. [chuckles]
I wasn't that involved. 
The curators that year just placed it there
but it was nice because it was
 my first summer show as an RA.
They were quite keen to give me a nice spot. 
It can be pretty random where you end up 
and I was lucky that year. 
Some years you're luckier than others.
It was really nice to be able to pop in
and show it to people 
so I must have gone half a dozen times.
I guess every time you approached that you 
so digest something whether consciously 
or subconsciously 
and you get a sense of its scale. 
One other thing about the piece is it feels
at first, you think it 
doesn't have a front or a back 
but it became quite clear
 that there is a front to the back 
where the crest of the work
the apex of the piece 
has to come to the front.
Prototyping, it's essential.
I don't think I've ever made a prototype 
that didn't change 
before you actually made it
because you always learn so much. 
Even renders on a screen you can't really get 
a sense of the scale of something 
so it's really important to create 
ideally one to one models of things 
but that can't always
 be the [?] studies of a piece.
That was the first time it was shown.
I did a show at Victorian Mirror
I think the next year
in which I had a whole array 
of iterations of these vertical forms 
which included these 
ascending stacks of tetroids 
which are the paradigms
and then, these descending works
which are these ones 
where time is moving downwards. 
You have these, which are called malifolds
which are these some kind of harmonic works. 
You have these ascending works 
and descending works all
in a room so as quite formal 
arrangement of all these studies.
They are quite architectural in a way 
and that's we have lots of constraints
 in which we put upon them. 
There is this fundamental geometry
 which is based on the tetra helix
which is a way that you
 put tetrahedrons together 
and they form this never-ending triple helix 
that goes on forever in a straight line 
but never actually comes back full circle.
I made a sculpture in 2008 or 2007.
It's called axiom, which is in the Ministry 
of Justice in Petty, France in St. James's.
It's meant to be a public
 sculpture but actually
because of security issues 
it's in this atrium 
of the- It's a government office and only
 the people who work there can see it
but it's essentially a stack 
of regular tetrahedrons that rise up. 
Because of perspective, it actually looks
 like it gets smaller as you go up. 
but in fact, it's actually the same.
One of the things that 
that led onto a few years later
was this idea of escalation
this idea of growth or expansion
and there is this sense 
of cumulative time is moving upwards
and there is this growth 
or entrepreneurial surging force.
One of the key factors in public 
realm work is things like claribility. 
Things like this, technically
I would never have been allowed
 to make a hollow one 
so it's the solidity 
is really key to the claribility issue 
so they do differ in that sense.
There is this 
precariousness to it which is really
I think, is the excitement about it and 
the pieces genuinely working really hard.
One in St. Pancras 
is very, very heavily engineered 
and the materials are working really hard 
and if you were to add another tetrahedron 
it would collapse under its own weight
though it's kind 
if quite perilous in some ways. 
What I like about it is that there's this
hopefully, a sense of the apocalypse 
that inevitably this thing will collapse.
Any form of growth will lead to collapse.
It's got such a small footprint.
When we were looking at the plans. 
there's also Thames link 
and all the railway lines 
and the services underneath
 is completely congested.
That's the exact spot I chose for it 
that fitted the concave dogleg in the facade.
It turned out to be 
the only place that was able
to take the sculpture 
so it was a real kind of destiny. 
That was a really nice sign
 because it was literally
exactly, where I wanted it 
and that was the only choice
because it could have had
 to be forced to be 10 meters 
to the left or 5 meters back 
or someone just random
but it was actually 
a little bit of fortuitous luck.
Their responses to spaces 
and to context and to subject matter
and to people who use 
the demographics that people use it.
I like trying to solve 
problems with the works. 
The ideas come from the problems 
that the specific location or site 
will throw up and so they are
 the pieces are dependent
upon those problems 
and so their ideas driven
from being given a set of constraints.
