I know we've gone over this many times, but I'm always happy to discuss it because I think each time we come up with more interesting views on it. My current stand point is that the main reason they burnt the million quid was just because they could! I think a lot of the other justifications and reasonings that they and other people have come up with may have been at the back of their minds at the time, or, more likely, they just came up with them afterwards to justify the whole thing. That said, I still believe it's a brilliant thing, and an astounding piece of art. It provokes an intense emotional response in people either way, which is precisely what great art always does. It calls into question the whole question of worth. I saw an exhibit recently which was just a blank canvas that the artist had sat and stared at for 1000 hours or something stupid like that. What is that worth? The manhours that the artist spent looking at it? Maybe if he'd been working instead he could've earnt say £10 an hour. So that makes it worth £10,000, if we're gonna be capitalist about it. The K Foundation's piece of art is worth £1,000,000 because they worked for that £1,000,000 instead of, say, sitting staring at a piece of card for 100,000 hours or spending that long painting a picture. I personally think it's one of the greatest artistic statements of the 20th Century. I think if Damien Hirst had done it, it would have got a lot more respect amongst the art community, as he's a recognised artist, and Bill and Jimi are just popstars, but that just shows up the snobbery in the art world. Thinking about the whole thing actually makes me feel better about the world. I find it morally enriching. Del