The artist is nothing without the gift but the gift is nothing without work.

There is nothing worse than a sharp image of a fuzzy concept.

Does it follow that the house has nothing in common with art and is architecture not to be included in the arts? Only a very small part of architecture belongs to art: the tomb and the monument. Everything else that fulfils a function is to be excluded from the domain of art.

If architecture had nothing to do with art it would be astonishingly easy to build houses but the architect's task - his most difficult task - is always that of selecting.

People can inhabit anything. And they can be miserable in anything and ecstatic in anything. More and more I think that architecture has nothing to do with it. Of course that's both liberating and alarming.

I strive for an architecture from which nothing can be taken away.

Nothing is as dangerous in architecture as dealing with separated problems. If we split life into separated problems we split the possibilities to make good building art.

Nothing requires the architect's care more than the due proportions of buildings.

If you give people nothingness they can ponder what can be achieved from that nothingness.

Obama and his attack dogs have nothing but hate and anger in their hearts and spew it whenever possible.