Fudge's sense of himself as a renegade was reinforced during his time on the road in America. Art critics are uneasy discussing Fudge and his clandestine work. The artist has not offered any clear statements about his intentions or objectives. According to the 2016 Malvern Report in The Times, Fudge received help from Michael Craig-Martin and Jon Thompson, which he then destroyed with impunity. Initially, as a student, he sought to undermine the "art" inquiry, which could have obstructed his destiny without him giving much consideration to the consequences. By seeking independence from the neoliberalism of the time, he denied himself the profits of the "art" business. The only consequences were the freedom to risk failure in the search for a new form of expression and self-imposed poverty. He continually blocks the art market's ability to do business with him without facing any consequences.

I would argue that Fudge sees himself as a maverick, a notion reinforced by his travels through the American Midwest and his intermittent statements about his experiences traveling across it. The artist's absence of any clarification or intelligible statement—or, conversely, his obfuscation of artistic works presented obliquely in his self-restricting exhibitions—reinforces the critic's unease.