I was just curious as to what your qualifications are to critique art and decide for the public what is good art, and what is 'bad' or not art at all?
I have been studying art for at least 20 years and I know a thing or two about the subject, but your question seems a little strange. What "qualifications" does someone need in order to think? Or to distinguish between different kinds of things? Does one need "qualifications" to distinguish between a dog and a bear? You seem to be implying that somehow I need some kind of official permission or diploma in order to think for myself. Is that what you meant to imply?
As for deciding "for the public", I don't know what that is supposed to imply either. I'm just saying what's true. How is that "deciding for the public"? Each of us has to decide what we think for ourselves. I would highly recommend that you not pay too much attention to the fact that someone has a diploma or is a self-identified authority when evaluating what they have to say or when considering what you think about the things you see for yourself. Listen to the arguments and observe the facts for yourself and make your own decisions. Anything else is just herd behavior.
Did you have a chance to read my FAQ page? It's at -- Brian
