Thank you! Finally someone said it. Of course you're going to think yours is better, OP, because you did it. But maybe, just maybe, the other guy's actually WAS better than yours.

My thought as well. Glad I am not the only one who thought it.

#26 a few people had already mentioned it.

I agree with #24. Isn't appreciating art an individuals perception? Your work may be brilliant to someone (and yourself) but might go appreciated by someone else who didn't understand it. It's not fair to diss someone just because u couldn't relate to it.

*unappreciated

#82 I sort of disagree with this. While enjoying someone's artwork is (very) subjective, as is enjoying pretty much anything, there are fundamentals in art as well (technical stuffs and all) and they're usually visible even in more stylized and abstract works. There is a more objective way to judge paintings too, just like there are objective ways to judge movies and music, which are subjective too. You can usually tell if something is well made even if you have personal reasons to not really like it. Not that I'm qualified to judge art objectively myself. But it's pretty possible.

at my museum, there was a bedframe and a chair with shirts and socks strewn over the corners. there was also a tangled mess of Christmas lights and garland andlan extension cords and other various things that looked like it was pulled out of grandpa's garage. "art"…

Lately, some of the art I've seen is terrible. it's literally splatters of paint, or squiggles that I could do myself. I'd love to say that art is always about talent and skill, but that's not really the case anymore. It's about networking, and about how well you can sell your brand. Is talent involved? Sometimes, but it seems that you can splatter paint on a canvas, call it conceptual or abstract, and sit back and watch people clamor to be the first one to buy a piece from the hottest new artist. I've witnessed my mother do this countless times. It's more about making sure that YOU'RE popular so that your art is popular, than actually having real talent. Who knows? Maybe I'm just jaded.

talent and skill aren't the same? usually, and most importantly, it's about how it makes the viewer feel.

Art isn't purely talent, or skill, or who you know, it's a mixture of all of these things and more. As much as I think a picture in the National Gallery of Victoria looks like crap, it's hanging there for a reason, just like all the rest. There is a thought process behind each piece which contributes to the value attached to it, as well as the ability of the artist. And then, of course, is the opinion of those judging it. I hate to state the obvious, but not everyone likes the same thing.