> "understanding that pretty much all art is a dialog that the creator has with past works was a big key" I'm not sure I quite see it that way. I mean, yes, yo

> "understanding that pretty much all art is a dialog that the creator has with past works was a big key" I'm not sure I quite see it that way. I mean, yes, you can view art as a progression where one artist is transforming the art of the past into new forms, but art goes beyond that. I think it'll be easier to elaborate by sticking to the musical arts rather than the visual arts. Consider any piece of music you enjoy. Sure, you can trace the origins of its style to earlier pieces of music, but to truly appreciate music you don't need to know that history, the music works as a standalone piece. It's the same with visual art, the greatest pieces require very little prior knowledge to appreciate, they instead can stand on their own merits as something that evokes emotion and/or reflection.