2 ms·

I think the dispute you two are having is whether or not your views are representative (respecting history as well) of the broader art community. Of course, goi

I think the dispute you two are having is whether or not your views are representative (respecting history as well) of the broader art community. Of course, going back to your original comment: > Still I don't think this is worth a form of art, given that 99% of landscape will never be seen by anyone. Oh - it's an opinion on a highly subjective matter. And indeed, you continue to use the pronoun "I" through your responses. Why anyone thought this was worth arguing against is beyond me. Similarly, why you feel that your specific opinion is obvious enough to be held by random strangers on the internet is also beyond me.

culebron21 5y ago
> why you feel that your specific opinion is obvious enough to be held by random strangers on the internet is also beyond me Not feeling that at all. I understand that whether it's worth an effort or not, is a subjective matter, and sure I use the pronoun "I" to speak for myself only. The reason I got into argument is the logical problem with the argument, that the scale or impracticality makes it art, whereas small scale would not.