> Picasso mastered "typical" art before he engaged in the abstract forms, right? That's what makes him special. So in a hypothetical future where memory of Pic

> Picasso mastered "typical" art before he engaged in the abstract forms, right? That's what makes him special. So in a hypothetical future where memory of Picasso's 'typical art' mastery has been lost, that which makes Picasso special will also be lost? > This is such a techbro opinion Scoffing at Picasso and (particularly) Pollock seems very mainstream in the working classes (and has been for as long as that art has existed.) It's not a "tech" thing.