Hehehehe Mac. I hold by my statement. It may not be art to you - but if Jane Doe considers it to be art... it IS art. Whether the dealers, other artists, other viewers agree or not. To that one person it is art. And that makes what they are viewing... art. Maybe only to THEM, but to THEM it is still art. Dealers, critics and the like can take a flying leap as far as I'm concerned. They are not who decides if something is or isn't art. They only do the same thing our fictional Jane Doe is doing. They are looking at it, and forming an opinion. Just because someone says to me that something is art, doesn't make it art for me. I agree with the cowpat / pile of sh!t comment above. You can tell me that a bunch of cowpats arranged in a pile is art - I will never accept that as art because to ME it isn't. But that doesn't make it any less Art to the person who has decided that it is Art. The trouble is, that if you have "Art Critic" attached to your name, your opinion on what is / isn't art is given infinitely more weight than my uninformed and blatantly "I like / I don't like" opinion and people are more apt to agree with the critic than they are with Joe Public who doesn't know squat about "Art". However - just because I don't like it, doesn't mean to say I don't say it's art. There is art out there that I would define as such - even though I utterly dislike it. (i.e. "Modern Art" has never appealed to me. I like to be able to identify what it is and often I really struggle with that - but yes, it's Art... it's just not something I would hang on my wall.) Anyway, that's how I see it :) Silke

Silke