hmmnnnn....I think Warhol, like Marcel Duchamp has to be looked at mainly for his ideas. Like Duchamp, his work can seem silly unless you take the trouble to read why he worked the way he did, and understand what he was saying about art. Although DaDaism kinda led on to Surrealism, it was much more groundbreaking. Dali was (again, just my opinion) an astute, clever painter, an exhibitionist who latched on to other people's ideas and packaged them in a successful format. But in many ways he subverted the Surrealist movement by becoming, though his exhibitionism, synonymous with Surrealism in popular opinion. He found a horse to beat to death, found a formula that worked, and made him wealthy. I don't believe that he was sincere, or cared about anything but getting lots of attention. Art was just a vehicle that brought him fame and wealth. These are only my own views. I think when you're looking at anyone's work, you have to look not just at one piece, but at the body of their work, see what their interests are. Where one person may be interested in photo-realism, or telling a coherent story, other people may be interested in exploring colour, or telling a story in a different way, using symbols. The Fauvist movement and artists such as Klee Kandinsky Marc Chagall are all really interesting to read about......I'll shut up now, I'm lapsing into Teaching Mode.