i find there's nothing uglier than a masterpiece of technical skill without imagination. my personal POV (or $0.02) my field is bioarchitecture, i see this everyday: listen to your heart and tell me if you'd like to live in a modern ipertechnical building or in a small town on a greek island - don't let me be misunderstood, when i saw ridley scott's blade runner many years ago i was amazed: there is a certain charme and imaginative deep in a high-tech metropolis, but i like the soul landscapes more. to be healthy you need to feed your soul. there is also a charme in "technical" pictures, but look at the childern paintings: there are no practice and particular skills, but only feeling, emotion - and that's why i like them. this was the way that (one for all) picasso followed bad architecture and bad art make humans sick and deviant. quote: art is in the eye of the beholder but the beholder belongs to a group/culture/society/religion art is also a powerful control medium leonardo worked for the pope and the "big" lords and princes. his art counts a lot of christian sacred images, because the beholders were christians of the 15th century - he'd never "published" a picture called "omosexual love" ok, i broke the slot machine this was my $0.02 pile