Like I said it's not an attack on his argument. It's not even a part of my argument. I'm not saying that he's wrong because of his prejudices (real or not), am I?>exactly what happens in these threads, again and again
This isn't your usual cringe or vendetta thread. To repeat, this thread is literally for GOOD art that have a few glaring mistakes in them.>I pointed out how people keep dragging out middle ground artists to trash,
There's nobody dragging anyone down to trash. Even the OP admitted he likes the artwork. It's just that he noticed these few unfortunately glaring mistakes in them.>Your thing about the books makes no sense
Elaborate> with seemingly no result or self progress.
There's no absolutely way to prove that, and any efforts will prove unproductive as this is an anonymous board. Whether or not the contents of this thread will be useful is entirely on you.
You can choose to use it as a vehicle to be bitter and jealous about other artists or you can productively integrate these little observations that you may or may not have noticed before into your own works.
Again there's nothing objectively wrong with the core idea of critical observation of artworks which is what this thread about. Their motives can be questionable and people can choose to abuse it, but it shouldn't be used as a reason to invalidate them when their observations are absolutely correct.
If you want something to attack, then attack those specific invalid criticisms you can find, and not the idea of criticism itself. Or just ignore them, don't let them ruin the thread, especially since this thread starts with what I think is a decent and level-headed OP.>You haven’t countered anything,
I have repeatedly, I don't know what you're talking about.