For instance, the word “formal” has connotations that mean “adhering to the rules”, “acceptable” and “in agreement with the status quo”. So the words “formal presence” cannot be ignored. The implication is that this work is “acceptable to the general public” and therefore cannot be ignored. Whether this is true or not is debatable, but that conviction is what the artist wants to portray. You can’t just say it’s bullshit, even if it is.

I also can’t condemn an artist wanting to incur a “physical experience” through their work, even if it doesn’t. You can’t just condemn that desire as being “redundant”. Remember the reason you, me and anyone else on earth exists is because of a “physical experience”.

Observation: most, if not all your respondents, are sycophantic. This is sad. Especially as they appear to be in the same frame of mind as you and in agreement with the statement that “bullshit baffles brains”. Maybe you know this and are prepared to attract like-minded individuals to bolster your “bullshit baffles brains” campaign. But beware … there is no substance in their support.

If you’re going to denigrate the bullshit of artists/politicians/agents/executives/anyone/ you can’t just come out with all guns blazing and consign their commentary to the dustbin for no apparent reason. You have to justify your argument. If you don’t, your commentary is just as much bullshit as anyone else’s. In fact it’s counter-productive because most people can see through your bull argument. I totally agree that “bullshit baffles brains”, but please think it through a bit more than you have.

Nevertheless, thanks for putting up your post. At least it engenders some sort of response to whoever wants to read it.