For something to have value, it has to be rare. Artists, writers, etc. are devaluing their work by making too much of it. That’s why Leonardo, Picasso (and some others) are great: when they started to repeat themselves, they moved on, voluntarily.
In order not to offend them, a good portraitist is painting people the way they perceive themselves, not as they are in reality. Thus portraits of famous people aren’t valid historical documents.
I always thought that all human talents have roots in the same core. I never could understand intellectuals with a deaf ear, or no sense of humor, or arts.
The problem with art is that you can’t make it too obvious, since it becomes banal, or too complicated, falling in danger to be too esoteric. Should I even bother to stress out which extreme artists preferred better?
