More on the 4-year-old artist "scandal"

On Tuesday, Greg posted an article about a four-year-old artist who is immersed in scandal because her dad may have "helped" her.

Here's another take on this situation, delivered with more than a hint of animosity toward modern artists.

My question is simple: I can understand why someone wouldn't like Jackson Pollock's paintings (one pictured here), for example, but why do so many people harbor so much hatred for people that don't paint concrete concepts? I think good art can be about more than the physical manifestations of the work itself, like a concept album for a rock band, which carries an idea above and beyond just the songs on the record.

Likewise, a lot of modern art is not just for the viewer, it's also a representation of the artist. People are constantly up in arms about these artists making money because "they could do it themselves." The fact is that they didn't, and if someone wants to buy this art, what concern is that of the offhand critic?

We need to do a better job of supporting unique creativity in this country as it is, but that's beside my point. Art is whatever you want to call it, so if you don't think abstract painting is art, that is perfectly acceptable. But other people do, so it art to them, and many of them are affected deeply by it. Try and relax.