MANI - a question

Mani,

I had rather obvious question (sorry!).

I read many posts of yours and the pages of your web site as well. Apparently you have a stable drive to write about art stuff.

But, apart from thunder-bolt criticism, why wouldn't you write POSITIVE or/and ANALYTICAL reviews of art that you like. You tend to be sceptical and generally you exploit you negative attitude energy to write to usenet.

But there are good things and you (remaining a scowling sceptic) might write some positive articles as well. Since you have time and appropriate frame of mind to write about art ands artists.

I saw some posts of yours in alt.surrealism where you offered to write any manifesto for a modest fee. Challenges thrown at to you did not succeed because it would be an obvious waste and effort and time on your part, I understand. Yet, you may write something without haste and preset theme - just something you like yourself.

Critique as well as art, or literature (etc) can be negative and positive in its approach and methods.

The Art that slaps people with scary revelations and nightmarish images do not appeal anymore. It is too depressing and people don't want too much negative stuff. Sometimes its necessary, but it has been so many times that it does not seem to work anymore.

Whereas there is a noticeable call for positive, affirming, uplifting ideas in any kind of art. - Higher aesthetics, nicer techniques, brighter visions, healthier ideas...

The same goes with critique.