Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Aldarc" data-source="post: 8020700" data-attributes="member: 5142"><p>Stop trying to wiggle out of the hole you dug yourself into. You were arguing that Umberlee reflects the artist's view of the sea. Arguing a positive claim is not speculating. You are right that you had no facts - apart from Ed Greenwood being Canadian - to back up your claim. Regardless of what you may believe, when one speculates or argues about "art" to make an argument, it does not mean that your position is above reproach from criticism, it means that you have to put forth evidence that supports your claim. Neither art criticism nor art history are simply people talking about their feelings and saying "there are no FACTS" the moment that someone challenges their assertions about the artist. Because you are not just saying something about the art; you are saying something about Ed Greenwood (or whoever was the author). You were making a claim about the creator and their views about the ocean. Can you not see the difference between what you are trying to assert above and what you have been arguing previously? Can you not see why you can't just retreat to "it's art and so facts don't matter" when making an assertion about the artist?</p></blockquote><p></p>