Why indeed, given beauty and "art" is always in the eye of the beholder! I've often thought of just getting a great big canvas a paint ball gun and see how well I'd do creating A psychedelic blue polls mark two, and sell it to a government, interested in yet another set of the emperor's new clothes, and cheap as chips at 10 or 12 million? And open to some really imaginative interpretations! Oh look, there's and abstract cow or sorry, bull. And there's a couple in the 629 position. Deadful don't look Sammy.

Seriously Sells, I like the classic female nude and artfully posed either on the side and recumbent or facing full frontal, with a wisp of lace strategically draped over the hairy bits, and breasts that haven't discovered gravity yet.

Not too easy to tire of those views? And worth every penny of the $25.50 I paid at a Gold Coast flea market, during the eighties, for two fine, Rubenesque, gold leaf framed, deceased estate examples.

As the grieving vietnamese war widow remarked, the frames were worth at least as much?

But is that any worse than this image wherein the "hero", representing ever single living-breathing-feeling human being, and humankind as an indivisible totality, is systematically beaten to death.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0335345/mediaviewer/rm4251170816
Remembering that film images are now easily the dominant and most powerful art form, and that at the time this unspeakably vile sado-masochistic snuff/spatter movie was promoted as a powerful mission tool for communicating the "good news"

"All we have left is art wank."

I am afraid that sums it up very well.

David