I strongly urge everyone to read this amazing response. Specifically the butterfly analogy of criticism. While Jason talks about how he feels he won't be able to understand how beauty is created unless he analyzes and dissects it, I feel that you can't learn that way. Art, in my opinion, is not something that's constructed, therefore it's impossible for someone else to break it into parts that can then be rebuilt by someone else to produce the same piece. I think you absorb and relate to art. It's an emotional process and not a scientific one. As a huge hater of critics in general, I found Dave's words inspirational.

I love the way he chooses to construct his readings. It shows what a full-of-life person he is and finding an artist who is not full-of-himself is refreshing.

His words relating to how you cannot judge other people and what they do is well put. Here's the part that best sums up that subject-matter: "What kind of small-hearted person wants an artist to adhere to a set of rules, to stay forever within a narrow envelope which we've created for them?" Think about that one for a while.

He addresses the issue I find so fascinating about some people I've met who consider themselves a good judge of art. Just because something is popular doesn't automatically make it 'unreal.' What a twisted way to think!

I love that he talks about not saying no and how he mentions that he doesn't get along with people who say no. I've met many people who think refusal is a form of coolness. Real people are never too busy or too important. They don't worry about the messages they send and the way people might judge what they do or say.

"What matters is that you want to see and make and do, on as grand a scale as you want, regardless of what the tiny voices of tiny people say." If we could all live with this frame of mind, not only would we all be happier, but the world would be such a better place.

Thanks to Jason for pointing me towards this amazing article and I am glad people like Dave exist in this world.