Apparently, and as I figured would happen, the reader has misunderstood my
comment.  I actually do not believe that art necessarily exists except by the
culture who terms it so.  Accordingly, I believe that anything can be art or
vice versa depending upon who gives it its authority.  However, I do not
agree with the concept of good and bad art as I have already stated.  Despite
your comment that assumes that I do not realize the implications of my
belief, I actually do see the danger of this opinion leading to a radical
relativism.  However, I also see the danger of your opinion, which you seem
to think is correct, continuing the high and low culture problem which causes
individuals, such as certain graffiti artists, to react against this
traditional, and may I add, dying, concept. It seems that there is a
misunderstanding of the larger problem, which is why there is such a thing as
graffiti.  As long as "art" is placed in a position that makes it exist
outside of culture and heralded as "the work of a master" or some other
mysterious thing, there is the risk of continuing the myth that culture is
divided and that good art is only what has been allowed into the canon.  If
you see Basquiat, you will find that this artist had to play the game of
other white artists in order to get himself, an African American, accepted
into the canon.

Once again this is only my opinion and although I am obviously responsing to
your posting, I do not mean to offend you.

Warm regards,

Nicole Basso