Unless you believe in some weird talent ceiling, I think you're putting an arbitrary line up for justifying inability. Anyone can paint or play guitar or fuck or cook better, how is one supposed to choose simplicity and the reasons for it?
That's exactly it, I believe inability can never be justified. If you want to create something, but don't have the skill to do so, then you're not (yet) an artist, if you want to create something, have the skill to create something more complex, but
choose to create something simple, then that's different.
Like I said, it's hard to explain, but it's not about whether or not someone else could do it better (there's always people who are better than you), it's about whether or not your choices in creating are limited by your ability. It's all on a personal level. If your skill is a limiting factor to your end product, rather than an extension of your ability, you're not yet an artist, at least not one who should consider himself to be developed (although it can be argued that no one ever is).
Note that I still consider myself to be in the stage where I'm working to make my skill match my imagination, and therefore don't consider myself to be a fully-developed artist either.
I'm being accused of elitism, but how can I be elitist if I don't consider myself to be a fully developed artist either?
And as long as people are still learning and developing their skill, they need critique. It's what helps them grow, not a way for others to put them down. Something a few people in this thread don't understand - thankfully Morganna does, so I don't see why the likes of neal need to interfere and play Internet White Knight.
I'm through wasting keystrokes on this stupid pissing contest. If you think the purpose of an art thread is about always giving each other shoulder-pats instead of actually helping others grow, then just keep thinking that.
I sat there like "it has an 'e' doesn't it... hmm... whatever" for about 5 minutes.
