ARTelevision

Understood.

I think it's clear that this "artist" is an entertainer.
I begin with traditional academic categories, which - while they lag a bit behind contemporary idioms - do offer some continuity with what is commonly described as the history of art.

Then, as a professional in this field - as a creator, teacher, and critic - I apply my own postmodern standards to things aesthetic.

While many, if not most, popular entertainers aspire to the status of artist, I prefer not to simply bend over backward in accepting their claim.

It seems to me we have a clear category known as "entertainment" operating in our culture. It also seems clear to me that this performer falls squarely into that camp. Of course, it's a matter of personal opinion.

Basically, Stompy, the most important issue you raised is one of partisanship. I really just want to make it clear that, in this instance, my refusal to acknowledge the value of the work in question is not based on partisan politics.

__________________
create evolution