The response?
"Still drawing cartoons, I see."
Okay, I'll admit, some art is more impressive than others. Not everyone can do this:
But... really? Is the above art form the only acceptable, professional art form? I would disagree. And so would Picasso. So would Van Gogh. So would Munch ('Scream'-man.)
I'm not saying that we shouldn't strive to get better with our art. This is an example of the growth of my art:
Now, it's not a huge improvement, and there are still plenty of flaws, but it's an improvement, and you know what? It's the art form that makes me happy! I mean, sure, the masterpiece paintings are amazing (especially when you can see them in person) but I just like the cartoony/anime art form. It appeals to me.
So, to cut a long story short, I don't think we should be so dismissive of art that isn't a 'masterpiece'. Sometimes it's even what makes the artist happy, so if you go: "Are you still drawing that?" it's like saying: "You're still eating pizza?" "You're still wearing non-skinny jeans?" "You still have a dog?" and you know how ridiculous and stuck-up that sounds?
Besides, some of us want to do more than paint farm-life, and some of us should, I think, honestly. Because God has given us all unique interests and skills and the choice and opportunities to use them to glorify him. Some of us could be painters of masterpieces, others could be comic-book artists. And may I just say, Calvin and Hobbes had a greater impact on me as a kid than Rembrant did.
