[xook]

Nowhere on that website was there a "blanket statement" about all art. They said "I believe," not "It is stated fact."

I also share the opinion that having no interpretation can be either or since often I have no interpretation outside of "it looks neat" for something that later I find out has deep meaning for the author that is shared by others. I don't personally see it, but that's what I think.

[phailhaus]

Sure, but if you said "This art is just trying to be neat", you'd be wrong. What you're basically saying is "how I feel when I look at art is how I feel when I look at art", which is a meaningless statement. Like, sure? But we're talking about interpretations of art, not the validity of your emotions, which can certainly be correct or not depending on the artist.

I think the author has conflated the two because in their art, they are explicitly inviting you to draw your own interpretations. That's not true of all artists.