Introspection POL-style

A post which might be described as contentious - among other things - suggests that we are saccharinely sweet and supportive to each other here.  I have - as is my wont - reflected on whether there's any truth in that; the possibility that we're becoming a cosy and coy coterie.... Of course, I'm about to find us Not Guilty: always best to start with the verdict before you've considered the evidence - possibly I've slightly misunderstood the cornerstone of English justice there, but pressing on.... Of course it's a danger, in any forum, any group, any art class - not so much in any political party, of which I have quite different experience - that people will huddle defensively like musk-oxen contronted by a pack of wolves.  (In political parties, the wolves are within, and gnawing at your ankles.)  I don't think the "supportive" element is a bad thing, for so long as it doesn't lead to the massaging of egos, or the avoidance of needed truth.  It may be that the person making these observations, whom for the sake of argument we will name Justin, believes that we flatter each other - bask in the warm glow of complacency - will not say if, for example, a work posted is actually a stinker..... I don't know if that IS what he meant, because he wasn't entirely specific; following his comments through, he suggested the forum was generally boring, and I suppose it can be: most human discourse tends to be pedestrian, illuminated by occasional flashes of, if not brilliance, then at least interest.  It's just that he didn't notice the "interest" part.  Well, fair enough, and other clichés... that's what he thought, that's what he said, and he got a response which was, in all conscience, gentle, and supportive, if not saccharine, enough for most people.  Possibly not much need to keep stirring the pot, but there we are. It's good for a forum - and all those previously indicated groups - to take a look at itself now and then; and of course we have the occasional slightly daft conversation; and of course we have got to know each other, so far as one can on social media, and do not say what might be on our minds, or at least give free-rein to it.  For example, one might suggest that Jones is a wordy old bore who long ago fell in love with the dictionary and touch-typing - would I be hurt by that (try it and see...)?  Well perhaps, if it were said with malice; but as it's generally true, no, I wouldn't.  Much.   We don't say such things though because we don't need to: I wouldn't wander into your living room and start disparaging your soft covers and scatter-cushions; nor would I remark that you seem to be a stranger to furniture polish....  It's unnecessary and provocative.  What Justin dislikes is what most of us would think of as social lubricant - just the amount of semi-sincere oleaginousness that one needs to get through the average day.  Of course any social media forum that wishes to keep its members will have a soupcon of that; and perhaps it can cloy now and then.  JT is perhaps not a man who plays by others' social rules - but perhaps it's worth his reflecting that without them, no forum, no group, no joint place of work, can function.

Well said, and more concisely than I managed. 

Sharpies on canvas are actually NOT a very good idea, but of course you know that but have yielded to the truth that they can be helpful.  Pardon the pedantic note, but just in case anyone else was thinking of taking to them.....  I can live with your dislike of Turner, especially if you'd consider sharing your gin bottle, and the only time I'd worry about hair-dryers on paintings is if you're using oil; might not be too good an idea with thick acrylic, either, but plenty of us use them to speed up the drying of watercolour and water-based paint.   Sharpies, be it said, are fun to use - but bleed through paper, and might well damage the priming of canvases.  Pity, but there it is.   If it's confession time - I am not hooked on Dalí, Picasso (largely because he painted and drew - and sold - too much Dreck among the gold), Kandinsky, or - oh come on, find someone controversial for whom your dislike might actually shock - or - or - no, I give up: I actually admire the vast majority of artists.  Damn, I was hoping to stir up a bit of argy-bargy there.  Kahindé Wiley (or something like that): really don't like him, but i doubt that he's widely known outside of the USA.  Paints presidents and the like, surrounded by exotic foliage - ghastly.  Well done in its way, but ghastly.  Then for a really rotten painter, the late Thomas Kinkaid (spelling probably wrong, but he's not worth the trouble of getting it right). Anyway, I run on, as I will if no one thinks to throw a bag of spanners at me.