May I ask one question to those who may aimlessly wander upon this site? Under what definition can modern art claim to be art? Van Gogh, Monet, Rembrandt, and company all possessed the ability to illustrate a common scene with incredible technique. Close inspection of each masterpiece reveals hundreds of precise brush strokes delivering the intended artistic impression. The amount of drugs necessary to bring a human to place a single color on a canvas and call it art is unfathomable. One example of my recent trip to the Philly Art museum was a porcelain sink with two legs (looked like doll legs) coming out of the wall so they dangled over the sink. First, I could create that if I was hit in the head hard enough. I define art as something I can not do. I can see the same picture Van Gogh may have seen but there is no way I will ever be able to reproduce his work. Jackson Pollack's splatter paintings are a prime example of my point. A monkey could create the exact same picture probably in less time and you would only have to feed it bananas. Secondly, why? Don’t give me that crap of why not? Modern Art is a waste of perfectly good canvas, paint, time, and space. I am trying to discover why this crap bothers me so much and I think I have found the source. Why didn’t I think of it first? I could easily manufacture this "art" and people will spend hundreds of dollars buying junk. My career could have been so simple rather then climbing my way up the corporate ladder.