When looking at at piece of art do you immediately say, oh yes, this is art; I must look at it in a certain way? Or, upon going to a museum or gallery, tell yourself this is a place to find art, therefore every little thing in here must be art? I don’t believe art can be defined in any meaningful way. The picture above is art to me, with balance and materials of primordial origin. Who is to say that anything perceived of as artistic design is or isn’t art, whether of no designer’s origin or of an omnipetant one. Truly, it seems to me that everything is a piece of art in progress. or art is a piece of everything in progress. Art is in everything and everything is art. There are differences in looking at life as there are differences in looking at anything else; however, art critics should be ashamed of themselves. Can art be defined as negative or positive? or does art (you can substitute the planet and everything on it or around it) define everything. When we look at anything we should be able to see the art or the artfulness in it, even if we are looking something compellingly repugnant. The planet and its art only are and nothing we can do can change anything, or at least very minimally in the long run. One of the most common mistakes we make is in thinking that our limited time here will really affect art. The time span we’re looking at is immense and more than immense and we are too immersed in our own importance allow that realization to affect us. Should we back off of the critics game and just appreciate what we’ve got or stay in the game and risk the effects lack of open-mindedness on us?