> What you've written, though, is a very, very lazy critique of art appreciation.
No it isn't, because I haven't written a critique at all. I shared a fairly simple opinion broadly in response to some people's reactions of some other people's negative reactions to this work.
> You make a real juvenile start just calling it "snobbery,"
The ad hominem here is inappropriate.
> I'm sure Centre Pompidou is objectively "way more interesting" than the Louvre, why does the Louvre even exist? Thanks for clearing that up.
Objectively? How have you read a position of objectivity into my comment? This is a discussion about art, which is inherently subjective.
> What, did you go to Paris once and have a bad time?
I love Paris. I haven't the slightest clue where you got this idea.
> So: why should we--why should anyone--care about your half-arsed opinion? ... and why should I respond?
Good question. Why did you respond?
> therefore people who do understand that thing are, what, somehow insulting you?
No. I have neither said nor implied that. You should try interpreting other people's comments more charitably in future.
> Just shut up. Let people appreciate things and shut up.
These words — and most of your words that precede them — are entirely inappropriate for this forum.
If you would like to attack me personally, I'd be happy to share my personal phone number with you and you can say all of this to my face.