You're not... serious about Vallejo, are you?
He may not be but I am.
Never seen a boring Vallejo picture...
Ever...
Vallejo's art is exciting and always tells a story. Plus the babes he draws are seriously HOT!
Art as the saying goes is in the eye of the belholder.
What passes for and has passed for art over the ages is IMO proof that there have always been those around with the skill to fleece the rich out of their hard or not so hard earned money. (Which really means if I don't like it I don't consider it art
which probably invalidates what I've written below but I'm bored, have little else to do right now and am a ramblin' kind'a mood).
I imagine most would call the Mona Lisa fine art. Ever seen the thing in real life, actually seen the framed canvas hanging in the Louvre? I have. It along with most of the stuff around it is pure drecht. Why it is worth millions is beyond me.
That's not to say that some of the stuff considered art isn't good. Rembrandt's Night Watch is kind'a cool. Rodan did some good stuff. Whistler, Rockwell and Remington are pretty darn good among others. I can appreciate some, not all, of the stuff painted by the naturalists in the 1800's. Not sure who did it, Michelangelo maybe, but I stood and stared at the Pieta in the Vatican for over an hour and had to be dragged away by my Navy buddies.
That said:
IMO, most of what is considered art - like what that whackjob Picasso did is just trash and I'd bet that the artist(s) knew/know it and laugh themselves silly all the way to the bank and on the way home marvelling at the gullibility of some people.
Of course the rich folk that got fleeced, the art critics and the fleecers would just write my opinion off as that of an uneducated, uncouth, bufoon. I may be uncouth at times but I'm far from being uneducated and definitely no bufoon.