Well, sure. But: I think the aesthetic part of one's reaction to art is the least interesting to argue about. You like it? It evokes a thought or a feeling? You want to relate that to someone around you? Great. It's even useful (sometimes) while reading criticism because it gives you a sense of what the critic is like. But it's not something you can convince someone of.
> [...] up one thing that bugs me about Hirst. He's participating in,
> I won't say causing, a process that leans toward turning art into a
> kind of financial blood sport.
I think Art will survive this period; I think we're in the late stage of it (that article seems to say this as well), and we'll be on to something new. In the mean time, what's wrong with a little blood sport among richies? We need more blood sport up there :-)
/jordan