Reply to comment

-- Interest in putting the present into his work

-- "outsider art" -- the tour guide seemed to idolize him as a sensitive soul, seemed to laugh off the problematic things -- cast him as "sensitive soul"

-- He did stuff without people's consent (face, property)

-- It's beautiful but he hurt people in the name of art.

-- solipcistic.  "I don't know if you think therefore I don't know if you are."

-- By hanging up the article, he's making the documentary into one more broken plate. He himself is looking at his art as validating himself.

-- He portrays himself as a God.

-- Shiva 

-- Cultural appropriation.  

-- Does he have a right to do what he does?

Folk art?  Would the people who made it describe it as folk art?

Does he call his own art folk art?

"Art of unknown origin that reflects traditional values of a society."

Anything outside of where we are creating art from is "folk art" = other people's art?

Radical inclusiveness?  

Tour guide -- 

breaking accuracy

She seemed to speak for him.  

self-indulgent

Is it possible to break without being an asshole?

Breaking on behalf of others . . . 

More complete?

He thinks his work is a Temple.

Being landlord -- 

Did he restore or gentrify that neighborhood?

What is the rent on that place?

Vibe from the Gardens not so solipcistic

The article has a bias.

What does it mean to be self-taught?