yes!

to quote Barbara Rose from "American Painting: The Eighties "...the drive toward novelty, which began to seem impossible to attain within the strictly delimitative conventions of easel painting, was further encouraged by the two dominant critical concepts of the sixties and seventies: the first was the idea that qualtiy was in some way inextricably linked to or even a by-product of innovation; the second was that since quality was not definable, art only needed to be interesting instead of good."

so funny it's awesome. What is interesting and what is good? She had quite specific ideas & mine don't match at all but I think the simplification of the idea is interesting/funny. I do think that for some, the urge/need to be innovative becomes paralyzing.

A former professor of mine, Pat Schuchard (who, if you ever are lucky enough to get to hang out with will leave you feeling so zen and encouraged about art and life) once asked "what if you could make a painting that was as good as a car?" I struggle to figure out what that means but I love the question. We make things. If we are taking responsibility to release these things into the world, we should be confident or attempt to at least make them as good as other things in the world. What if you could make a painting that was "as good as" your fully stocked ipod?