As stated above, I am not really interested in critiques of subculture; only in the art produced.
Of course, someone could very easily provide a strong argument that furry fandom and furry art are inseperable. The problem I've been seeing in both inside and outside criticism of the art is that rarely is the art discussed as an object of value in and of itself; furries tend to talk about themselves mostly, while outsiders tend to dismiss the genre entirely before moving on to more general discussions of animation/comics/children's literature/whatever, or also talk about the furry fandom.
Since this is the last post, I suppose my major point is I'm rather bored with constant discussions of the furry fandom and what that means, and would rather have a discussion about the art, and what it means, if for no other reason than a change of pace.
As stated above, I am not really interested in critiques of subculture; only in the art produced.
Of course, someone could very easily provide a strong argument that furry fandom and furry art are inseperable. The problem I've been seeing in both inside and outside criticism of the art is that rarely is the art discussed as an object of value in and of itself; furries tend to talk about themselves mostly, while outsiders tend to dismiss the genre entirely before moving on to more general discussions of animation/comics/children's literature/whatever, or also talk about the furry fandom.
Since this is the last post, I suppose my major point is I'm rather bored with constant discussions of the furry fandom and what that means, and would rather have a discussion about the art, and what it means, if for no other reason than a change of pace.