Context is necessary to say anything useful about art though. Would you review that image above the same way if you didn't know Xianjaguar is a proud Christian? Or if it were a page from a commercial fables book rather than a private commission?
I see what you are concerned about here, but be careful not to confuse trolling like Keller's with actual criticism of the furry fandom. Old school fans called it "criticism" just because they didn't know better, but nowadays we know better. Drawing fat guys and making zoophilia jokes is not criticism because it doesn't explain anything and doesn't show understanding of anything, it merely shows that the author doesn't like such realities and wants to make fun of them.
Stuff like "Creature Comfort" instead is real criticism, because it doesn't judge what it describes and it offers a rational explaination of *why* the fandom is the way it is. It shows that it's possible to discuss seriously about the fandom - if the author is up to the task.
Of course I'm not saying that all criticism of furry art needs to delve into fan psychology, but the critic needs to be aware of the motivations behind the art IMHO, else he risks to miss important things.
Context is necessary to say anything useful about art though. Would you review that image above the same way if you didn't know Xianjaguar is a proud Christian? Or if it were a page from a commercial fables book rather than a private commission?
I see what you are concerned about here, but be careful not to confuse trolling like Keller's with actual criticism of the furry fandom. Old school fans called it "criticism" just because they didn't know better, but nowadays we know better. Drawing fat guys and making zoophilia jokes is not criticism because it doesn't explain anything and doesn't show understanding of anything, it merely shows that the author doesn't like such realities and wants to make fun of them.
Stuff like "Creature Comfort" instead is real criticism, because it doesn't judge what it describes and it offers a rational explaination of *why* the fandom is the way it is. It shows that it's possible to discuss seriously about the fandom - if the author is up to the task.
Of course I'm not saying that all criticism of furry art needs to delve into fan psychology, but the critic needs to be aware of the motivations behind the art IMHO, else he risks to miss important things.