All of his work is heavily planned out and were influenced by many other sources (esp contemporary ones). He was a well read individual and took interest in many things. e.g. quantum physics, mathmatics. And these influences are reflected in his works of art. He still followed the guiding principles of aesthetics in his works of art though - e.g. perspective, etc etc
So as with photography, there are rules to be followed/observed - and to be not broken willynilly "in the name of art" or because it hasn't been done before. If you want to break the rules you've got to know why you have broken them and not leave it up to your audience to make up their minds.
Also, it is easy for us to criticise the critics (and I am not defending DP by saying this) but one must also be able to take the criticisms when they are put foward. No point posting pics for critique and when people do, you start lambasting them when they post negative ones. What is the point of posting then if all you want is to hear praises all the time?
You guys want DP to post his pics - sorta like saying to him - if you want to dish it out, you must be able to take it as well. While you guys have a valid point there, the flipside is that some of the people criticising DP can't take critiscism of their own work as well.
I am not condoning DP actions; far from it (it irritates me to read his rants as well) - he did seem to improve for a couple of weeks (and was tactful in his posts) but sadly he has reverted to his old ways recently.
Nonetheless, his enemies are no less sterling in their behaviour, they have been publicly goading him on CS. And I must say to DP's credit, he hasn't taken the bait.
The way I see it both sides are equally infantile in their behaviour.
And oh...because I haven't been in on this long drawn out scuffle between the DP supporters and haters, I suppose (according to some of the logic expressed here) you could say that I am not qualified to criticise or comment on it.