Can we raise the bar on the level of critique in here - ? Or is this sort of typical? (no offense intended - but I'm not sure how you can really learn anything with 'i like' and 'i don't like'). Perhaps a statement BY Friedlander ABOUT his work might be somewhat in order - so that we can approach the work in a way that doesn't come from our own egos...? Does that sound reasonable? Or should I just piss off?
(just trying to make things a bit more interesting here!)