Fascinating and mostly spot-on article by AO Scott in the New York Times today about “The Paradox of Art as Work,” or what I like to call Art in the Age of Digital Reproduction. I like the film critic’s broad cultural references, especially Gillian Welch. I am particularly mulling over this sentence: “The idea that everyone can be an artist — making stuff that can be shared, traded or sold to a self-selecting audience of fellow creators — sits awkwardly alongside the self-contradictory dream that everyone can be a star.” I think I disagree with the predicate: These may be antagonistic and possibly even revolutionary notions, not complementary ones. This is actually a topic I devoted independent study to at USC, under Henry Jenkins, and may well take up again. What do you think: Is the idea that everyone can be an artist akin to the idea that everyone can be a star?