As an MFA student, I was encouraged to offer "context" for my work at critiques. Great art, I was told, often doesn't speak for itself. In fact, that art should or could be anything on its own, without a very thoughtful and specific conceptual framework that can be communicated through ordinary language, was considered naive and laughably preposterous. A visiting artist even accused me of having a "manifest destiny" attitude toward art appreciation for merely suggesting that not all great art is conceptual. So, even if I create something emotionally compelling with incredible style, I'm a hack artist if I can't explain my intention, list my influences, and connect the content I'm presenting to some cultural or social phenomena. On top of that, I'm a colonialist for thinking that taking things out of their originally prescribed cultural context can allow for meaningful interpretations.