Okay, to be serious for a moment.
I'd say that less technical learning is necessary the more innate ability an artist has.
Said another way, I believe artists are born, not made. Tons of people do "art" only because they want to be artists. Only those born with true artistic ability can be true artists. I've seen enough crap art to realize this fact.
There are very few Michelangelo's but many Andy Warhols.
Editor's note: Of course even Michelangelo had to learn to use his tools.
Unpolished raw talent rarely succeeds on it’s own, it requires effort and development, and I see very little indication of that here.
Warhol was a massive LARP that took on a life of it’s own. He did have a certain vision and skill. His knowledge of and use of color was startling for the time but on solid ground. He defined an era with his imagery, plastic and throwaway though it may well have been, or was intended to be at the time.
He was an artist and what he produced was art, despite the fact that it was all artifice. It was street theatre.
Mr. McNaughton exhibits no such ability, his work is murky, his efforts with the human figure are juvenile, his understanding of perspective is one step above Egyptian.
Many here respond to the political message contained in his efforts, I do understand that. And, it’s a good message. Pity it’s overshadowed by crap execution, though. He can do better than this.