Because her talent was in representational art, she was mocked by many of her classmates and critiqued severely by her professors. She no longer is interested in painting, because the cadre of galleries and former students she sees have convinced her that painting things that people LIKE is not really "art."
I hope she will return to painting at some point. Right now she is applying for a graduate school program in library science.
My favorite work was at a student show was a larger than life oil of a male student's genitalia, as seen when he looked down at it. (Rolling my eyes in disgust.) Now there's something one can market!
I also remember the project my daughter had in "wearable art" where she took an inordinate amount of time to make a costume that looked like a chess piece, using hula hoops and stretchable fabric. Of course, she got a lukewarm comment and a "B", while the star of the clas produced a necklace made of DEAD BABY MICE ENCASED IN RESIN. I am not making this up.
So, I have an axe to grind with the current gallery system and the pierced tongue, green-haired, black-clad no-talent sycophants who scam both the public and the government. I am glad to see this movement starting, and I will also subscribe to the magazine!
Thomas Kinkade makes scandalous amounts of money from representational art. Hopefully your daughter will have the last laugh.
I once spent 6 weeks working on a pencil drawing. When I finished it, I showed it to my Art 120 (drawing) instructor. He said (quoting as closely as possible) "well... technically drawn it's very good, probably better than I could do, but it's not real art, it's poster art. You can't make a living doing that."
I was so disillusioned at that point. I went on in school for a few years then quit, less than 40 credits from my degree. To this day I don't draw or paint the way I used to, I just don't have the same love for it anymore.