Thanks for giving context! About the link, after submission it was automatically linkified.

"Modern art uses vague language."

Just want to throw in a paper of mine: https://philpapers.org/rec/UNBATB Hope it's not bad practice here but it addresses exactly tis point.

I thought it made sense to be more specific here and see how bullshit works in art texts, and embed it in an art history context. Two takeaways,

1. vagueness is different in different text types, but there are some general prototypes
2. Specific vagueness may have its roots in specifics of the genre. For example, "the artist interrogates x" is meant to evoke a common stereotype of artists being like researchers, finding out hidden meanings in x.

Btw. I agree that specific language can be bullshit, too. If you want to look further there is a term "obscurantism" (I don't say much about it though.)

Sorry for not finding the linkify button. It should be here according to the FAQ but it's not.