Generally speaking, this podcast is concise & differentiating when it comes to historical persons, eras, & is not conflating an oeuvre with anecdotal splotches of the author's biography. However, ever so often, you get curators' unchallenged views of "he used blue because he was sad" [episode on Picasso] or any such naivety, expressed quite bluntly. Which is enormously irritating. An arte factum is not an effect caused by historical circumstances, & history as a science is, usually, cautious to the extreme not to misunderstand influences of varying & shifting degree, with their impact hardly empirically at hand, as "artwork c is thus because y happened" [episode on Borges]. Why such a conflation anyway, the artists' biography is absolutely of interest in its own right?!