One of the fundamental flaws in this otherwise humorous diatribe is the fact that Picasso wasn't a "Picasso artist," Seurat wasn't a "Seurat artist," and so forth. It should be noted that classifying a programmer in terms of a famous artist would be like classifying Picasso as a "Bjarne Stroudstrup artist - having so many different perspectives on the same image which ends up making the whole thing an incoherent mess," or Andy Warhol as a "Niklaus Wirth artist - creates an image which is accessible to everyone but only truly understandable to a few."

That isn't to say that there isn't any sort of overlap, but it'd probably be better to refer to them as "cubist programmers" and "pointilist programmers" and the like. The genres were defined by a few notable artists, yes, but defining the entire genre by a single artist is typically unfair.

Now, if you were to say, for example, "Leonardo daVinci - RMS" and make other such direct comparisons, then the metaphor holds up better. But otherwise, it's kind of insulting to pointilist programmers, as well as pointilist artists, to make it seem as though there is only Seurat.