Mike. I would not for a moment challenge you superior artistic sensibility, your nose for a good "je ne sais quoi" or your ability to deliver an edifying art lecture to us, the artistically unwashed. Rhetoric is my area of expertise, however, at least to the extent that I taught it in one of them there swanky private universities.
Your most egregious rhetorical error is to label the interest in busts as a "fad". A fad is not something that has merely recently come into popularity, but something that after a short while went out of fashion. Since busts remain popular, your "fad" label looks suspiciously like a pejorative device. It gets into even deeper rhetorical water when you make a distinction -- and correct me if I am mistaken -- between "artistic" and "less than artistic" busts. Are they all fads, soon to be cast away by a discerning, or semi discerning public? And since some full figures also lack artistic merit, what is to become of them?
I like full figures, I must admit, because of their accoutrements. God knows, I have spent enough on books on the subject, and if you show me a figure from 1854 holding an Adams revolver, I expect it to have the right kind of hammer, not something from 1860. And my preference doesn't just stop there. If the figure is a cavalryman, I'm happy if you toss in a horse as well.
After reading your most stimulating and provocative thread, I decided to check out a few manufacturers' busts, to see if I had been missing something and came across those by Michael Miniatures. Wow! Have you seen the busts of the 17th and 21st Lancers? Just think of being able to paint up those helmet badges in a scale that does them justice! Think of being able to paint a British lancer without having to paint those damned double stripes on his pants! I shall certainly be setting up a piggy bank for both of them.
So in the end, you have succeeded, willy nilly, in achieving the goal of every would-be rhetorician, you have made me, at least, change my mind on the subject of busts!