#artcriticism is trending on Twitter today, thanks to a symposium at Rotterdam’s Witte de With Center titled I AM FOR AN ART CRITICISM THAT…, which will continue this afternoon at 4 PM. You can stream it live here. Participants include critics, poets, curators, art historians, journalists, heads of arts funding agencies, and heads of masters programs.
The symposium text notes that public opinion is now driven by art news reportage, while “long form arts coverage itself is being reduced to ‘editor’s picks’, coded rating systems, and short summary reviews, with little space in which to substantiate their claims.” The focus on the format may explain why only one artist, Barbara Visser, is listed as a participant. Still, it’s a missed opportunity to hear back from artists about how their work is discussed; hopefully we’ll see some of that happen on Twitter.
The panels all start with the phrase “I AM FOR AN ART CRITICISM THAT…,” and this morning’s was “HAS A VOICE.” Here are a few of the highlights from Hyperallergic’s Hrag Vartanian and Europe and Amsterdam-based panelists, artist Barbara Visser, poet and critic Quinn Latimer, art criticism professor Maarten Doorman, H-ART’s editor-in-chief Marc Ruyters, critic Ingrid Commandeur, and moderator Vivian Sky Rehberg, the course director of the Piet Zwart Institute.
Barbara Visser wished for a ghostwriter when tasked when writing a “positive” txt about art. @wdwcentrum #artcriticism
— Nat Muller (@nat_muller) November 28, 2012
#artcriticism Barbara Visser: “Am I the only one of my tribe here?” before spotting few others in the audience. Believe me we tried, dear B!
— defneayas (@defneayas) November 28, 2012
Barbara Visser: “This has to be a two-way dialogue” #artcriticism
— defneayas (@defneayas) November 28, 2012
@hragv questions #artcriticism being a marketing tool: writers should be creative and play with the system! — Witte de With(@WDWcentrum) November 28, 2012
Ew. RT @gregorg: without [our] #artcriticism “the general audience does not have the tools” to understand the institutions’ projects. — Paddy Johnson (@artfagcity) November 28, 2012
Latimer: “Language comes first. Medium is priority. Style is character. Current criticism is suffering from lack of style.” “#artcriticism
— defneayas (@defneayas) November 28, 2012
Marc Ruyters:the art critic killed himself,marketing is to blame (yes with lack of vision), art world has lost audience 1/2 #artcriticism
— Nat Muller (@nat_muller) November 28, 2012
1/2 #artcriticism @wdwcentrum Marc Ruyters: writers need specific skills. Amen! — Nat Muller (@nat_muller) November 28, 2012
Comments at @wdwcentrum #artcriticism do not make art critics look good. Marketing is to blame for the suicide of the art critic? #bullshit — Paddy Johnson (@artfagcity) November 28, 2012
@artfagcity marketing is too often becoming perceived role of critics. critic’s job to transcend the PR binder. cool mission if you ask me. — visitor design (@visitordesign) November 28, 2012
@artfagcity @wdwcentrum If you take the view that the art journalist is marketed as the art critic, then yes—it obfuscates market & academic — Artypes (@Artypes) November 28, 2012
@artfagcity “It would be sad to say the situation is just hopeless”-Maarten Doorman — Witte de With(@WDWcentrum) November 28, 2012
@artfagcity and as ‘individual personality’ moves closer toward ‘media industry,’ *marketing* means many things. — visitor design (@visitordesign) November 28, 2012
@artfagcity That marketing comment was from one person. #artcriticism
—Hrag (@hragv) November 28, 2012
Speakers agree #artcriticism is to select, contextualize, look a lot, not only embrace enthusiasm about art but about language, fearlessness
— defneayas (@defneayas) November 28, 2012
Do artcritics not realize that we need more arguments and more deepening articles? They only talk about the why of #artcriticism :s
— tiesch (@tiestenbosch) November 28, 2012
Comments on this entry are closed.