Wednesday, October 26, 2005

On Trial: a new paper

When forming an opinion it is better to see art work first hand. The experience and concrete description of the work helps define the criticism. When the writer is an echo chamber, forming opinions based on another writer's experiences, the experiences are not as broad nor flexible because the (latter) writer has narrowed their focus for clarity sake. Some key pieces of the puzzle are often missing. (Although, the echo idea is an interesting angle for forming an opinion, and opening up creative options, based on conjecture rather than fact.) But after reading some articles by Jed Perl and Donald Kuspit I decided I might actually have an opinion of my own worth exploring.
Whether an artwork is considered valuable or not, either dollarwise or in a social or historical context, or whether artwork is even worth writing about, has become the an important issue in the last decade or two. Donald Kuspit's "I Wanna be an Art Star" in Art New England, June/July 2003, Jed Perl's "Oh Cool" in The New Republic, Sept. 2003, and "Beyond Belief" Feb. 2004, have presented some enlightening commentary regarding the true value of contemporary art. These articles parallel the Grayson Perry, Times article Gerard suggested reading last Monday, where the word "clever" becomes the dark casm between "good art" and just a cool idea.
So now I get to write my own personal opinion, and I can back it up by echoing great art criticism and by using examples I've seen first hand.

Note: If you want to see a critic rip the art hierarchy, "Beyond Belief" is for you. Mike would probably like this one too. Perl goes off on a related tangent discussing modern art and its relationship/counterrelationship to figurative work. Happy reading and writing.

Bumper Sticker: How's my spelling. Phone 555-555-5555

1 comment:

Unknown said...

If you send me copies of those, I'll make PDF's available for your classmates.
It's been funny to read reviews of Perl's new book, in which everyone feels compelled to comment on his personality as a slightly curmudgeonly intellectual generally dissatisfied with the art of the moment. Is it me, or is the thought that someone might be able to discern the broad outlines of your "personality" through your work mroe than a little disturbing?