Hi Simon, patrick & others,
I've just finished writing a paper about DIWO, which relates to the
subject being discussed in detail.
Currently wondering where to put it - perhaps on P2P FOUNDATION WIKI...
Chat soon.
marc
Looks like a few months worth of themed discussions here for empyre or
CRUMB.
best
Simon
On 14 Dec 2012, at 15:13, Lichty, Patrick wrote:
In Irving Sandler's "Art Criticism Today" in the Brooklyn Rail,
there were a number of issues put forth, including the death of
polemic, the "molecularization" (Guattari) of discourse about art
away from any sort of movements, and laid out a number of questions
about the state of criticism in today's art ecosystem. First, I
salute the mention of Artforum's original mission in combating the
emergent cycle of art-capital as the "art industry" became the
gluttonous frenzy of fairs, galleries and countless sycophants
banging at the gates.
Don't misunderstand me. I am not a "sour grapes" artist who is
discounting the art market because I have had no successes. I have
either shown in or been involved with projects for the Whitney,
Venice, and Maribor biennials, and am in several permanent
collections. But I don't drive a Lexus either, and this is not why I
left a lucrative job in engineering to pursue art, either. I did it
for love and for the fact that I was supposed to be blind by 30, and
now at 50, am blessed with having made the best decision of my life.
Also, I am a "New Media Artist/Curator" which made Hyperallergic's
"Top 10 Most Pathetic" list this year, so if I were truly concerned
with being a blue-chip darling, I should have gone and slit my wrists
long ago. That being said, I'd like to reply to Mr. Sandler's
article, and then to his answers.
Mr. Sandler mentions Jerry Saltz' derision of "art fair frenzy,
auction madness, money lust, and market hype" and whether it
influences criticism. Let's just say that it does, and set that
aside. Sandler then says, "that as critics we should investigate the
art industry's values, infrastructure, and practices." To that, I
say, "Well, that's just great.", as I wrote in a recent entry of the
blog RealityAugmented that curation, and might I say criticism as
well, is no longer a pyramid, but a logarithmic "power curve". Here,
the pyramid's sides sag into a steep saddle where power is
concentrated amongst the metaphorical 1%, then to a eroding group of
"Lower-upper and Middle-Class" critics, curators and gallerists.
They fight to stay above today's sea of pop-up, residential, and
independent spaces, which sit upon an even larger sea of online
content. At first, it might seem a bit depressing, but I think there
is a silver lining that ties back to Artforum, and to a seminal book
by activist art scholar Gregory Sholette.
The point is that there is too much made of the art market, and to be
perfectly honest, that isn't where the best art is. In Sholette's
book, Dark Matter, he describes that like dark matter comprises 95%
of the known universe, the majority of art practice is unseen by the
magazine critics, gallerists and the lot. Much of the activist work
he describes is largely uncrecognized by the institution, although
the PAD/D archives is at the MoMA, and Marc Fischer, et al's
Temporary Services projects has been featured globally. My contention
is that the bulk of art is at the bottom of the "long tail" of the
sagging pyramid that I speak of, with its pop-ups, apartment shows,
and the like, and in some ways, it reminds me of the 1960's where
studio events, Happenings, and so on proliferated much art of the time.
However, it is also important to note that the Internet has totally
changed the landscape, and has produced abysses of art across the
gamut, along with the abject curatorial gesture of the "like" and
funding methods like Kickstarter and stores like Etsy. This is not
the 60's, nor do I intend to imply it is. I also believe that the
"art world" to wonder about its primacy in this age is also akin to
the recording industry's worries about downloads and independent
distribution. And with self-curated image sites like Pinterests and
tumblrs (realizing these will become anachronistic in the next five
years), curatorial practice is upended and possibly even banalized,
even though quasi-movements like The New Aesthetic use these
technologies for dissemination of its ideologies.
Bottom line: the 'art world' currently only matters to a given body
of people, and those people are of Sandler's 'art industry'; but that
is to ignore certain things. The first of these is a larger
definition of Sholette's 'dark matter' that culture is awash with to
include all the grass-roots art production that happens today which
is off the tabloid radar. This assertion also makes visible the idea
that art is only as good as its value in the art world ecology of
capital, which becomes less and less accessible as the pyramid sags,
and more power concentrates in the hands of fewer people. The work,
in following, affects fewer people. Therefore, I want to frame my
response to Irving Sandler's questions in saying that as the art
world becomes smaller and more concentrated, it becomes more
irrelevant to culture and the importance of 'dark matter' starts to
take over.
In the online forum of the Brooklyn Rail, Sandler put forth a series
of questions that I'd like to address, framed by my discussion above.
1. What should art criticism be doing?
The question is also "What is art criticism doing now?", to which I
would say that it is talking to the fine art industry, which is
receding and ascending simultaneously. What should it do? Perhaps it
should look at art and artists in a larger context and reflect on
artistic practice in a sociocultural perspective in the vein of
curators like Sholette and Thompson.
2. What are the issues or polemics, if any, for art criticism?
This certainly has to do with legitimacy, relevance and audience in
terms of traditional criticism and the rise of influential art blogs.
Who is respected by the contemporary audience, and why? Is it
because of influence, because of experience, or because of profile?
In criticism, what role has Jerry Saltz' part on 'Work in Progress'
served in regards to his own career? This media attention certainly
makes him a known entity, now possibly as much as Greenberg in his
time. But what does this say? Is art criticism equal to "Flava of
Love?"
3. Is there a crisis in criticism?
There may be within the 'art world'. There seems to be a
molecularization of art that has collapsed down to the individual as
Sandler states, but outside the ecosystem of blue-chip/metro
galleries, museums and collectors, there is a thriving 'dark matter'
art world with a lot of work being made of various grades and genres.
4. Has art criticism been marginalized in the art world consensus? Is
it influential in terms of what readers think and do?
I feel that if criticism has been marginalized, capital has done so
for its own agendas, and critics may self-ostracize in not having the
independence to work 'outside the loop', choosing to work within a
Poe-esque Masque as the plague of change ravages the margins of the
art world.
5. Who and what is an art critic?
One can be flippant in using the axiom, "Everyone's a critic..."
However, today this means that to one extent or another, criticism
includes comments on Amazon, so we are dealing with a flattening of
legitimacy of the 'high' critic. But then, this happens to curation
as well, as a 'like' is a form of curation... that being said, a
critic is a person who offers a (hopefully) measured review of work
in order to influence taste. The best instances of this today are
the high-profile blogs like Art Fag City, Hyperallergic, Paint It
Red, etc. There will always be a place for the Times and Art in
America, but the reality is that the basis of criticism is widening.
6. How would you define yourself as a critic? Reviewer? Essayist?
Theorist? Artist-critic? Blogger?
As an emergent 90's New Media practitioner, I consider myself a
theorist from which my art, criticism, and curatorial practice
emanates. This comes from having worked in a genre that wasn't
defined until the early 2000's, and before then, that community was
certainly inter-genre, often wearing all the hats of curator, critic,
theorist, and artist at one time or another until the seminal shows
of 1998-2000 cemented the genre in the art world consciousness.
7. For what audience do you write?
I write for general. Contemporary, New Media and Digital Humanities
audiences.
8. Has the Internet been good or bad for art criticism? Does it raise
the issue of elitism versus populism?
It has broadened notions of legitimacy and focus. Criticism has
definitely widened beyond the magazines and newspapers, and from a
conventional point of view, this can be seen as threatening, as every
form of media seems to feel threatened by the changes brought about
by the ongoing Digital Revolution. We might consider the role of
cultural producer, rather than in terms of elitism and populism,
might be better framed by deskilling and deprofessionalization that
are tools of capital to create goods cheaply and quickly. Global
culture is witnessing the deprofessionalization and subsequent
amateurization in terms of unpaid labor) of the critic.
Depends on your point of view. In terms of the traditional 'art
world', I feel it has turned the genre on its head, with younger
critics like Hrag Vartanian and Paddy Johnson using their blogrolls
with equal power to established organs such as the Brooklyn Rail and
New York Times. A critic is now someone who can build an audience as
much as someone who is legitimated by an institution. The Internet
is bringing into question the conversion of elite practices to folk.
9. How do you deal with the proliferating mediums in the art world
today?
I stay with the artists and genres I find satisfying, and keep an eye
out for everything else.
10. How has globalization of art and the art world changed art criticism?
Much of this has been answered in my response regarding the role of
the Internet. Much in that globalization has created a market for
initially inexpensive speculation on Chinese Contemporary art,
globalism has exerted the same pressures of capital upon criticism
that it has upon everything else in the age of web 2.0 It wishes to
have content as cheap or free as it can get so that it can then
create derivative revenue or status from it. It is the axiom that if
you love what you do, you might be willing to do it inexpensively, or
for free while having a day job. Globalization has set the concept
of value on its ear, whether in art or in criticism.
11. How has the enormous growth of the art world changed art criticism?
It has created problems in terms of complicity with capital. I would
like to challenge the idea of 'art world' as stated as only making
visible the capital ecosystem of galleries, fairs, museums, and
collectors. This is only a small, influential part of the overall
art environment proper.
12. How do art magazine policies affect art criticism?
Within the 'art world' proper, they have a great deal of influence
among collectors and fairs, but that sphere of influence is become
smaller, more rarefied and concentrated. Look to the blogs.
13. Are gender-based and political issues still viable in art
criticism today?
Of course, but the question is whether they are addressed at high
profiles, or whether they are dealt with in terms of 'dark' culture?
14. Is it a function of art criticism to analyze art world institutions?
It is 'a' function, but far from the only function.
Patrick Lichty
Assistant Professor, Interactive Arts & Media
Columbia College Chicago
916/1000 S. Wabash Ave #104
Chicago, IL USA 60605
"Some distractions demand constant practice."
_______________________________________________
NetBehaviour mailing list
NetBehaviour@netbehaviour.org <mailto:NetBehaviour@netbehaviour.org>
http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
Simon Biggs
si...@littlepig.org.uk <mailto:si...@littlepig.org.uk>
http://www.littlepig.org.uk/ @SimonBiggsUK skype: simonbiggsuk
s.bi...@ed.ac.uk <mailto:s.bi...@ed.ac.uk> Edinburgh College of Art,
University of Edinburgh
http://www.ed.ac.uk/schools-departments/edinburgh-college-art/school-of-art/staff/staff?person_id=182&cw_xml=profile.php
http://www.research.ed.ac.uk/portal/en/persons/simon-biggs%285dfcaf34-56b1-4452-9100-aaab96935e31%29.html
http://www.eca.ac.uk/circle/ http://www.elmcip.net/
http://www.movingtargets.org.uk/ http://designinaction.com/
MSc by Research in Interdisciplinary Creative Practices
http://www.ed.ac.uk/studying/postgraduate/degrees?id=656&cw_xml=details.php
_______________________________________________
NetBehaviour mailing list
NetBehaviour@netbehaviour.org
http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
_______________________________________________
NetBehaviour mailing list
NetBehaviour@netbehaviour.org
http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
