Wednesday, September 29th, 2004
Critics
[ This provoked by a diamond geezer post today ]
Critics, in my view, play a valuable role because they create a standpoint on a topic. Rather like the opposing sides in a debate. By staking out a viewpoint you are engaging others to have some response – even if that’s to say ‘what a load of old b******s’. I quite like being ‘told what to think’ sometimes because it provokes me to think about something to which I would otherwise have remained indifferent. When it comes to Art in particular I’ve personally found it rather helpful to have people of insight articulate in a detailed way the concepts and meanings of a piece as they perceive it. It gives me a handle and ‘way in’ that I might not otherwise have. The careful use of language to describe visual concepts is something to be accepted for what it is – an attempt to convey subtleties of meaning as they are understood by the viewer. The language used by critics is often criticised for sounding pretentious or impenetrable. On the one hand I’m all for simplification and inclusion. On the other, I think that some visual ideas are difficult to render in text and that’s where things can get out of hand. I’ve written several posts which use what might be considered high falutin terminology about art and design. I’m unashamed because I was genuinely trying to convey meaning. I don’t know if it’s always possible to write about art without someone thinking, ‘pretentious twaddle’. Matter of fact language isn’t always enough.
Back to DG’s comments >>



Breeze On By – by Donny Osmond. 




