Thought I’d flag up the current Rant on Axis’ website.
It’s called Critical Distance, and points out that art reviews are often too harsh, poking fun for the sake of it, or conversely too generously flattering, or too fluffy and descriptive. I tried to answer honestly some of ranter Josie Faure Walker’s points from my experience as a freelance writer in the article comments section…
http://www.axisweb.org/dlForum.aspx?ESSAYID=18166
In my own art reviewing, I probably err on the side of positivity and generosity (making art is hard, and I admire anyone who doesn’t give up) unless I see a big ethical, institutional or art historical error – in which case I will dive in with the judgement. I was, in fact, censored for my negative views on the historically inaccurate curation of Tate Modern’s 2007 Louise Bourgeois retrospective, as the new, online magazine that commissioned the piece wanted to attract advertising from said museum. As I was a very fresh, young thing back then, I complied, producing instead a rather inane descriptive piece that at one point used the word “magical” (puke).
Truthfully, I’m not sure what I’d do now if asked to significantly change a magazine piece for purposes of commercial diplomacy. It hasn’t happened again, in part because I tend now to accompany any negative comments with an attempt to understand why the show’s perceived blunders happened, what the curators or artists were perhaps trying to achieve.
But I do try to stir other people to consider the importance of making room for the negatives when writing on art. i teach (paid and unpaid) workshops on critical writing, where I never fail to tell my censorship tale, following it up with a discussion on how better to frame such criticism so that it survives the editorial cut. i also reassure them with the story that, once, a curator actually asked me to be critical. (Shock, horror!) I had the good fortune of meeting Gavin Delahunty, then curator at mima, Middlesbrough, now working for Tate, Liverpool, for a coffee and a chat about queer studies, Rosalind Krauss and his brilliant curatorial project A Certain Distance, Endless Light. Delahunty used to teach critical writing himself, and bemoaned the lack of meaty, incisive reviews. He cited Krauss (and I agree) as someone who didn’t care about pleasing museums and curators, and therefore had the balls intellectually to rip a show to shreds if necessary.
I adored A Certain Distance, Endless Light as it resonated with many of my art historical interests. But – wanting to impress Gavin – I decided to note down negatives where i could. This is perhaps a less intuitive way to flatter a curator, than with generous commentary! I found a few bad points, deeming some of the installation decisions poor, and finding the premise of the umbrella A/V festival rather woolly. It was a great feeling, to have permission to be negative, and the result, I feel, is one of my best pieces of writing.
You can read it here:
http://whitehotmagazine.com/articles/gonzalez-torr…
