Art Critic or Art Appreciator?

The Business Standard out of India has a very good article on the art critic. The Business Standard states as times have changed and so has the need for the art critic, who is being replaced by the collector and appreciator (not to be confused with authenticator). Are we looking at a true change, or perhaps just a change in degree, semantics, and definitions?

It is a very interesting and thought provoking article and I highly recommend you click through and read the full content.

The article states For centuries, the critic was an independent voice that analysed an artist, his oeuvre , his influences, and measured each exhibition, even each individual painting, against that background. You were able to negotiate the space between an artist’s attempt and his achievement, and deal with it in an authoritative manner. A critic pointed out shortcomings, devices of convenience, artistic complacency, the first deterioration in quality, and did it with the elegance of an observer with a bird’s eye-view with a comprehensive sweep over an entire generation of artistic peers and trends.

The article continues What’s an art appreciator? Well, actually not all that different from an art critic. An art appreciator is so well versed in art and trends and artists that he could well be a mirror image of the critic. The difference is hairline enough to have escaped the notice of many, but it is a crucial one: The art appreciator tells you what to look out for in a painting, what its highlights (and the artist’s highlights) are, what is part of the artist’s — or his peers’ — influence and trends, what the colours/medium et cetera reflect or suggest. The art appreciator celebrates each work, he does not underplay the strengths, nor over-suggest the weaknesses. In fact, the appreciator has nothing negative to say about an artist or an artist’s work.

Is that good, or bad? To understand that, you must understand how the appreciator came to replace the critic. Impoverished for years, the critics found that as the market grew, there was a good living to be made from writing on art — provided it was supported by the trade. A handful of brilliant art critics and writers were roped in by galleries to write the catalogues for forthcoming exhibitions. Catalogue writers make three to four times as much money than if they were to write for magazines and newspapers. There is also more space available to them here than in the mainstream media. There was literally no choice.

Art lovers and collectors look constantly for guidance, and have been influenced by what critics, and now appreciators, have to say. It is ironic therefore that when the art markets have crashed, it is principally for those artists that have been “celebrated” by appreciators.

To read the full article, click HERE.