So like many bloggers when in a writing funk I can again only offer tidbits. I have been musing on how art develops as an artist ages and matures but I don’t know enough about it to write yet and I’m still working on items about street art gentrification and madness and art but no one piece is coming together. I’d like to write about the weirdest email I got today acknowledging receipt of a job application which caused me to wonder if I’d actually want to work in that place.
Anyhow The Montana book award shortlists were announced yesterday and many have commented on the amount of visual arts books. Of course there is the spat about only 4 fiction titles being shortlisted and other items and the anti-Wellington sentiment creeping in again. The best comment I’ve read read on that topic so far is on Beattie’s Book blog where an anonymous commenter replies to “what’s Wellington got to do with it?” with “Wellington shot bambi’s mother”. And while there is talk of some Wellington cabal I really don’t think regionalism is the problem here. On a brighter note one of the better books I’ve read lately, Waimarino County, was shortlisted in biography section. Author Martin Edmond muses on this here.
Speaking of books, the illustrated version of Denis Glover’s Magpies has been reprinted. Illustrator Dick Frizzell says “It sank a bit when it was released actually. I threatened to reprint it myself and eventually the publishers came to the party so it was reprinted and it just kind of hung around by the skin of its teeth until it reached some sort of tipping point in the public consciousness…Although I have never called it a children’s book, a lot of parents have told me their kids wanted it read again and again until the book fell to bits. I just don’t know what the kids would be actually hearing.” Its now on MY shopping list.
I also read this interesting interview with John Updike, which begins.
NEH Chairman Bruce Cole: I think I may have told you that in my former life I was an art historian. While there are many Ph.D. art historians, the people I most enjoyed reading were the poets and the critics who brought great language to their description of art and were able to express the meaning of the art.
John Updike: I think it’s a field where to be an amateur is not necessarily a disgrace. Some of the best have been, in a sense, amateurs-Baudelaire and Henry James, to name two.
I guess this spiked my interest because I read recently how Rita Angus hated non-artists (Fairburn and Fred Page were the examples) acting as art critics and felt they were out of their ‘zone’. She said, in turn she would not think of critiquing their music or poetry. This is something that is very common in New Zealand but there are a fair amount of people who are critics, artists and writers. It would make a good debate I think.
Hi,I’m new to WordPress, but your blog entry drew me in. It is a subject a subject close to my heart or more accurately my brain pan.
I’m curious, what do you think you are missing when you think about what happens when an artist ages and matures? Is it only the writing and visual arts you are thinking about?
Also I wonder about the debate you propose. Rita Angus might be able to critique music or poetry from a specific perspective and it would have validity but only as far as her opinion. She just doesn’t feel justified in taking a public stand, which is beautifully consistent of her. But I’m sure she does critique in her own personal space. If you critique outside the “zone” you can only relate to a piece as it affects you. As long as you identify that it is opinion and not following a formal structure of critique in the field I believe that makes it valid. But what if you are a musician with an art degree? Is your critique official at that point? Is critique a from of interacting with art on it’s own?
Also one could frequently disagree with critics, even if they are in their zone as being out of touch with movements or tastes. I am specifically thinking of the battle of Impressionists to be taken seriously in 19th century France by L’Academie and the critics of that time.
As for age – I was thking particularly of visual art and how the artwork of a ‘young artist’ might differ from someone at say 70. Also do artists go stale or run out of ideas? Still thinking on this.
Rita Angus died in 1971 and she did a fair amount of critique of other disciplines in personal letters I gather. There seems to be a movement that says everyone’s a crtic BUT the critique is only valid if you are an artists/have an art (in the broadest sense) degree or have a lot of experience in the area. even then the crtics are criticised…
I think layperson critique is valuable because it is approachable for us other laypersons. I learn a lot from reading your blog that would be inaccessible to me otherwise, if only in terms of how much time/effort I can put in to digesting critical material.