Comments on: Snips and snails

By: Heather

Heather — Thu, 12 Jun 2008 16:18:27 +0000

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.

By: artandmylife

artandmylife — Thu, 12 Jun 2008 00:36:28 +0000

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…

By: ponderrule

ponderrule — Wed, 11 Jun 2008 23:26:55 +0000

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.