te: Tuesday, September 15, 2015 at 8:43 PM
To: NetBehaviour for networked distributed creativity
<netbehaviour@netbehaviour.org>
Subject: [NetBehaviour] Bad review[s]
So what do you do when the Distinguished Critic writes a newspaper review
where he says one of your prints (in a curated
Hi Paul, Alan, Rob & all,
I remember reading a review in Time Out magazine years ago written by Sarah
Kent about an unknown artist's work that she completely trashed. This made
me feel uncomfortable, mainly because the artist had no chance to argue
back, and unfortunately people tend to believe
Rob, you hit the nail on the head. Aside from my having led a sheltered
life and having to learn (all over again) how to ignore the vagaries of
critics, the sort of criticism that offers a tidy judgement of value has
always been foreign to the way I write, back when I wrote criticism. The
critic
oh we all get these kinds of things, curating is a form of conoisseurship.
I don't want to sound bland but when one of your albums years ago got
compared to a car crash, you learn to ride the road. :-)
- Alan
On Tue, 15 Sep 2015, Paul Hertz wrote:
So what do you do when the Distinguished
On 15/09/15 09:43 AM, Paul Hertz wrote:
>
> Nevertheless, I am astounded that the moldy fig style of journalism
> still persists, where the critic's opinion is the subject matter of the
> critique. I suppose it's more entertaining than opening the work up to
> the reader's judgement.
I made a
So what do you do when the Distinguished Critic writes a newspaper review
where he says one of your prints (in a curated gallery group show) that it
"shows neither intellectual nor aesthetic spark."?
Probably nothing, except post to NetBehaviour. All publicity is good
publicity, right?
org>
Date: Tuesday, September 15, 2015 at 8:43 PM
To: NetBehaviour for networked distributed creativity
<netbehaviour@netbehaviour.org>
Subject: [NetBehaviour] Bad review[s]
So what do you do when the Distinguished Critic writes a newspaper review
where he says one of your prints (in a cur
