I found this reading to be.....confusing. I hardly understood any of it yet I believe I may have picked up on some points the writer was trying to make. When someone asked him what his opinion was on "'The Issue of the Nineties'" he said "'Beauty'". He, I believe, is another person that believes art must do something, in that make you think, feel, ponder, anything that would elicit an emotion.
Dave Hickey is actually an art critic. An art critic is a concept I have trouble understanding. How can one critique art if there is no clear definition for what art really is? Does he base his opinions off of what he thinks art is? If so, he is entitled to his opinion but who is he to tell others how it is? Many rely on the reviews from movie critics to determine whether or not they will go to see the movie. There are far too many factors to simply base one's opinion off of another's. The critic probably has a different taste than many, they may be having a bad day, they may not like the artist's previous work and suspect this one will not be good either, or someone else could have told them their own opinion. giving the critic a preconceived notion of what to expect. If someone tells them they didn't like it or thought it was stupid, ugly, etc. the artist may base their opinion off of what the other person thinks.
All in all, I wonder how one becomes an "art critic"? Are there qualifications for this profession? Or maybe they must just be well known or have connections or be well off. Either way I believe that the job of an art critic is one like the job of a movie critic, it is good to keep in mind what they have to say but after all, it is better to critique something and form your own opinions yourself.
(Posted by Sarah)
No comments:
Post a Comment