|
These “interactive reviews” break down the distinction between writer and reader. Here at artcritical a new kind of artwriting is being developed that exploits the properties of the Internet to be spontaneous, democratic, topical, and open to challenge. |
|||||||||
The Magazine: How it works and what you do
"See more, see better"
Art
criticism can assume myriad forms -
scholarly, poetic, journalistic - in a correspondingly broad range of outlets
(printed matter, lecture halls, the broadcast media) but there is a case for
saying that the most vital kind is the "live" criticism that is as
likely as anywhere else to take place on a windswept streetcorner in West
Chelsea, when a couple of artists doing the rounds cross paths and trade a
"Go see!" with "What did you make of that?" As the
show progresses, a body of interactive criticism will build up. After it is
over, the material will take its place - in the site archive - as part of the
critical literature.One thing needs to be stressed: this is no mere
"chatroom". The number and spread of exhibitions are carefully
determined, each month, and all the comments are scrupulously edited. Not in
the least to rob them of guts or gusto, but just to ensure that the art
reviewed in <Artcritical> gets the fair and considered prose it
deserves.We will focus on contemporary art in New York City. There will,
however, be some coverage of past art, of happenings in London, and a
scattering further afield. If this bias seems to recall that classic
cartoon-map (by Saul Steinberg) of Manhattan...New York...the World, this
reflects the priorities and expertise of its editors, not their cultural
imperialism. But if readers "further afield" don't like it, just
jam our e-mail with your recommendations! David
Cohen
|
