Criticism Videos

The first video, Greenberg on Art Criticism: An Interview by T.J. Clark, focuses on the legendary art critic Clement Greenberg, in an interview that took place in 1981. According to him, art criticism is much more difficult than other kinds of criticism, for other kinds, like music, are much more formalist-based. He believed that it was important for critics to refute any preconceptions they may have, for "good" art can come from anywhere. He, for instance, is not "for" abstract art, but he has to accept that the best art is coming from abstract art. He talks about how he struggled for a long time with the notion of "art for art's sake." It's interesting how the interviewer, T.J. Clark, seems to argue that the things that Greenberg is talking about now contradict what he typically writes in his writing. Greenberg argues that modern art has not proved itself, and it does not need to. It's enough that some modern artists have proven themselves. Based on what Greenberg was saying, the difference of opinion between the two stemmed from the age difference, as Greenberg kept referring to Clark and those like him as "you young ones." In the forties, Greenberg's art criticism had been much more similar to Clark's tastes, but since then Greenberg has grown and no longer places history in as important a position.

In Greenberg on Pollock: An Interview by T.J. Clark, we see the two discussing together again. Greenberg talks about his relationship with Jackson Pollock, and how he witnessed his artworks' evolution into the splatter/drip paintings. Clark describes Pollock as Dyonisian, but Greenberg disagrees, at least at the ending of Pollocks's life. Most artists, he believes, get quieter toward the end. He also says how important it is no not prescribe. Pollock was self-aware enough to know that he could not create masterpieces while using a brush. Greenberg believes that the paintings that "fail" are the ones that feel like effort, though he is quick to say the mark of a failed painting is by no means one where the effort involved is palpable. He discusses how those he considered the "best" artists felt isolation, where as now (1981)artists have become celebrities. They had yearned for fame. He also comments on death being "an overrated literary idea," romanticized by some, but scoffed at by him. In the end, he calls Jackson full of it, like everyone else, for becoming enchanted by the idea of a romantic death as well.

An Introduction to the Italian Renaissance focuses on the artists that are accounted for in Giorgio Vasari's Lives of the Artists. The video emphasizes how it's important to understand the context of artworks. One cannot simply compare Giotto and Michelangelo and declare Michelangelo the better artist, for if not for the innovations of Giotto, Michelangelo and other artists would not have had them to build off of. Giotto, for instance, gave paintings life through using perspective and using real people as models. While his buildings may not look realistic, he was one of the first to use buildings to convey depth. Ghiberti built off of Giotto with his sculpted panels that paid attention to the human form. Through "guilds," skilled people come together to improve themselves and teach apprentices their trades.  This is how they are able to build off of each other. Masaccio made the leap from portrayng the physical to portraying the emotional as well, such as in his painting where grief-stricken Adam and Eve are cast out of Eden. Later artists introduced new ideas such as Greek mythological subjectmatter and structured composition.

The Critics: Stories from the Inside Pages focuses on critics from many different fields, and how they benefit society. It showed short clips first of movie critics, then music critics, then television, then book critics, emphasizing that their goals and similar across the different fields. The purpose of mass media critics is to stop and make people think about what it is they are listening to/watching/reading. They often create the prism through which the media arts are then seen. Through their writing, people are more likely to not just absent mindedly consume media without thinking about it, and they may direct consumers to things they are more likely to enjoy. Criticism is also an art form in itself, that people read/watch/listen to for its entertainment value. One of the loftier goals of critics is to have an impact on whatever field they're criticizing. If enough critics feel a certain way, they can have an influence. Or, they can "discover" new artists, who go on to fame. This is particularly true with book critics, which have a more difficult time being "discovered" on their own with the general public.

Of course, critics, and especially effective critics, have to have a love for the media that they are criticizing. They typically have somewhat obscure artists they love, that they enjoy spreading the word about. Some critics also have to where the hat of the reporter, where they interview people or write a piece on a new trend. This might blur the line between the objectivity of the reporter and the subjectivity of the critic. This can make the relationship between the artist and the critic uneasy, a critic may need to interview an artist that they gave a negative review for.

There is a difference between the critic  and the reviewer. The former assumes the reader has already seen the subject of the criticism, while the latter assumes that the review is introducing the reader to the subject of the review for the first time. For the critic, knowledge, comprehension, application, analysis, synthesis, and evaluation are elements that often come into play in their writing. They must have a deep, wide knowledge that they apply to individual artists/artworks. It is important for them to write in an engaging manner for whoever their audience is, and to recognize the social connections that exist in whatever is being critiqued. Unfortunately, much criticism has been "dumbed down" and has become much more like reviewing. Well written, thoughtful criticism takes up too much time and too much space. With less research time, there is the danger of the critic allowing his/her preconceived ideas to dismiss things that might have more merit than they assume. The internet has become a place for them to flex their critical muscles without a lot of the obstacles that exist on tv, newspapers, or magazines.

The Colonial Encounter: Views of Non-Western Art and Culture is about the way to NOT go about exhibiting work. At the 1900 World's Fair, western ethnocentrism portrayed art from what they considered "savage peoples" whom they had colonized. The Dahome exhibit featured a tower of sacrifice, portraying the people as barbaric and in need of civilizing by the French. Algeria, which had long been colonized, emphasized the exoticism and tourist appeal that the western world felt toward it. Their exhibit was meant to advertise Algerian settlements. Arabicity became defined by sexual bellydancing. Studies of facial features were meant to emphasize the inferiority of non-western races. Unfortunately, the 1900 World's Fair and exhibitions since then are created to fit prejudices that the western world already holds.

Lastly, Jackson Pollock: Michael Fried and T.J. Clark in Conversation brings us back to the beginning, with Clark discussing Pollock again. Clark believed that avant garde's importance came from its historical role, whereas Fried believed its importance came from being completely independent of its history. They agree there is a dispersing of energy that is very optical rather than tactile. While the two critics/scholars approach the painting in different ways, their conversation shows how the individual person brings their own personal baggage to their interpretation of a painting. One is struck by the fragility of Pollock's Lavender Mist, but the paint-membrane is more energetic than the other. In front of Autumn Rhythm, the two continue their conversation, discussing Pollock's painting in relation to abstract art. The two debate over whether the painting was intended to express certain ideas while Pollock was painting, or if he never explicitly thought at such things while creating.

The videos, particularly The Critics: Stories from the Inside Pages, mostly related to art criticism and what we need to think about and look out for while becoming critics ourselves.  The Critics literally went into what one needed to do to become a "good" critic, while others simply showed art critics at work, so we could see what sort of discourse they took part in, which was the case for the first two and last videos. The Colonial Encounter was a video that showed the mistakes and prejudices that art critics and exhibitors have fallen into in the past. It demonstrated how caution and respect for other cultures is very important when critiquing and exhibiting their art. The Italian Renaissance video showed how important learning historical context was for the critic, for artists did not develop in a vacuum, so nor should critics. All of the videos would be helpful when trying one's own hand at becoming a critic, but The Critics will probably prove to be the most helpful to us, as it went into detail about how to go about writing criticism, even if it did not discuss fine artists at all.

As most of the videos focused on different topics related to art criticism, most felt quite useful. Unfortunately, the quiet volume and the dry material made the first two and last videos hard to watch, and therefore hard to glean  from. While Greenberg is a fascinating person to read about and listen to, it was difficult for me, even with the volume up all the way, to understand what he and Clark were saying. Still, it was good for us to hear what professional, critical discourse and debates looks like. It almost makes me wish we could have more of a debate in the class, over instant messaging or something like that.