The Useless Art Critic
Criticizing is easy they say. Couldn’t you put that effort into something creative or productive? Even present day “art critics” see their main role as providing information about exhibitions; a reduction of the critic to no more than a publicist. There is certainly merit to the argument that art is beyond reproach. If the art makes others feel emotions, then who has the right to critique or criticize? However, this attitude taken by an artist can spawn elitism and cultishness among his followers towards anyone who “doesn’t get it.” Isn’t it a bit egotistical or fanatical to think that an artist’s work cannot be admonished? Even at the point of writing this sentence, I am not sure if criticism is energy well spent or if the critic has any role in the art landscape.
I have a natural inclination towards criticizing, but I also have a strong inclination to not hurt other people’s feelings. I understand criticizing other people’s work (even thoughtful criticism) is relatively easy when compared to the effort involved with creation; therefore, it takes quite a bit of nerve to leave feedback that could be interpreted as negative. Does that mean we shouldn’t do it? I have thought of many a criticism for various Medium articles or stories, but I have failed to leave critical feedback, save for one comment on the article above, because I am not sure how people will take it.
I see two types of potential criticism: the Thought Provoking Criticism a.k.a. “think about it from a different perspective or take something else into consideration” criticism; and the Essence Criticism a.k.a. “the artist is fraudulent or bad criticism.”
The Thought Provoking Criticism sounds good on the surface but that doesn’t make it any less scary. From my perspective, it passes the Golden Rule, and I should work to leave constructive feedback whenever I can. The comment I referenced earlier is an example; the author wrote an emotionally charged piece about the power of stories, how the world needs more stories, and criticism and/or hating being a waste of energy. I pointed out how stories could be used to harm others and that criticism might have a place in art. I was pretty mild in my criticism, but this far from guarantees the criticism will be received well.
In general, people are terrified that they might be wrong, so they insulate themselves from the other side to eliminate the possibility of changing their minds. Confronting even the most thoughtful criticism is hard because we must be vulnerable to being wrong or changing our minds. In addition, society guides people towards neatly defined categories and pressures them stay there; no one wants to be called a flip-flop even though it might be an admirable change. Although I feel objective and willing to change my mind, I am still terrified that someone will find a logical flaw in something I wrote. After considering the comment, I may no longer agree with the words on the page; the time and energy I spent will feel nullified.
The Essence Criticism is an even more difficult pill to swallow. I am not yet totally identified by my writing, but a comment suggesting that my writing was terrible or dishonest would still rattle me with anxiety. For example, if I had commented on the story story referenced above that it was “story porn” or that it was a “logically flawed appeal to emotion to generate claps” that would be an Essence Criticism, and honestly, that isn’t too far from how I feel. But, is this a valid criticism? Despite my reservations, I believe that this type of criticism is necessary to keep the artist from spawning some form of cult. The artist may have started with good intentions, but the allure of fame and power may have gone to his head.
The popular self-improvement “listical” writers on Medium are generating a lot of claps from self-improvement junkies, but unless their list is unusually original and thoughtful, it is completely worthless as information and as art. The truth is there are some negatives that come along with reading self-improvement. Once you have read ten books by different authors on the subject you likely have all the information you need to change your mindset and take action; after that point, the books are simply a feel good distraction from taking action. These articles are no different, and I see their whole purpose as to generate fan fare from those addicted to the feel they get from reading about success. These are examples of potential artists who have gone off the noble path generated by pure intentions.
Despite my support of the right to criticize, others are more skeptical; Nassim Taleb talks negatively about those who are “non-actors,” such as most journalists (who include book reviewers and other critics) that do not have skin in the game (disincentives). The best reviewers will have something of their own that is similar to what they are criticizing which can be an object of criticism. Criticizing when you can receive criticism of your own introduces some risk into the equation, so exercise prudence. After consideration, I strongly believe that criticism can add value to the art world by giving the reader a new perspective on a piece of art or by causing the artist to reconsider his work. However, if you decide to criticize, make sure you think it through because there is always potential to be ignored or attacked no matter how polished the argument.
