Current
Issue »
Email
List »
Submissions
»
About
Us »
Contributors
»
Contact
Us »
V.Codec Online Forum Apr.25.2006: Panelist Matthew Stadler
Forum Moderator:
(Question for Matthew Stadler) What are the ideal goal(s) of contemporary visual art criticism?
Matthew Stadler:
Here!
Matthew Stadler:
Should I answer this one?
Forum Moderator:
Yes.
Matthew Stadler:
Okay. Hold please.
Forum Moderator:
Holding.
Matthew Stadler:
Contemporary art criticism should be be beautifully written. It should enchant and endure because of its qualities as writing. It should be triggered by thoughtful, thorough-going engagement with the art work it addresses.
Matthew Stadler:
But, that engagement need not be rational, documentarian, descriptive, "accurate," or in any other way answer to the desires of the artist or community concerned.
Matthew Stadler:
The critic's only duty is to be interesting.
Gretchen Bennett:
I agree, and what is written is it's own work of art.
Corey Smith:
True.
Matthew Stadler:
Yes, and it takes its place in the unregulated give-and-take of art discourse on equal terms with other works.
Forum Moderator:
(All, this is matthew's own time to answer...)
Forum Moderator:
(Your time to respond is coming right up...)
Matthew Stadler:
The only problem comes when artists, collectors, or other comptrollers of career take criticism to be a definitive commentary or otherwise above and outside the discourse of artwork. But that's not my problem.
Matthew Stadler:
I'm done with my monologue.
Forum Moderator:
Thanks matthew...FREEFORM is now called on Matthew's question/answer...
Adam Harrison:
Matthew, that is a perfect, ideal description. I think i might frame it.
Matthew Stadler:
I think he's right on!
Regina Hackett:
Me too. Key words, for me, are engagement and enchant.
Clint Burnham:
Matthew, I think the role of the "comptrollers" has to be recognized — not that they have their place, but they do structure much art criticism.
Regina Hackett:
The critic structures art criticism, each critic, a sentence at a time.
Matthew Stadler:
Yes, and I'm facetious when I say it's not my problem. I try to not affect markets...
Clint Burnham:
Comptrollers like curators and collectors?
Eva Lake:
It was the same before: Baudelaire liked certain artists but had bigger ideas/agendas in mind. And that is why the writing is stil interesting and important.
Matthew Stadler:
Yes to Betsey.
Matthew Stadler:
And Baudelaire didn't make careers then (did he?), but now...
Adam Harrison:
And while his taste in art is precarious, his writing on art is still relevant.
Clint Burnham:
By "structure," Regina, I didn't mean sentence structure, I meant who gets paid, who's asked to write, who's published, etc.
Regina Hackett:
Oh.
Regina Hackett:
Well, structure, even in your context, depends on the writer.
Clint Burnham:
Sure, we can say no.
Adam Harrison:
And work outside those structures if need be...
Gretchen Bennett:
Regina, could you elaborate?
Matthew Stadler:
Editors determine what you can cover, in my world anyway.
Regina Hackett:
On the other hand, working at a newspaper for awhile, I see freedom and maybe not the bars of the cage.
Eva Lake:
Writers had large, new ideas and found artists who might illustrate the ideas. But they were not necessarily propaganda machines for the artists.
Regina Hackett:
Editors don't determine what I cover. They try, but they don't.
Gretchen Bennett:
Eva, so writers and artists have relationships?
Eva Lake:
I don't know that they all have relationships. They might agree to disagree but maybe have some concerns in common. Still, it is not for me as an artist to expect something predictable. Ever.
Matthew Stadler:
Aren't you on staff? I'm a freelancer.
Regina Hackett:
Point taken, Matthew. Believe me, in my newspaper, you could write whatever you wanted.
Eva Lake:
That's great. I get the feeling that our big paper here does not operate in same way Regina...
Clint Burnham:
Dang it. I've disappeared again.
Matthew Stadler:
Regina's situation is unique, and its a miracle (a blessing) that she's recognized it and taken the opportunity. DK Row has great restrictions.
Regina Hackett:
No. The Times eats writers. And of course, most of the writers are no good. Insecure and haughty art critics get nothing done.
Clint Burnham:
I want to add that I agree w/matthew's "elegance," "interesting," and "enchantment." Plus I'd add "negation."
Matthew Stadler:
How so?
Regina Hackett:
How negation, Clint?
Clint Burnham:
Oh, the importance of negative critique, of making the kind of flatfooted Marxist connections to society, etc.
Forum Moderator:
Cool, time.
Forum Moderator:
So we are done...with that question.
Forum Moderator:
On to the next panelist...!!
