The sad fact that most of our art critics (not all) write out of mere newsroom deployment rather than authoritative schooling and appreciation of the arts genre they write about , has spurred some artists to respond to this disability by becoming arts critics themselves.
Whilst their writing and appreciation of the arts is unquestionable, I still cannot reconcile how a practicing artist can critic their competition, let alone critic impartially! That two artists will approach the same subject artistically different is a congenital and very agreed fact, and therefore the artist-critiquing-the-other scenario will risks perpetuating the myth that a critic's un-presented "version" is better than the presented critiqued version. However, nothing is further from the truth.
In my humble opinion, an artist who decides to be a critic automatically surrenders their standing as an artist, and ceases to be fair competition in the chosen field of their critique (the arts genre), never mind the prevailing conditions and nobleness of the motivation and intention. True, we need to challenge our media houses to develop their arts writers' understanding of the genre that they assign them to cover. But while we push for trained media arts critics restricted to this function, we very desperately need artists who restrict themselves to producing and marketing artworks that do not need and rides on the unfair advantage achieved by their creators during "critiquing" their competition.
I seriously pray that fellow artists stop the abuse of and confine usage of the social media platforms to promoting their own works, share arts opportunities/resource links etc. But more importantly I pray that our artists find it morally sick and improper to openly "critique" their competition in the name of some unclear freedom and a need understand only by them. For, it is wrong, unfair and shameless.
No comments:
Post a Comment