Can be reborn Russian art criticism?

[Ольга Озолина]

C. Zagraevsky posted a new article, and I would like to discuss it on the forum.
http://zagraevsky.com/critics.htm
Do with art criticism all really so sad?

[Протоплазма]

Сообщение от Ольга Озолина

С.Заграевский posted a new article, and I would like to discuss it on the forum.
http://zagraevsky.com/critics.htm
Do with art criticism all really so sad?

How many people, so many opinions.

[Vladimir]

Protoplasm, make you a warning for flooding.

[Vladimir]

Сообщение от Ольга Озолина

Do art critics all really so sad?

The article is interesting. But the main message I do not share. The author somehow believes that the evaluation of art criticism (the scientific and the whole of yourself to a professional) is or should be a leading factor in pricing. And the rest is history exhibitions, private collections...), say that again. In fact it is not. I agree that there are a number of critics whose opinion is interesting and curious. But not more. Critics, even good, do not risk your money. Unlike collectors and a wide range of buyers at auctions. In the end, it was the market will put everything in its place. And will put. In 20 years it will become quite clear where innovation, where the secondary, where strong medium at a moderate level of individuality.

If the criticism affect pricing, they would bathed in money. So in General presenoe critics condition adequately to the current moment. Sources of financing - strong editorial, gallery owners, clients, supervisors, clients and passionate entrepreneurs, funding the exhibition. Do not see any prerequisites that in the future something has changed. Yes, and the reader varies. Criticism in the same form he can no longer perceive.

[Ольга Озолина]

[QUOTE=Протоплазма;3305101]How many people, so many mnini@

Unfortunately, this is not a flood, and the attitude toward art in the absence of art criticism lot About this in the article. Sad article, I think. I once "the Art newspaper" along with Zagraevsky edited, what hopes were... Archive of this newspaper even survived:
http://zagraevsky.com/gazeta.htm

[Ольга Озолина]

[QUOTE=Vladimir;3305321]Article interesting. But the main message I do not share. The author somehow believes that the evaluation of art criticism (the scientific and the whole of yourself to a professional) is or should be a leading factor in pricing. And the rest is history exhibitions, private collections...), say that again. In fact it is not. I agree that there are a number of critics whose opinion is interesting and curious. But not more. Critics, even good, do not risk your money. Unlike collectors and a wide range of buyers at auctions. In the end, it was the market will put everything in its place. And will put. In 20 years it will become quite clear where innovation, where the secondary, where strong medium at a moderate level of individuality.

If the criticism affect pricing, they would bathed in money. So in General presenoe critics condition adequately to the current moment. Sources of financing - strong editorial, gallery owners, clients, supervisors, clients and passionate entrepreneurs, funding the exhibition. Do not see any prerequisites that in the future something has changed. Yes, and the reader varies. Criticism still as he could not perceive moget@

Your opinion is absolutely logical, but on what principles puts everything in its place market? Critics focus on the history of art, and the market for what? On what factors? With refrigerators, which the author mentions, it is clear - the ratio of price-quality. Is it possible that the art market is so? Just then, another question: what is the quality for the art market? What do You think?

[Vladimir]

Сообщение от Ольга Озолина

Critics focus on the history of art, and the market for what? On what factors?

Olga, we have a whole website about it. The market for some time may be mistaken, be wrong, but still taxiing on the right road. And in the end, the market understands not less critics. In short, the key criteria remain the innovation and power of painting.

[таша]

"What's missing art, speaking about modern art: five theses Elena Petrovskaya
http://theoryandpractice.ru/posts/10...kusstvovedenie

[Ольга Озолина]

[QUOTE=Vladimir;3305441]Olga, we have a whole website about it. The market for some time may be mistaken, be wrong, but still taxiing on the right road. And in the end, the market understands not less critics. In short, the key criteria remain the innovation and power zhivopisi@

So while the market taxied (simply put, while the descendants will look at this era with fresh eyes), our contemporaries-artists of hunger will die
And who can assess the innovation and power of painting? Again, the critic, no. And the modern market confers candy traditionalists, they are the heart of the people closer

[Ольга Озолина]

Сообщение от таша

"What's missing art, speaking about modern art: five theses Elena Petrovskaya
http://theoryandpractice.ru/posts/10...kusstvovedenie

I'm not strong in the philosophy of art, but it seems to me that this is one of the typical texts "nows". But I do not understand how contemporary art correlates with the art market of paintings and sculptures. Bound by the chains of Kulik on the antique salon will not sell