Can be reborn Russian art criticism?

[Vladimir]

Buy collectors and connoisseurs, not criticism. Criticism helps to understand: to restore historical context, to recall, was this already or not, etc. But, if criticism of a sudden disappear altogether, the artists will not cease to work, and collectors will not stop buying. Sort out themselves.

[Кирилл Сызранский]

Recalled article D. Dragunsky about sharply incurred a deficit of readers of good literature and compare it runs the literature and, in this part of the subject matter, the circulation of literary-critical press.
One quote from there, although it is useful to read it all:
[QUOTE][FONT="Georgia"]let's Start with the publishers of these muscles literature. We have less than 6 000, and their number is decreasing; there is a merge. In the United States - 6 large, 400 medium and 86 000 (!) small and tiny. Annually based around 10,000 small publishing houses, among them, of course, by the end of year survives no more than 10%, but in General, there is growth.

The backbone of the literature are literary magazines. In Russia a little more than thirty, in the United States - more than three hundred. The difference in the circulation is also impressive. The main American literary magazine "the Atlantic" - 400 000 (issued 10 times per year); monthly "Harper" - 200 000; weekly "new Yorker" - 1 050 000 (!) instances.

If we take the big seven Russian literary magazines - namely (in alphabetical order) magazines "Friendship of peoples", "Star", "Banner", "Moscow", "Our contemporary", "New world" and "October" - each with a circulation of 5,000, then you will see that their total circulation is not even 1/10 of the circulation of the magazine "the Atlantic".

And circulatory system literature is a literary-critical press. Each of the three hundred American literary magazines, there is a critical Department. The most popular Supplement to the newspaper "new York times" - The New York Times Review of Books - weekly with a circulation of 1 500 000 copies conveys to the reader the news literature. The second power - output once every two weeks, the New York Book Review with a circulation of 135,000 copies.

We have a "Book review" and NG Ex Libris edition - pleasant, but their popularity and influence readers in dozens of times skromne@

[Ольга Озолина]

Сообщение от Кирилл Сызранский

And circulatory system literature is a literary-critical press.

Very well said, in my opinion. In the literature the same problem, this is clear.

I honestly cannot imagine how collectors and artists "will understand" without judgelike. As they will "understand"?
On this subject more than ten years ago, there was another very good, I think the article:
http://artunion.ru/rating/article16.htm
It is a pity that the author several years ago left and hucitec, and in General the world of art. Talents leave, it's revealing.

[Vladimir]

Can't remember what the criticism was based kostakis, when collected avant-garde. Or collectors Zverev and Yakovlev.

[Кирилл Сызранский]

[QUOTE="Ольга Озолина;3305811"]I honestly cannot imagine how collectors and artists "will understand" without judgelike@
Judgelike not for collectors and artists, and to the public interested in art or simply wanting to be in temae cultural events.

[Ольга Озолина]

[QUOTE=Vladimir;3305861]Can't remember what the criticism was based kostakis, collected the avant-garde. Or collectors Zverev and Yakovleva@

I heard that the avant-garde began again to collect the official authorities, and evaluated it official criticism, it's just not very advertised. It to us many years ago told long ago by the late C. A. Pushkarev, which in the 50s was the Director of the Russian Museum and formed the collection of the Museum of avant-garde.
And critics of that generation, remember to kostakis not treated seriously as a critic, though he acknowledged his contribution to the preservation and promotion of art. Apparently, the job steward negatively influenced

And Zvereva and Yakovleva all critics knew and appreciated (except for holding on to quite extreme marxistic views). Not calculated would be without them collectors of these geniuses, I'm sure. Painfully neorhodomela was their painting.

[Vladimir]

Сообщение от Ольга Озолина

't figured would be without them collectors of these geniuses, I'm sure.

Nothing sure. Roomnew was not a critic. Grobman, too. Generally today the names of the collectors of the era can recall much faster than the names of the critics.

[Кирилл Сызранский]

Сообщение от Ольга Озолина

kostakis not treated seriously as a critic

So he was not.

[Ольга Озолина]

Colleagues, I think that to argue here is useless. I like resp.Secretary of the Rating center had the opportunity to chat with the critics, so I'm on the side of conclusions topicstarter article (maybe I'm not completely objective, because it would have been strange if I had not been on the side of the Zagraevsky ). So, who is himself a collector and communicates with colleagues on this very private world, maybe closer idea of the Almighty Market. Time will tell.
It is important for me that no one said, what are You, Olga, criticism is not dead, it is alive and thriving! So, really all so sad, as in topicstarter article.

[Кирилл Сызранский]

Сообщение от Ольга Озолина

critic is not dead, it is alive and thriving!

Never thought that someone can now seriously concerned about the fate of critics, for example, art.