"Apology of criticism - Форум по искусству и инвестициям в искусство

gans · 21.03.2010, 20:59

Certainly not for the "hero" to engage in reflection. The "hero" sword should cut down faster than brain decides to cut or not. So I spent the whole year, just published in the most odious LJ quotations and provided them with caustic or encouraging comments. But once one does not do, will have to yourself. First, we classify criticism.

Right - all kinds of obscurantists + agents of the past. These usually do not like you he (a Jew, a Muscovite, a Moldavian, son of A. Gelman, putinoid or vice versa, each Limonov) do not like modern art as such (it's not art, too provocative, teaches nothing, does not serve as "excellent", not ours, not primordial, and brought in from the West, unlike the pictures of the "native tongue") is not satisfied with the figure of the artist dare to think freely about politics, God. These are so many and they are so diverse that they will be discussed in a separate post.

Criticism of the right - this is a factor. It has always existed. It is often ignorant, not giving himself the trouble to understand the criticism (like I do not want to understand the sorts of shit, I'm sure your Duchamp, that Warhol that Malevich). It helps judice - to decide. Shares artistic community into "us" and "them" even if the person does not understand art. Well, that is, burn "our" books Sorokina Yakimenko or acts against the inclusion Gelman in the OP, but Dugintsy against the exhibition Rossiya2. For some, this is a signal. Criticism of the right often uses the past as a cudgel. At one time, spread rot Nikolai Ge with the help of Leonardo. Now, using Fe, to prove "neoduhotvorennost Syndicate. Most like to appeal to Sezzanu and Rembrandt.

Читать дальше...

the left - young artists, leftist theorists, "the eternal revolutionaries. To them you're part of the system. The first of the capitalist system transforms art into a commodity, dictating "relevance", the emerging institutions of "stars". To them you're establishment. They are opposed to the museum in principle. History of art for them - an instrument of suppression of freedom, which requires the artist to reproduce indefinitely "actual discourse. You're so bad how to cooperate with political power and capital. Yavlyaeshsya part of a protest sublimated into a secular event.

Criticism of the left - is perceived by the community is very interested. These critics, in contrast to the right, most often dealt with that criticism. Revolutionaries - those who criticize me his community. Art System seeks to incorporate them into itself, including for what would finally merge with the world of capital and power. Save suverinitet art. Often, critics on the left are the flagships (Boyce, Fluxus). Critics on the left - it marginalia system, part of it. Art community takes them another reason that over time revolutionary protest gets spectacular form and successfully muzeefitsiruetsya.

Sideways - interested. Those who would suit all, if they all participated in this. Those whose interests your work touches directly (they think so). For example, in New York Exhibition Blue noses, or work Gozhi Ostretsov bought Saatchi. They think that it is their quota with the help of my tricks given to these artists. The same is true for example Ismagilova which asks the governor to give him a river station. As it turned out that was boarded up for many years, then suddenly turned into a museum - he does not understand. Understands simple, that instead of there Gutova and Florensky could be with his wife and son.

Criticism from the side - is the voice of a loser. Imagine in Moscow now 7 thousand artists. More not less active in the artistic life 150. It is unlikely that the remaining 6850 consider themselves insufficiently talented. They believe that the system is unfair. What is the solution it must be made through cronyism, bribery, bed. In an extreme case, community leaders are incompetent. "Gelman made more than 400 exhibitions? Artists with whom he works represent Russia in all international forums? Survey of professionals has identified it as one of the most influential figures in the Russian art world? It means nothing. I do not like, I was not there - then it mediocre, marginal, etc. "

Criticism From Within - Most critics - are artists. Formulating for themselves "what is art" they projected their system at all. And those who do not fit into the template - are "bogie": - formalist, literariness, design, poster, Glamour, provocation, secondary, oven, Entertainment,, cartoon, etc. But sometimes it applies to the curators. This is a "competitor" who catch your mistakes, and their criticism is not criticism, and fixing the negative points and yellow cards. For example: galerist Gelman became director of the museum - a conflict of interest. All true. Few international artists. Also true. We hear that and take into consideration. From the gallery distancing, the vision to invite an American co-curator, so that the number of international stars is the envy of Moscow's museums.

Inside criticism often resembles a dialogue. It brings together artists with the same software settings in the group. It generates manifestos. This is the glue connecting individual events in the artistic process. This naming of things "by their names." Here the main thing to understand that "one is no truth" and that we should look for one that you organic. Some believe that the art of politics - death. Other that, regardless of political expression the artist - just a designer. The main thing to understand - what you think and why.

Situational criticism: that by and large anyway. They solve their problems. You're for them sparring partner, with which they are positioning themselves and advertise. Well, in some cases are trying to deal with his political opponents - thy partners. Do these "claims" no. They can borrow them from all others. And sometimes borrow conflicting claims. Thus, in one text can be assaults on contemporary art, which is the traditional view "is not art at all" and claims to ensure that "we brought junk" which in Venice three years ago, all have already seen.

And finally, a rare and coveted critic - analyst. Which compares the tasks that you put before the results of your activities. And look - turns out or not. Correctly formulated problem. What are you waiting for an ambush. Etc. The agent of art history. Removal and interested only in one thing - to find traces of the total in the private sector. Objectify subjective. It was he who once rightly observed that Guelman Gallery, played a key role in Russian art, 90 - became the "one" - a zero. One of the best, but in a series.

http://maratguelman.livejournal.com/1355670.html

Кирилл Сызранский · 21.03.2010, 21:41

Цитата:

The same is true for example Ismagilova who asks the governor to give him a river station. As it so happened that stood boarded up for many years, and then suddenly turned into a museum - he does not understand. Understands simple, that instead of there Gutova and Florensky could be with his wife and son.

Ravil Barilovich Ismagilov (born in 1940.) Chairman of the Perm Dep. SC RF.

Posav · 22.03.2010, 00:17

gans,
you have written "criticism on the right. But here, in Russia, "right" two factions. For example, the Union of Right Forces, Yavlinsky, Nemtsov, and all those pro-American liberals are right on Western concepts. But "United Russia" - too right. I saw on their website headlines "Why I am a conservative and policies of their right, liberal. Liberals and neo-conservatives are right and always in the coalition. Simply they are not (yet) been friends, and fight for positions. So here I see inconsistency in your classification.

gans · 22.03.2010, 01:07

Posav, all claims Gelman.

Кирилл Сызранский · 22.03.2010, 01:13

Цитата:

Сообщение от gans

Posav, all claims Gelman.

Over here, please:
http://forum.artinvestment.ru/member.php?u=40581

21.03.2010, 20:59	Язык оригинала: Русский #1
gans Гуру Регистрация: 15.03.2009 Сообщений: 2,264 Спасибо: 1,961 Поблагодарили 3,561 раз(а) в 765 сообщениях Записей в дневнике: 29 Репутация: 4950	"Apology of criticism Certainly not for the "hero" to engage in reflection. The "hero" sword should cut down faster than brain decides to cut or not. So I spent the whole year, just published in the most odious LJ quotations and provided them with caustic or encouraging comments. But once one does not do, will have to yourself. First, we classify criticism. Right - all kinds of obscurantists + agents of the past. These usually do not like you he (a Jew, a Muscovite, a Moldavian, son of A. Gelman, putinoid or vice versa, each Limonov) do not like modern art as such (it's not art, too provocative, teaches nothing, does not serve as "excellent", not ours, not primordial, and brought in from the West, unlike the pictures of the "native tongue") is not satisfied with the figure of the artist dare to think freely about politics, God. These are so many and they are so diverse that they will be discussed in a separate post. Criticism of the right - this is a factor. It has always existed. It is often ignorant, not giving himself the trouble to understand the criticism (like I do not want to understand the sorts of shit, I'm sure your Duchamp, that Warhol that Malevich). It helps judice - to decide. Shares artistic community into "us" and "them" even if the person does not understand art. Well, that is, burn "our" books Sorokina Yakimenko or acts against the inclusion Gelman in the OP, but Dugintsy against the exhibition Rossiya2. For some, this is a signal. Criticism of the right often uses the past as a cudgel. At one time, spread rot Nikolai Ge with the help of Leonardo. Now, using Fe, to prove "neoduhotvorennost Syndicate. Most like to appeal to Sezzanu and Rembrandt. Читать дальше... the left - young artists, leftist theorists, "the eternal revolutionaries. To them you're part of the system. The first of the capitalist system transforms art into a commodity, dictating "relevance", the emerging institutions of "stars". To them you're establishment. They are opposed to the museum in principle. History of art for them - an instrument of suppression of freedom, which requires the artist to reproduce indefinitely "actual discourse. You're so bad how to cooperate with political power and capital. Yavlyaeshsya part of a protest sublimated into a secular event. Criticism of the left - is perceived by the community is very interested. These critics, in contrast to the right, most often dealt with that criticism. Revolutionaries - those who criticize me his community. Art System seeks to incorporate them into itself, including for what would finally merge with the world of capital and power. Save suverinitet art. Often, critics on the left are the flagships (Boyce, Fluxus). Critics on the left - it marginalia system, part of it. Art community takes them another reason that over time revolutionary protest gets spectacular form and successfully muzeefitsiruetsya. Sideways - interested. Those who would suit all, if they all participated in this. Those whose interests your work touches directly (they think so). For example, in New York Exhibition Blue noses, or work Gozhi Ostretsov bought Saatchi. They think that it is their quota with the help of my tricks given to these artists. The same is true for example Ismagilova which asks the governor to give him a river station. As it turned out that was boarded up for many years, then suddenly turned into a museum - he does not understand. Understands simple, that instead of there Gutova and Florensky could be with his wife and son. Criticism from the side - is the voice of a loser. Imagine in Moscow now 7 thousand artists. More not less active in the artistic life 150. It is unlikely that the remaining 6850 consider themselves insufficiently talented. They believe that the system is unfair. What is the solution it must be made through cronyism, bribery, bed. In an extreme case, community leaders are incompetent. "Gelman made more than 400 exhibitions? Artists with whom he works represent Russia in all international forums? Survey of professionals has identified it as one of the most influential figures in the Russian art world? It means nothing. I do not like, I was not there - then it mediocre, marginal, etc. " Criticism From Within - Most critics - are artists. Formulating for themselves "what is art" they projected their system at all. And those who do not fit into the template - are "bogie": - formalist, literariness, design, poster, Glamour, provocation, secondary, oven, Entertainment,, cartoon, etc. But sometimes it applies to the curators. This is a "competitor" who catch your mistakes, and their criticism is not criticism, and fixing the negative points and yellow cards. For example: galerist Gelman became director of the museum - a conflict of interest. All true. Few international artists. Also true. We hear that and take into consideration. From the gallery distancing, the vision to invite an American co-curator, so that the number of international stars is the envy of Moscow's museums. Inside criticism often resembles a dialogue. It brings together artists with the same software settings in the group. It generates manifestos. This is the glue connecting individual events in the artistic process. This naming of things "by their names." Here the main thing to understand that "one is no truth" and that we should look for one that you organic. Some believe that the art of politics - death. Other that, regardless of political expression the artist - just a designer. The main thing to understand - what you think and why. Situational criticism: that by and large anyway. They solve their problems. You're for them sparring partner, with which they are positioning themselves and advertise. Well, in some cases are trying to deal with his political opponents - thy partners. Do these "claims" no. They can borrow them from all others. And sometimes borrow conflicting claims. Thus, in one text can be assaults on contemporary art, which is the traditional view "is not art at all" and claims to ensure that "we brought junk" which in Venice three years ago, all have already seen. And finally, a rare and coveted critic - analyst. Which compares the tasks that you put before the results of your activities. And look - turns out or not. Correctly formulated problem. What are you waiting for an ambush. Etc. The agent of art history. Removal and interested only in one thing - to find traces of the total in the private sector. Objectify subjective. It was he who once rightly observed that Guelman Gallery, played a key role in Russian art, 90 - became the "one" - a zero. One of the best, but in a series. http://maratguelman.livejournal.com/1355670.html

Похожие темы
Тема	Автор	Разделы	Ответов	Последние сообщения
London critics quarreled painting by Damien Hirst	vyadem	Exhibitions and events	92	12.06.2013 18:46
Contemporary Art. Criticism of criticism)))	LCR	Artists, artworks, art history	27	18.07.2008 18:17

22.03.2010, 00:17	Язык оригинала: Русский #3
Posav Banned Регистрация: 11.07.2009 Сообщений: 1,789 Спасибо: 852 Поблагодарили 1,805 раз(а) в 972 сообщениях Записей в дневнике: 23 Репутация: 3342	gans, you have written "criticism on the right. But here, in Russia, "right" two factions. For example, the Union of Right Forces, Yavlinsky, Nemtsov, and all those pro-American liberals are right on Western concepts. But "United Russia" - too right. I saw on their website headlines "Why I am a conservative and policies of their right, liberal. Liberals and neo-conservatives are right and always in the coalition. Simply they are not (yet) been friends, and fight for positions. So here I see inconsistency in your classification.

22.03.2010, 01:07	Язык оригинала: Русский #4
gans Гуру Регистрация: 15.03.2009 Сообщений: 2,264 Спасибо: 1,961 Поблагодарили 3,561 раз(а) в 765 сообщениях Записей в дневнике: 29 Репутация: 4950	Posav, all claims Gelman.