Post #307 • June 25, 2004, 9:45 AM • 125 Comments
I have to confess that last night's panel discussion is difficult for me to recall in detail - I think being on the spot like that took me out of the observer mode that I use to remember art shows. It was well-attended. I remember making a lot of points that I've already made on this blog. I'm hoping that Artblog.net readers can fill in some details for me. (Frankly, it's a little weird. Sorry.)
I do wish that we had gotten into some tougher issues earlier. Conflict of interest was brought up as a closing point right at the end of 90 minutes - I had some thoughts all ready to go, but moderator Alfredo Triff wanted to end on time. He suggested that we go read Michael Betancourt's recent piece on the matter.
Anyone who attended may have noticed that Frederic Snitzer and I were talking afterwards in a manner that seemed like he was laying into me. I guess he was, but he had some good points - he accused me of trying to evince a clever personality in my writing, sort of like Dave Barry does. He said that he would bet that when I'm critiquing a student I'm not as interesting of a voice, but I deal with the work, good or bad, understand it, say what needs to be said about it to make it better, and leave it at that; he says that serious criticism should be the same way. It's worth considering.
Update: Jide weighs in.