Extraordinary Art Blogs Series, Part 2: Extraordinary Critique

See Catherine Spaeth’s art blog profile, visit the Catherine Spaeth art blog.

The story so far
In the process of compiling over 100 art blog profiles, and starting what will be an ongoing survey of the art blog scene, we accumulated a whole range of questions we wanted to investigate further.

As a part of this series, we have explored the extraordinary growth of an art blog with Ruben Natal-San Miguel from ARTmostfierce, and providing extraordinarily cohesive coverage with Christopher Reiger from Hungry Hyaena.

In today’s discussion, we will explore the factors that are required to produce high quality art critique. I am pleased to be joined for this discussion by Catherine Spaeth. For those of you who do not already know Catherine, she is a professional art historian and critic, and a lecturer of Contemporary Art at Purchase College (located in Westchester County, New York). Catherine also provides private art tours of museums and galleries in New York.

Peter Cowling – loveart (PC)
You first started blogging back in October 2007. What factors prompted you to commit to writing a blog?

Catherine Spaeth (CS)
I was writing for magazines and newspapers, and after studying the history of contemporary art for so long was very frustrated by the limits upon one’s writing in the established forms of print media. Many magazines, for example, are not interested in reviewing group shows. I provide well-curated art tours privately, and in New York there are amazing appearances of things down the street from one another. This is just the way that art is visible here, works of art can be like ideas bouncing off one another, and this is often very interesting. I felt compelled to write in a way that newspapers and magazines do not appreciate, and there was really nothing to stop me from doing it.

PC
It is one of the very best moments, when you are able to think ‘why not, there is nothing stopping me’.

Now, one opportunity I would like to get your thoughts on would be bloggers who want to develop the ability to produce better-written art critique. Before we start, perhaps you could set out your thoughts on the job of an art historian when writing critique?

CS
I think the first job, really, is to respond to what’s immediately before you, and this is why I am drawn to contemporary art to the extent that I am. It is the job of the art historian to be adequate to that. So description, being able to describe an experience of something, is where it starts. And then it begins to get interesting because there are always competing histories in any choice of words. Knowing the history of art criticism is crucial – you do align yourself within a history of words, carry that history forward even as you are re-writing it, bearing upon it with the inflections, corrections of your own time. The work you are doing remains that of description, these words adhere to the work of art at the same time – they are not loose interpretations and you can really tell when they are failing to stick to the object and when they are successful in describing it.

PC
Okay, so it is completely possible to critique contemporary art as an art historian?

CS
From my perspective, it is impossible not to critique contemporary art as an art historian. This is not in the flippant sense that because I am an art historian I think art historically, but because art actually thinks, and there is a history of thought that it is thinking with and inside of. I feel that if you are not attending to that you are missing the best of it.

PC
I tend to think of the writing on your blog as being highly accessible, but that is probably the wrong description. It is not accessible in the sense that any child could read it, but it is in the sense that it makes the art you critique highly accessible. Is that your intention, and do you have any perspective on the wider debate about the need for art to be ‘dumbed-down’ in order to accommodate a wider audience?

CS
I have been a strong advocate for the expression of difficult ideas in arts writing. I am quick to condemn other art’s writers who make jabs at difficult language when it comes off as sheer anti-intellectualism, and it frequently does. So by making a work of art accessible without skirting away from difficult ideas, one is acknowledging the thought of the work, making it visible – not simply glossing over it. In turn, I always write with something at stake, and those stakes are sensed out of the art.

There is no one art world, and so I don’t have much at stake in condemning art or art writing that is accessible. I do, however, take very strong objection to what you are referring to as “dumbing down” when it is relied upon as uncritical fodder for the market. For this reason there is a very important role for the academy and the museum to uphold a place for scholarly research. But I have also seen some atrocious academic writing, produced by galleries especially, that relies upon a history of philosophical thought to dress something up for the market.

PC
One way in which the writing on your blog stands out is that you do not seek to impose a single flow of thought where none should exist. It seems to me that this works because you build your thoughts around the art, rather than trying to shoehorn the art into an a-z style of writing. Is this an accurate reading of your approach? Could you give some perspective on the overall writing style you utilize when writing a blog entry?

CS
Right. I think there is a way to have authority in your writing by successfully delivering the sense of the object and it meanings, and to do this in such a way that your address to others is quite broad and generous. The form of the blog is perfect for this kind of openness in writing. And it really does start from being very open to the art, attending to it. It is not that there aren’t strong declarative statements in my writing, and I do think I am saying what things are. But there is an awful lot of room in what things are.

PC
Another aspect that stands out is your use of references, and analogies. Do you have any tips on how to balance the desire to be inclusive with the need to maintain momentum?

CS
I don’t think there are tools, per se. Inside of your question there might be something about reach, and I do enjoy having a lot of reach. This has to do with that sense of there being a lot of room in things. By this I mean that the meanings generated by a work of art extend into the larger context of the world at large, and it is here as well that you are becoming art historical. The references and analogies that appear are only appearing because the work of art as I understand it has that kind of reach, it really comes from there. As for momentum, you might call it running room. But in order to see it perhaps you need a lot of curiousity, and the self-criticism to be playfully aware of your own tics and habits. Sometimes even references and analogies are really in the way, will slow things down, and you need to bust through them entirely to get back to the work at hand. It’s not about what you already know, there is a sense of being taken up by a history of thought when you write about art.

PC
Art historians are able to build-up an extensive and detailed understanding of their chosen area of expertise. It is tempting to think, then, that art historians are just the sum of their facts, applied to a given situation. I do not agree with that view – not least because I have seen art historians who provide illuminating insight into art they have little prior knowledge about. Is it the case that art historians develop a systematic approach to viewing and thinking about art?

CS
For myself there is no system or method. If I have a system, I suppose it is that I know the history of words and their use with relevance to the objects they’ve described. So for example if a word like “complicity” shows up when I am looking at and thinking about a work of art, I am automatically beholden to that word and its histories, and can’t help writing from the perspective of the question, “What does it mean, when I look at this specific work of art, to use the word complicity as an expression of this time, given its history with regard to art?” There is a great deal of care in that. And so maybe the systematic approach would be in this way of caring.

PC
There are many places where you can get information about art, and we have seen a great deal of diversity in the 400 or so art blogs we know exist. However, the number of art historians maintaining a blog is relatively small.

In my experience, art historians are not generally disposed to have the character traits of, for example, theoretical physicists who consider explaining their findings a distraction to their continual explorations. (Richard Feynman being an exception to the idea that theoretical physicists never enjoy explaining their thoughts to others.)

Looking at other factors, it is understandable that time pressures have an impact. Perhaps the opportunity to write articles or books, teach, provide tours, curate, etc., compete for available time. Is it a factor that these opportunities have the benefit of an instant return of investment, whereas blogging is not?

CS
Well, all of these things you mention in fact pay very little and are few and far between. So I really would put it in the context of how one enjoys writing.

PC
What would you say are the unique benefits of blogging?

CS
It is really very liberating to not be too hung up on the preciousness of your words and to make yourself vulnerable, unedited by another and accountable to a public audience. Art historians are not really supposed to to be thinking aloud in public, this is a fearsome thing. I know that I am becoming a better writer because of it, and for me it was the unstoppable compulsion to write that brought me here.

PC
My perception is that art historians and curators sometimes lack the technical tools, or that they are reluctant to get involved in new technology. I think there is an opportunity for institutions to make much better use of blogging technologies, and perhaps to de-formalise the process of blogging, so that the entries become a little less…rigid and formulaic, and a little more personal. What would be your perspective on this area?

CS
Classrooms are all going digital, so art historians have long ago realized they need to catch up with technology. Slide projectors are long gone. And platforms are becoming friendlier – Moodle is more bloglike than Blackboard for example, and many schools are making the switch. So it is not that people are unwilling to use technologies. Although I should add that I have not yet stepped past Blogger, which is just about the easiest template out there. At any rate, I would say that it’s not a fear of the technology, but more the worries over what it means to write in public that seems to be of concern to others.

PC
One problem particular to writers who add a lot of value and insight through their critical writing is the risk of plagiarism. I understand that this is a real issue, and have some questions on the actual risks and potential solutions, but to what extent do you think the perception of this risk prevents others from starting to blog?

CS
It’s huge. It’s the first question an audience of academics will ask when you present the blog as vehicle for establishing a career and a vehicle for teaching. I have to tell them that you have to be someone who can let go of old notions of intellectual property. But this is also what sorts out the writers from the rest – if you keep on writing, keep on providing content, the people who count for you are going to know who you are, they are going to find you and you them. If someone is plagiarizing, they can’t live up to the consistency of a writer, and so it is going to show, plain and simple. A reader can tell which one is the plagiarizer and which one is the real thing. It was in fact a reader who discovered that I had been plagiarized.

PC
Having recently faced this issue firsthand, I wanted to ask you about your decision to publish your work under license. First-off did you have this licence in place from the start of was that a reaction to your recent problem?

CS
That was long before I was plagiarized, I was watching what other people do and was grateful for the Creative Commons license – it’s yet another opportunity to publicly establish your ethics, like not using Google Ads.

PC
Okay, so the licence you have in place grants people the right to re-use your content, on the proviso that appropriate attribution is made, and that the consumer of your work is not using it for commercial purposes. Do these terms provide you with the assurance you require that your rights will be appropriately protected should you face plagiarism in the future?

Notes:

• See Catherine’s posts Brief Note on Plagiarism, Authenticity Truth and Deception, and Plagiarism Art Criticism and Web for more detail.
• Catherine Spaeth is not a lawyer, and the answers provided below do not constitute legal counsel.

CS
The Creative Commons license that I’ve chosen establishes the same terms of agreement that would exist in academic publishing. But the web is an entirely different thing, and as you note I have learned this the hard way and have written about the difficulty of this. There is no protection other than the publicity of your own blog – the capacity to broadcast an infringement.

PC
What tips do you have to share with others who are concerned about the possibility that their work is being plagiarised, but are not sure how to go about checking out whether it is or not?

CS
Check your sitemeter often, know who is reading your blog.

PC
And what if they actually discover their work has been plagiarised?

CS
Out both the writer and the publications in public – no more behind the scenes negotiating. It is a huge problem, and there needs to be a community of shared ethics established around this issue, which won’t happen if it’s all hidden in the dark. Those essays need to be removed from the sites, and public apologies should be written, that is the standard and it needs to be maintained. Magazines and websites need to be held more accountable for knowing the work of their writers well, for seeking out those who are proven in the field.

PC
You have The Neuberger Museum of Art at Purchase. I have never been, but have only ever heard good things. Is the Museum actually on the grounds of the college?

CS
Yes, it was actually the first building built on the campus – Purchase was imagined by Rockefeller to be the arts college in the SUNY system. It’s quite important how and why in the Vietnam War era the role of the arts emerged in higher education as a response to the student unrest, and I love being able to teach this history in my classroom!

PC
I guess that the Museum is one of the key attractions to your job? I mean having one of the biggest art museums in New York state on your doorstep is pretty neat.

CS
It has been so much better under the helm of Thom Collins, who has really worked hard to integrate museum programming into campus life. Earlier exhibitions tended to be pretty safe in a “gem of suburbia” sort of way. But the museum remains very much an outpost – people in Westchester who have the means can sit on the board of major museums in the city, and when the market was doing so well it was actually quite difficult to even secure loans from galleries. You have to remember that the city is not much more than half an hour by train. Even so, there have been truly fantastic exhibitions at the Neuberger, and as I weave the content of my blog into the classroom, the same is true of the Neuberger.

I have to say though, that the museum is not the key attraction for me but the students at Purchase. I have previously taught in an arts school that did not place a strong emphasis on the Humanities, and there it was the case that students were being taught to think that all they need to know happens in the studio. So it is truly a pleasure to teach in a place that values the history of art, and to work with students who on their own are going to the galleries and museums in the city. I learn from them, too.