Comments on: Ken Johnson’s Burden

By: Astrid Bowlby

Astrid Bowlby — Sun, 09 Dec 2012 22:52:05 +0000

I signed the petition under consideration. I did not do so anonymously. I am not interested in getting Ken Johnson fired, or anything of the sort. My first response upon reading his review of Now Dig This was “what else is new?” in that many, many people think the way Ken Johnson does about these issues. However, they are complicated issues and deserve an airing, a real examination. Our culture will become moribund otherwise. Ken Johnson put it out there. there is bravery in that. it is getting discussed in many ways and in many places. This is wonderful. Unfortunately, some people, including higher ups at the New York Times have chosen to view this as some kind of mob effort to bring down Ken Johnson and have responded thus, instead of seeing it as a golden opportunity to tackle all the b.s. that is running just under the surface of our culture. The comments here have heartened me greatly. Thank you.

By: Jeff Abell

Jeff Abell — Thu, 06 Dec 2012 04:42:51 +0000

As someone who spent many years publishing reviews of group shows and individual artists in a national magazine, i just want to note how difficult it can be, at times, to adequately frame a response to a group exhibition in language that is fair, balanced, historically and technically accurate, inclusive, respectful, etc. that also keeps to the editor’s prescribed word count. Unless someone has sat at a computer, trying to frame a thoughtful, cohesive set of comments on an exhibition, with a deadline breathing down one’s neck, and all the dreadful awareness that these comments will go out into the world, and the writer will bear the responsibility for every word (even when an editor changed a few to “liven up” the writing), then i think they really have no place launching a full-throttle attack on a professional art writer. We tend to hear (and hear and hear and hear) about bad reviews; in 30 years of writing about artists’ work, i can count the number of artists who thanked me on one hand.
Should critics who espouse racist or sexist viewpoints be allowed to continue writing? i think that’s a much bigger issue, in a culture that includes publishing giants like Rupert Murdoch, who sell papers spreading lies and misinformation. But in the New York Times? i just don’t see it.

By: Frank Gavere

Frank Gavere — Thu, 06 Dec 2012 01:52:58 +0000

I believe the critic expresses his views, not his employers, or that of his readership.His task is to discuss his reaction & thoughts about the work;possibly placing it in a context he feels it fits.His digression is His own, & as such is a issue of free aesthetic expression , much like the work he is reviewing. As such I may as an educated artist agree or disagree, but that still stops far short of getting out a rope & hanging him, or trying to get him fired.I would not of necessity find offense,or invent some offense, Id allow him to speak, & judge this by my own reaction to the work. Who among us has not said he strongly disagrees with a critics view on a work or works.I often think the point of criticism is to sharpen my critical reply,which has served the purpose of making me be a more thoughtful critic-al observer.I never read crits before seeing the works, becouse it may alter my reaction.First go look, then think about it, then read the critic.In any event, it has been my experience that critics get locked into the work of their time &tend to underwrite that inherent bias, far past its time.. If for no other reason they describe a position we will react to, and ponder,that is worthwhile.To remove a critics voice,is to propose a censor for this dialogue,& is just a bad idea…Agree or disagree, but dont hang the critic..
Are we all not Critics?
FG.