Art Critics

The Subject:

Although critics who write about the arts tend to deny the existence of any objective standards for evaluating works of art, they have a responsibility to establish standards by which works of art can be judged.


My Response:

It has been proposed that art critics have a responsibility to establish standards by which works of art can be judged. While the thought may be appealing to some, it is assuredly appalling to many more and most likely hardly even an afterthought to most. The truthfulness of the assertion depends entirely the person or people to whom these critics are to be held responsible.

Those who are interested in a particular art form are interested in it because of how it makes them feel. Art in every form is emotional, and no two people emote exactly alike. A person may find a critic with whom they may agree in most instances, but their opinions will invariably differ from time to time. How can a standard even be established, let alone adhered to, when each party may potentially feel different about a particular subject?

Regardless of whether standards are even possible in art critique, it would be an injustice to the critics to impose any standards on them. After all, is art critique not itself an art? Should they not be allowed to express their opinions unfettered by arbitrary rules?

I hold no critic responsible for adhering to any standards. Let the critics tell me how they feel, and I can either take it or leave it. They and I may, after all, not agree on what is and what is not enjoyable. This is hardly a matter of concern for me; what does it matter to poverty-stricken third-world farmer just struggling to survive?