icon caret-left icon caret-right instagram pinterest linkedin facebook twitter goodreads question-circle facebook circle twitter circle linkedin circle instagram circle goodreads circle pinterest circle

Report from the Front

Art criticism, sometimes with context, occasional politics. New shows: "events;" how to support the online edition: "works."



One of the things that separates your true modernist from your postmodernist (at least when one is talking about contemporary artists and critics of the contemporary scene) is that true modernists go for the best art of the past as much as the best art of the present. The philosophy is that greatness doesn’t age or go out of style.

Your true postmodernist, on the other hand, is apt to dismiss any really good contemporary art that s/he doesn’t like as “old-fashioned,” and, when s/he is dealing with the art of the museums, there is an ever-so-slight hangover from the dadaists of World War I, who felt that museums were only repositories for “dead art,” the next thing to mausoleums, in fact. Any time a contemporary critic, on the NY Times or elsewhere, wants to cast aspersions on the Met, for example, s/he sneers at how it doesn't pay enough attention to contemporary art. Read More 
Be the first to comment