The other day I met a friend at an opening. He’s been reading Kloe, and it helped him to start his own blog about art and stuff, something he’d been meaning to do. But after his initial post, which was great, he found himself intimidated, thinking each entry had to be perfect, well thought-out, and lengthy. I murmured that some blogs, like mine, are more like twittering, little ideas about what I’m thinking or doing. I told him I like blogs where the writers post often and regularly, if sometimes cursorily.
My friend complimented me that I write about so many different topics, but may have just been being polite…
However, he got me thinking about my “lack” of long, in-depth posts. I used to believe I could be an author, that I enjoyed writing and had something to say. Keeping Kloe for the past two and a half years has cured me of literary aspirations. I don’t care about words enough—I often find them burdensome.
What Kloe has helped with, whether I have readers or not, is clarifying the important threads weaving through my life…
7 comments:
Interesting comment; I've found that since I started blogging about art in the Bay Area plus making longer posts about art movements that interest me that I've found my "voice" as a writer. Or, at least, am finding my voice. Of course, I am retired so I have more time but for me, being an art blogger has been what's given me an entry point into the wider art world here in SF. As a painter, I couldn't even get my little toe in the door but as a writer, I get respect (well, some), invites to shows and get to meet a lot of interesting people who are not painters but still involved in the art world. In fact, I am enjoying writing so much and spend so much time doing it that I am seriously questioning where my real talents lie. Maybe I'm a better (art) writer than a painter whereas you are probably a better painter than a writer. But, I hasten to add, please don't take that as a criticism. I enjoy your writing and found your writing on Turkey to be especially fascinating.
Kloe -
what is the website address of your friend's blog?
Dear Namaste,
I think it's fabulous that more is being written about local arts scenes. I don't know about the SF Chronicle or the weeklies up there, but down here there's about one published art critic for every two million people. Which means there's basically one critic. And he has way too much power.
So people who write blogs about the local visarts scene are beyond valuable. I'm sure you are deserving of the acclaim, and I wouldn't hesitate to use it. Enjoy your writing and painting both.
Kevin:
misterfobesart101.blogspot.com
If you don't know him, you should...
Yes of course, the gorgeous duct tape paintings that we both saw at the Cannon.
Perhaps you're comment about critics in this one critic town was "straight from the shoulder" as they say, that one critic being Pincus of course, does not I believe, have any power at all - at least in the sense of those now infamous and trotted out critics like Greenberg had way back when - machismo aside.
I personally like Pincus, respect the man and his work - did you know he was one of the first critics to write a major oeuvre on Edward Keinholz? It seems newspapers everywhere are already folding and/or have already done away with their arts sections in these tough economic times. Pincus was also recently saddled with editor of the book section at the tribune.
My point is this, I believe irregardless of whether you like what or how Pincus writes about art here in SD, he's handcuffed by the tribune and its editorial line that prevents him from writing "quality" reviews, it's not that he can't, it's just that he doesn't have the freedom to do so. He only has the apparence of being powerful because he's the only game in town.
A bigger question is why aren't the larger art magazines doing reviews of shows here in SD? CityBeat could play a much larger role but I doubt they will, prefering to sell advertising over talking about art to keep the paper running. There are many economic and arbitrary choices that are made unfortunately, that determine whether some review gets published.
Blogs at least here in SD, are crucial to maintaining any dialogue at all.
I absolutely agree with Kevin; art blogs are crucial to getting the word out to the public. We now only have one full time critic at the SF Chron and his choices of venues to review are largely people who have already made it in NY or Europe. He will sometimes review a good museum show but (mostly) not in depth. In any case, there's a real lack of "professional" journalist coverage here in the Bay Area which is why bloggers like me are increasingly being invited to press reviews of various art events. Of course, I'm utterly delighted and try to do justice to the opportunities that I'm being given. But if the newspapers weren't folding right and left, I'd never be given this chance. A lot of art critics slam the bloggers because we are seen as competition but really, if the papers were doing a better job, who would be reading us? Plus, I think that quality varies from blog to blog; there are some art blogs that aren't very good but most of the ones that I read maintain a very professional standard.
Nice discussion. It's not Pincus' fault he has no competition, and I'm sure he's very nice. But he does have power. I remember he was invited to a grad crit and it was like God was in the room...
I'm sorry I missed the Art Produce talk this past weekend on the state of art here is SD... but I'm hopeful you'll provide a synopsis and critique, Kevin.
And baby, I'm a John Wayne type of girl, shoot from the hip, always. Could never hold a big shoulder gun... xoxo
Ask and you shall receive. And I'll give you that too, you just might be a faster draw(er) than I am...
Panel discussion videos
Post a Comment