I thoroughly enjoyed Ms Schmid's lectures more so than some of the other lectures we have had in this class thus far. Hearing her talk about the way she "writes with art" instead of just about it, made me think that she is really starting a conversation and participating in the art world in a valuable way.
The lecture was organized in a way that made it easy to follow and yet it was still very informative and complex. I agreed with what she said about how it is somewhat impossible to encapsulate art through language, and how it is like playing air guitar. But I find this kind of writing neither mimicry nor criticism, but rather an opening up of a dialogue between the artist, their audience, and also the writer. Although many artists are themselves sometimes hesitant to talk about what their art is actually "about", I don't think this type of writing necessarily tries to fill that void that the artist often does not, rather it aims to give a separate interpretation and brings a separate knowledge and perspective to the work itself.
I think Christina may have mentioned something along the lines of what I have just said, but there was someone in the audience that confused what she actually said with "the artist is incapable of dissecting and explaining their own work," and for some reason he seemed somewhat offended that Christina wanted to write "with art" instead of "about it". I think it is not meant to offend. She is trying to participate in the conversation of art, and if an artist does no want their to be a conversation about his / her art, then I don't know what the point of exhibiting it would be.