Christina Schmid lecture

| 3 Comments

I really appreciated Christina's talk because I could sense how passionately she spoke about what she does and the discipline of art criticism. What I found intriguing was that there were many forms to write about art, but each has its own way of presenting the subject. Some tend to be overly academic, while others are more like a conversation with the artist. I feel that outlets such as the internet, allows writers the freedom to write with art by embracing the inherent conversational qualities of visual art. This type of writing feels much more personal and engaging, Instead of the usual black and white perspective that comments on whether a piece is successful or unsuccessful.

I am glad that there are writers like Christina that help interpret artwork. Because I find it immensely helpful to listen to interpretations from others because they often highlight aspects in my artwork that I would have never noticed. These ideas tend to occur subconsciously until that moment when someone gives a new perspective that transforms them into ideas that can be further explored. I appreciate interpretation because it invites the artist to think about their work in a wider context instead of only thinking about the processes that lead up to the finished product. Conversations with others definitely is incredibly helpful because it allows me to see the work in a whole different way I couldn't have possibly have seen on my own.

3 Comments

I completely agree when you say that writers like Christina are helpful to working artists. The perspectives that they can give are hugely helpful in order to learn more about your work and develop it further. The conversations that are started by critics in their various forms can often play a huge role in the development of the artist themselves, helping them grow and learn to do more. It's a whole new way of thinking to realize the importance of, and I think it's the next emergent model.

It's good for artists to know that feed back on their work is constructive. Because their work is not just for themselves if they are displaying it in galleries and therefore should put some effort into making a piece that the viewer will enjoy and that follows the conventional rules of what good art is. Also, the negative feed back is probably the most constructive. In Schmid's talk, she mentioned how she likes to write negative comments. But she definitely did not seem malicious about it at all. Only helpful.

I agree, especially with what Christina said about "writing with art" and "if a show wasn't written about, it never happened. It's also true what she said about interpreting artwork, and I agree that it's definitely helpful and interesting to read someone else's interpretation of an artwork, because you might have thought about the work entirely different from the,

Leave a comment

About this Entry

This page contains a single entry by nguye964 published on April 12, 2013 10:56 AM.

Dianna Molzan and Alex Olson artist talk was the previous entry in this blog.

Christina Schmid is the next entry in this blog.

Find recent content on the main index or look in the archives to find all content.