Wilfrid LI wrote this post about the #ArtWorld no longer having prevailing trends https://wehavecookies.social/@wilfridl/116614267142534191
Then I saw this article about the end of the full time art critic.
The article talks about prominent art critics and their takes on art and I think this ties into what I was saying in my post.
The reduction and end of prominent art critics prevents predominant trends being formed, identified and maintained. This is possibly because art has become so eclectic and diverse and that the - usually white, Western- white-centric - critics have become irrelevant.
But also the death of #LegacyMedia and their cutting of staff means fewer leading critics arise to champion predominant trends.
I think it's a bit of both, but I also think critics' voices are just irrelevant to the art market. You could have hundreds of critics railing against Banksy, for example, but their opinions will have little influence on buyers, Banksy's fame or his prices.
There's a different authority now and I think it's more aligned to celebrity and media than to intellectual thought.
Wilfrid L (@[email protected])
I try to follow what's going down in the #ContemporaryArt scene, but I think a mixture of the internet and #decolonisation has saturated art reporting. Things are much more open and global than they were in the past. The art world has always been global, but in the West art has been primarily Western. What's really changed is that there used to be 'what's hot' in the artwork, a kind of current scene that dominated headlines. It didn't mean you cared much or was inspired by the current art trends, but they did serve as a kind of anchor that helped you know where you stood - either you liked it, partly liked it or hated it. Now it feels much more open. I suppose what's missing is a predominant trend that you can hate and rebel against. You still get big names, famous artists, but I don't feel like there is a one big scene we're all supposed to be interested in. #art #ArtWorld
Sim Barr
Mar Rodriguez