Why we can’t write art reviews
Apart from the obvious lack of academic qualifications there are good reasons why we should be barred from reviewing art. One, art shows elicit only two types of reactions from us: violence and indifference. Of the first type there is violent admiration—in which we become a total fan and, having no outlet for our enthusiasm, take to stalking the artist or waging war upon the artist’s detractors. On the other end there is violent revulsion—in which we must combat the urge to rip the painting from the wall and smash it upon its perpetrator’s head, although sometimes this expresses itself in fits of hysterical laughter.
But the most painful reaction is indifference. We don’t like it, we don’t dislike it, its existence is an unnecessary expense of energy and likely, so is its creator’s.
The other, more obvious reason is that we make the discussion about ourself. Lacking academic qualifications, left to my own devices, what else are supposed to talk about?
Zobel, D’Bayan and the Shock of the New in Emotional Weather Report in the Philippine Star. Whenever it comes out.
November 20th, 2011 at 15:06
I could not find your column in today’s STAR but I got only 17 sections plus Starweek. On first page it announces 19 sections plus Starweek.
Sad, your columns interest me unless it is about rugby or sports in general.