An art critic is a person who is specialized in analyzing, interpreting, and evaluating
art. Their written critiques or reviews contribute to
art criticism and they are published in newspapers, magazines, books, exhibition brochures, and catalogues and on websites. Some of today's art critics use
art blogs and other online platforms in order to connect with a wider audience and expand debate about
art.
Differently from art history, there is not an institutionalized training for art critics (with only few exceptions); art critics come from different backgrounds and they may or may not be university trained.[2] Professional art critics are expected to have a keen eye for art and a thorough knowledge of
art history. Typically the art critic views art at
exhibitions,
galleries,
museums or
artists'
studios and they can be members of the
International Association of Art Critics which has national sections.[3] Very rarely art critics earn their living from writing criticism.
The opinions of art critics have the potential to stir debate on art-related topics. Due to this the viewpoints of art critics writing for art publications and newspapers adds to public discourse concerning art and culture.
Art collectors and patrons often rely on the advice of such
critics as a way to enhance their appreciation of the art they are viewing. Many now-famous and celebrated artists were not recognized by the art critics of their time, often because their art was in a style not yet understood or favored. Conversely, some critics, have become particularly important helping to explain and promote new
art movements –
Roger Fry with the
Post-Impressionist movement,
Lawrence Alloway with
pop art as examples.
Controversies
According to James Elkins[4] there is a distinction between art criticism and art history based on institutional, contextual, and commercial criteria; the history of
art criticism is taught in universities, but the practice of art criticism is excluded institutionally from academia. An experience-related article is Agnieszka Gratza.[5] Always according to James Elkins in smaller and developing countries, newspaper art criticism normally serves as art history. James Elkins's perspective portraits his personal link to
art history and
art historians and in What happened to art criticism he furthermore highlights the gap between art historians and art critics by suggesting that the first rarely cite the second as a source and that the second miss an academic discipline to refer to.[6]
Portrait of
John Neal by
Sarah Miriam Peale, 1823. Neal is regarded as the first American art critic[8][9] and was also an influential writer and literary critic.
Édouard Manet, Portrait of
Émile Zola, 1868,
Musée d'Orsay. Émile Zola (1840-1902) was an influential French
writer, and art critic. He was a major figure in the exoneration of the falsely accused and convicted army officer
Alfred Dreyfus.[11]
Roger FrySelf-portrait, 1928. He was described by
Kenneth Clark as "incomparably the greatest influence on taste since
Ruskin... In so far as taste can be changed by one man, it was changed by Roger Fry".[14]
^Dickson, Harold Edward (1943). Observations on American Art: Selections from the Writings of John Neal (1793–1876). State College, Pennsylvania: Pennsylvania State College. p. ix.
^Sears, Donald A. (1978). John Neal. Boston, Massachusetts: Twayne Publishers. p. 118.
ISBN080-5-7723-08.
^Joanna Richardson, Baudelaire, St. Martin's Press, New York, 1994, p. 191,
ISBN0-312-11476-1.