ST. PAUL, Minn. — Superscript, a first-of-its-kind conference about arts journalism and criticism in the digital age, hosted by the Walker Art Center, was full of illuminating moments about the labor of writing. But it also left some things to be desired.
Very recently I was told that a certain art magazine editor, who had deleted the feminist critique from a review I had written, “can only take so much feminism.”
Out of Greensboro, North Carolina, comes some eyebrow-raising arts-journalism news: ArtsGreenboro, a nonprofit grant-giving arts organization, will underwrite a year’s worth of arts coverage in the Greensboro News & Record, the third-largest newspaper in North Carolina, Jim Romenesko reported on his blog.
A few weeks ago, the news broke that British newspaper the Independent on Sunday was cutting its cultural critics. Not just visual art, mind you: theater, music, TV, etc. The paper would lose all of its professional critics, and the arts section, until then called “The Critics,” would be renamed. The paper initially declined to comment.
Professional art history charlatan Silvano Vinceti has narrowed down his quest for the Mona Lisa’s definitely real body to one of three skeletons exhumed from Florence’s Santissima Annunziata basilica, all of which are currently being tested at the University of Bologna, the Guardian reports. The journalistic seriousness accorded to Vinceti’s antics suggests that the public hunger for arcane relics connected to famous artists is far from dying out. After all, dubious claims about the Mona Lisa, in all their sensational absence of verisimilitude, are something of the art world’s Shark Week.
LOS ANGELES — A few weeks ago, I wrote a bit about the potential for open arts journalism, asking if it’s a trend to watch. Journalists and those interested in the field have been discussing openness for a while now, but I’ve not seen as much discussion in terms of the arts. What could an open journalistic process look like in the arts?