If you’ve been a subscriber for a while, you know that I’ve done some research about cultural critics of color (and that I’m an art critic myself). So I’ve been following with some interest the current “crisis” of criticism. Since July, when the New York Times announced the reassignment of four of its long-time critics in music, theater, and TV, there’s been a spate of articles and essays lamenting the decline of financial support for criticism (from Kenneth Lowe, Charlotte Klein, and The Art Daddy), reflecting on its changing form or tenor (from Richard Brody, Kelefa Sanneh, and Hell Gate), or ruminating on its place in our rapidly evolving media and cultural landscape (from Jed Perl and Jenny Wu).

Just a sampling, these articles explain how traditional models of funding and creating criticism no longer work in a journalism industry that never recovered from the rise of the internet and continues to crater in on itself. They mourn the depth and nuance lost as criticism moves to ever shorter, breezier, and attention-grabbing formats, chasing shorter, breezier attention spans (I’m looking at you, TikTok). And they rightly pinpoint the dangers of a critical landscape that is dominated by sponsored opinions and viral hot takes that serve only to drive clicks and profits.

One thing I kept hoping to see amid the hand-wringing was an explicit connection between a thriving critical sphere and the survival of our democracy. So last week, I threw my own missive on the pile, arguing for arts criticism as a space for learning how to disagree, a civic skill that seems to have vanished in our algorithmic age.

I also wondered what history had to tell us, because this is not the first time critics have felt their calling endangered. In the 2006 volume, Critical Mess: Art Critics on the State of their Practice, edited by Raphael Rubinstein, I took cold comfort in seeing that the concerns of 20 years ago were largely the same. Then, as now, publications were paring back space and dollars devoted to criticism, coverage was narrowing to a few celebrity and blockbuster shows and artists, and critics worried about their own irrelevance in the face of a surging art market where their thoughts seemed not to matter.

The differences between then and now are ones of degree, and the fears of 2006 look quaint by today’s standards. Critics then were worried about budget cuts to public broadcasting and the NEA, not their wholesale elimination. Career critics felt threatened by the rise of the “blogosphere” and the unwashed thoughts it spread; they had no idea of the stranglehold social media would come to exert on public discourse, let alone the near impossibility of making a career in criticism.

One striking difference was that several of the critics who contributed to Critical Mess referred to a conference I had never heard of. In 2005, a consortium of critics’ associations and the USC Annenberg School of Journalism held a "National Critics Conference” in Los Angeles, a gathering of critics in multiple disciplines from across the country (It was documented as far afield as Minnesota and Florida).

What a concept! Apparently it only happened once. Although discipline-specific critics associations continue to meet, I haven’t heard of any cross-disciplinary get-togethers. When did critics stop meeting up as critics? (Probably around the same time full-time positions in criticism and living-wage freelance rates began to disappear … sometime in the 1990s.)

Speaking of which, the sunsetting (sob!) publication Art Papers recently re-released its 1990 special issue on criticism, which was also a product of a conference, the Southeastern Conference on Regional Arts Criticism. It was stunning to notice that none of these 1990 essays worried about the form’s survival. They grappled with the unmooring of modernist standards, the limitations of Eurocentricity, and the relationship between criticism and social activism, but none of the contributors seemed concerned that criticism itself might go away.

In some ways, calls in the 1990s for broadening and diversifying who/what constitutes a critic/criticism have come to fruition. That is as it should be. What hasn’t kept up is the value — both financial and civic — we place on powerful, independent, critical voices, no matter where they come from.

It’s not too late. This holiday season, please consider subscribing to, gifting, or just supporting an independent publication (a Substack, a Patreon, maybe even a newspaper!) that features cultural criticism. What you’re supporting isn’t just opinions, it’s the space for reasoned, open dissent, disagreement, discussion: the foundation of public discourse itself.

Events & Opportunities

Community Archiving Happy Hour

I recently learned about these online meet ups for those working in or with community-based archives to share experiences, resources, information, etc. In addition to a linktr.ee, they also have compiled a great list of resources. The next Happy Hour is Thursday, December 4 (noon PT / 1pm MT / 2pm CT / 3pm ET). Join the Google Group to attend.

Opportunity at Sixty Inches From Center

Midwest folks: This vibrant art writing and community archiving organization is looking for 10 Regional Resource Editors to create state- and city-specific versions of their Resources Towards Solidarity, Care, and Community Defense that can be used across the Midwest.

‘Caring for Cultural Collections’ Workshops

California peeps: If you work in collections care, Balboa Art Conservation Center is offering two 3-day, in-person workshops with trained conservators. Upcoming dates are Dec. 10-12 in Santa Barbara and Jan. 21-23 in Eureka. Partial or fully subsidized seats are available and applications are accepted on a rolling basis.

National Survey of Artists

I’m looking forward to digging into this report from The Mellon Foundation and NORC at the University of Chicago about the findings from a survey of US artists about their lives and livelihoods. I know making a living as an artist is precarious for all but the top tier — I wonder if they are faring better than art critics!