> How has free online art discussion impacted the art critical professions?
> Have we witnessed the beginning of the end for the salarIed art critic
> and/or a rise in the independent art critical practitioner?
>

A couple of years ago there was a big outcry in Chicago about there no
longer being any paid arts writers for newspapers and other local
publications as a result of dwindling funds in the publishing sector of the
major midwestern news outlets. Since then, I've been thinking about what it
means to be an - as it's named above - independent art
critical practitioner and what responsibilities I have to my audience and
the publications. I've written on "new media," netart, digital art, and
contemporary art in general for Bad at Sports for many years and constantly
think about what my contribution to the discourse is as someone who doesn't
get paid for his writing. In many ways, I feel glad that I don't make money
to write my 2cents for that site because I feel it would put pressure on
the type of contributions I want to make. I think I've established a
reputation of skepticism and criticality as a result of not having to do
traditional reportage, and I'm very satisfied with the ways that's
developed for me personally.

That being said, I still get confounded with the notion of representing
this audience to others. Bad at Sports is not an art+tech blog and covers a
extensive - and amazing, I might add - swath of contemporary art practices.
As a result, I often worry that I need to "represent" the work of my peers
and other fellow "net ppl" in this context in order to champion that work
within a broader art historical conversation. I hate having to do this, to
be honest, because it means that my worries point to my own marginality as
a writer and thinker, and as a result make me feel like I often have to
defend work, projects, or artists in such a way that I otherwise wouldn't
need to as a salaried critic. In other words, because it's a labor of love,
I tend to love the work I write about. Whereas if I was a paid critic I
wonder if I might not be more overtly critical about the
failings/shortcomings of digital disciplines. But I try to pepper that in
when I can and strike a balance between rooting for my peeps and taking
them - and myself - to task when need be.


>
> Are these collaborative, iterative, performative practices and if so, are
> they all that new? And how else might the be described?
>

Following up on the above (in a way), I tend to think about my
writing/criticism as a central part of my artistic practice. I don't think
"right, now I'm a critic doing the critic thing." That writing is just one
element or a larger practice, and I tend to think of many artists/academics
that feel the same way (the good ones at least). Within my own "writing"
I've tried to do several interviews with artists that employ their medium
to talk about their work. This has manifested by talking with Jon Rafman in
SecondLife, interviewing with Jason Rohrer through his gameSleep is Death,
and having a discussion with Ryder Ripps in Dump.fm. I think of these
scenarios of not only enacting the medium/discipline of the artist as a
site to meta-discuss their work, but also as a way of practicing my own
ability as a writer. In other words, how can SecondlLife be a writing
platform the same way as Dump.fm. So to describe these practices and
processes as something limited to a singular form (like writing) seems to
negate the potential for a critic to be able to express their craft in
other mediums.


> What do these ways of working mean for the discipline of art history? How
> can we validate or teach these approaches?
>

Validation is a narcissistic task and usually only serves to elevate those
that seek academic power. Teaching is the better option of the two, because
in teaching an implication of constant inquiry can be applied. That being
said, teaching leads to things getting "learned" - a process of finality
and reduction all on it's own. Some other alternative must be available to
historians as a way to discuss their work with meaning without worry about
desire for longevity/legacy. I guess something like poetry would be a
better metric.


Cheers to the martini's
-- 
Nicholas O'Brien

Visiting Faculty | Gallery Director
Department of Digital Art, Pratt Institute
doubleunderscore.net