How is the artist supposed to develop 'face-to-face approaches to clients and audiences' on an international level? On what are they supposed to live while they work this out? When he suggests that the 'state can decide what art it wants' is Socialist Realism his model? And how is the audience that he writes for to make its decisions if it is not able to see the stuff, let alone have any information as to its existence?
Galleries and artists I know are sick of the attitude of lazy critics to the serious endeavour of people, working under duress and with integrity, to engender some small debate about issues central to the human condition.
We are not expecting special treatment, nor complaining about the slim opportunities for making a living. We are not sulking about the lack of 'good reviews'. But we do expect curiosity, respect and a little mental application to be addressed to a profession that has survived and developed for as long as the human race has felt a need to understand its existence.
London W1Reuse content