Collaboration in Criticism: Then and Now

     In her article Can Art Criticism Be Both Collaborative and Ethical? Jamie Keesling discusses Corinne Robins' 1979 list of ethical guidelines for art critics. As Jamie wrote, critics today are far less of a middle man between artists and dealers than before. Robins list is both outdates and idealistic, but despite being those things, has intention grounded in the integrity of art criticism as a field. Reading her ideas prompted me to think back to the beginning of the term when I would often confuse curatorial writing with critical writing. The effort of Robins list speaks to the power critics used to hold in their position in the art world and highlights the fall of that influence now that the culture has been monopolized by private consultants and the wealthy collectors. I think her ideas would be much more valuable if reevaluated in a modern context, taking into account the climate of the current art world. Critics in that way owe authenticity, but they owe it mainly to themselves through creating work that says something worth saying. As Jamie said, "critics themselves — let’s be real — have little if any influence on the sale and pricing of artworks". Today, collaboration is often celebrated and allows us to share ideas and connect larger concepts. Ultimately, I think the question of whether critics are influencing the economics of the art world may be on we can move on from for now.