Can anyone — with a straight face — argue that our largely white critical contingent in Boston is interested in generating hard hitting debate, controversy, and unconventional ideas?
If you’re a fan of the podcast or the magazine, you know that Arts Fuse writers are sworn adversaries of the dreaded algorithm.
We need more serious, informed, and diverse voices evaluating and reporting on the arts at a time newspapers and magazines are cutting back and/or dumbing down their arts sections.
If the New York Times can’t make a reasonable case for the need for discrimination rather than salesmanship, we are in real trouble.
The publication, its editor, and its over 60 writers believe that the health of arts criticism and the arts community are inextricably intertwined.
Critics were once seen as the ‘canaries in the mineshaft’ — now newspapers and magazines are closing down the mines.
My thought was that it would exciting to invite high school students from diverse backgrounds to become better educated about arts criticism.
Many of today’s arts editors and reviewers embrace a lilliputian vision of arts criticism; they accept a crabbed sense of its possibilities.
The hope is that nobody will notice that arts criticism hasn’t been invited to the Pulitzer Prize’s centennial party.
The loss of arts criticism means severe economic challenges for arts and culture down the food chain.