Problems of Art Criticism Today

The concept of art criticism is still being evaluated in today's society. In this article we discuss today's art criticism and whether it is still worthwhile for today's society. Some people think that today's critics are not influential, and there are also people who do not have spectators. Why is this? James Elkins argues that art criticism is 'prospering' and argues that it is not consistent with contemporary debates. In other words, art criticism is on the verge of death. There are many works from the gallery, such as when the gallery hosts the exhibition: It produces a short essay on artists and works, but the art criticism of these formats is considered not important.

Today's art critic appeared in print media, professional art magazines, newspapers, as well as art critics on the Internet, television, radio, museums and galleries. Many people work as university workers and museum art educators. Art critics organize exhibitions and are often used to write exhibition catalogs. Art critics have a unique organization, a non-governmental organization of UNESCO called the International Association of Art Critics, with about 76 national departments and political non-cooperative parts of refugees and exiles.

The situation expressing today's media art and online art can easily be a form of artistic criticism. Looking at the current state of online art criticism, there are two tendencies to use online art as a specific school of media art or to display it. In 1995, until around 2002 (netdotart) (1), or a wider online art was replaced by a browser - specific art, Internet Art (2). These definitions ignore the existing important possibilities of online contemporary art and ignore the various works that are still being created. Although network art has not disappeared (some influential entrepreneurs and thinkers that support the first definition), it is slowly integrated into the transcending art practice that links the media art and the art world . If industrial production changed the state of art a century ago, the combination of network and personal computer is changing it now.

Today, many critics are far from the world of creative art and prefer passive contributions to the art world. People with formal titles of "critics" say that they welcome this new voice, but at the same time they are skeptical that the bar is too low. But one of the points raised by these new critics (Art Critic of the Los Angeles Times, Christopher Knight) is that, historically, neither critics nor artists have lack of prejudice. These newcomers who have not been told for years about such "formal education" and "good" and "bad" art for many years can respond more realistically and internally to the face value of artwork I can do it. Perhaps these outsiders will provide the urgently needed vision in the art world.