In which I take a look a controversial new initiative by a theatre media outlet.
How do critics maintain their objectivity when they’re being paid by the very people whose work they’re critiquing?
*[2022 Update: If the original link (below) no longer works, the entire piece is available in the attached screenshot.]
“The superior man understands what is right; the inferior man understands what will sell.”
– Confucius, The Analects
I read quite a few articles the past two weeks that have left some strong impressions on me. Three in particular.
One was a sort of “retirement letter” by Kenneth Baker, SF Chronicle art critic from 1985-2015. He reminisces about spending that time both witnessing and actively taking part in the changing face of San Francisco’s art scene and cultural make-up. As an SF native, it brought back a lot of strong and sad memories connected with my hometown (the Quake of ’89, the redesigns of the art museums, etc.). He mentions that the influx of residents, particularly over the past decade, has brought with it a lot of people with no interest in or connection to art. What’s worse, they seem to have little knowledge or appreciation of this…
View original post 1,186 more words