In case you missed it on Sunday, Philip Kennicott, who is one of the music critics at the Post, has a very interesting essay on gay art and censorship.

Blake Gopnik also has a brilliant piece on Christoffer Wilhelm Eckersberg at the National Gallery of Art. In the article, Gopnik discusses Eckersberg's works and relative importance in the world of art from the perspective of two Gopniks: The Gopnik that we all know (who thinks painting is dead, that in order for contemporary art to be any good it has to add something "new", why be a realist when you can take a photo, etc.) - and the "other" Gopnik; that is the opposite of the published Gopnik. This "other" Gopnik is less apt to generalize and more open-minded when it comes to art.

This is novel and interesting art writing and it is almost as good as my idea of having Blake Gopnik and Paul Richard review the same show at the same time so that we can read two critics' perspectives on one artist.

Or you can read the Chief Art Critic of the Washington Times' view of this same show.