Monday, January 25, 2010


Greg Allen reports on the Running for cover(age) panel discussion that took place a couple of weeks ago.

As I said last night, the Washington )#$%ing Post has absolutely no critical credibility with anyone in the art world outside of DMV. And it should be obvious from last night, too, that many people in DC feel the same way.
138 people showed up on a freezing night! DMV stands for DC, Maryland, and Virginia. Read his report here.

Pink Line also reported on the panel and her report also is a good read.
Many people who attended the panel discussion were upset that the Dawson article wasn't thinky enough for them. It wasn't meant to be thinky! In fact, I'm not so sure any of the writing in a newspaper is meant to be thinky. Several suggested that we need a publication dedicated to art reviews in DC. Not a bad idea! It would fill the gap that a paper like the Washington Post can't fill. Wish there were a way to make such a print publication financially viable. Perhaps an online forum would do the trick?

Some were upset that the article was too negative and didn't uplift our art community. Kriston [Capps] said newspaper writers do not have a responsibility to uplift an art scene and build community. Their job is to write stories that people want to read. When writers pitch stories to their editors, the stories must have an angle or a hook that will compel people to read the paper. This is the nature of journalism.
Read the Pink Line report here.


Carl Wright said...

Hi Lenny,

Is this a possible business opportunity? The WaPo does only selective reviews of gallery shows. There is also no independenat publication doing critical coverage of any art gallery shows.

Is it time for a blogger to make a full-time business of reviewing all shows for the DC Metro Area? This way becoming "the definitive site" for any art gallery shows?

Would be an easy sell to many people looking for something to do - but all the guides are woefully inadequete. Most guides just follow the popular artists or the ones they like. If you are not popular or a "name brand" artist it is difficult to get noticed.

Maybe the business angle would be to charge $50 - 100 per show to the gallery to get them listed in the blog.

Then have both a free section and a paid section of the web site. The free part would be a straight listing of the show - time date and type of art. For the subscriber part (for the people looking to go out on Fridays and Saturday night)charge $10 - $15/month to see the reviews.

Might be a good thing.


Anonymous said...

There are lots of cities without credible arts journalism. In fact, I invite everyone to prove me wrong, but I'm pretty sure all but the biggest two American cities are without serious arts journalism. Given that DC's claim to major city status is based on politics, and politics' famed total disregard for art, I guess I just don't get why everyone decided to be up in arms at this.