7 questions to protect the good artists from Zombie criticism

Generally the end of the solar year is the time when the “lists” are published, and the main part of them, probably the most interesting ones, are to tell you which are the emerging artists to watch in the new year. Therefore, since their criteria are necessarily subjective, we would like to suggest some questions to help the reader to understand which artists these lists are promoting are to be followed. As you will see, our questions stem from a position that is opposite to the one assumed by the art critic Walter Robinson last April, and supported by Jerry Saltz during the rest of the year.

 

What they call Zombie Formalism is not describing an art trend, but a disputable critic method mainly based on the identification of obvious formal similarities between certain emerging artists – always driven by a small group of speculators -, and the generations of artists that came before them. 

 

But by following this path, and taking this pessimistic point of view, you are running the risk to miss the really brand new elements in each work, or indeed art practice. And, funny enough, the great masters which the young and inexperienced artists are found guilty to resemble, are most of the times artists supported by presumed authorities such as Clement Greenberg or Peggy Guggenheim.

 

How many people had been able to recognize the easy formal beauty of masters like Claude Monet or Auguste Renoir at their time? Have the followers of the Zombie Formalism taken into consideration, for instance, how complicated, difficult, and full of risks had been the career of Paul Durand-Ruel, the impressionists’ main supporter? Or, do we have to believe that all the abstractions that are out of their idea of abstraction don’t matter?

 

Moreover, even after indisputable masters such as Raffaello or Michelangelo a new generation of artists came along adopting patterns from the Sistine Chapel, or the Vatican’s “Stanze” for example. But also in the realm of the so called “Mannerism” some extraordinary talents emerged: Pontormo, Rosso Fiorentino or Parmigianino to name a few. Or, what about the art historian and critic Johann Joachim Winckelmann and the great rediscovery of the classic age occurred, again, fifty years after his death? Is it not enough to prove that having a strong relationship with the past is not necessarily constraining?

 

The wise art critic is at work to recognize what is new and helps it to emerge. The old art critic tends to protect himself from what is new and wants to emerge without his help. Below the seven questions that generally help us to make our job.

 

Does it extend my notion of beauty?

 

What does it say about human beings and their destiny?

 

Would it fit in a great museum’s room?

 

How will it seem to me in ten years?

 

What will the artist do next?

 

Would I be able to describe it to a child?

 

Is it open, or is it closed to meanings?

 

December 23, 2014