|
|
Post by isaacs on Apr 27, 2008 15:03:37 GMT 10
|
|
|
|
Post by andrewh on Apr 27, 2008 16:38:53 GMT 10
Agreed - that's a fascinating perspective. Interesting to see Adrian Searle quoted, to my mind one of the the greatest living critics.
I like this as an ideal criteria: "Good criticism (and I mean this as an expression of an ideal) should be risky, challenging, candid and vulnerable. It should be urbane one moment, gauchely heartfelt the next. It should kick against cant wherever it sees it, and cherish and applaud not only art but the impulse to make art, for that impulse, which comes out of life as it is lived, is the real mystery, and the source of everything that makes it wonderful."
The point about blogging is interesting - there's a few who fill that criteria on this list alone, sadly unpublished/unpublishable. By that standard, thought, do we have any professional critics in this country, in any field?
|
|
|
|
Post by isaacs on Apr 27, 2008 17:04:13 GMT 10
by that standard though, do we have any professional critics in this country, in any field? In the field of music the only critics who have earned my consistent respect are Andrew Ford, Tim Stevens and Peter McCallum. Tim of course is not a professional critic (there are also some other non-professional reviewers who write for Music Forum mag that I like very much too, for example David Bollard) and Peter McCallum (classical critic at the Sydney Morning Herald) doesn't write about jazz. So let's talk about Andrew Ford. He is known as a classical critic - and he is a terrific one - but his reviews of jazz in the Fin Review were very good indeed as are his verbal reviews of jazz CDs on The Music Show. He can tackle any music genre with authority, including the work of mainstream popular artists. Andrew is also remarkable in the following respect. He reviewed an Arvo Part orchestral recording in 24 Hours some years ago. He gave it a very positive review. He concluded it by referring to an earlier review he had written of Part's music in the same publication in which he had said that Part had a limited palette of gestures and soundworlds. He referenced his earlier opinion and then wrote these immortal words: "I was wrong". In his reviews, articles, interviews, radio documentaries and books Andrew Ford is IMHO the finest and most engaging thinker and commentator about music - any music, including jazz - that we have in this country. (He also composes fascinating music). |
|
