Yesterday's People

If last night's SAMAG forum about critics is any measure, there is something deeply wrong with arts debate in this country.

The event was excruciating.

I publicised the event on my blog, excited about the up-coming debates, this one at the Australia Council for the Arts and another separate debate as part of the Sydney Writers Festival in May.

I took the opportunity in my entry to question why there were no (current) critics on the panel, a fair enough query considering that we were talking about the role of the critic. I believe, and still do, that it was one of many gaping holes in last night's event.

The forum had four members on the panel: Deborah Jones, a former Arts Editor at The Australian and now an Executive Editor at Rupert Murdoch's flagship Australian newspaper; Merran Doyle, a theatre publicist for the Ensemble Theatre & Glen Street Theatre; theatre producer and tourer Marguerite Pepper; and Michael Reid, an art market analyst.

The event was branded with the below description:

What is the role of today’s critic? What are their responsibilities to the public, artists, producers and to the art form?
Arguably more art criticism is written and spoken today than ever before. With the global expansion of the art world, increased literacy and public involvement in the arts and the abundance of glossy catalogues, popular magazines and websites, it might seem that anyone can fancy themselves a critic.
In a dense environment of opinion are some critics more relevant than others? How do the professionals stack up against the bloggers?
Are there external factors shaping the view of the critic? Are they influenced by professional relationships, a media release, ideas and opinions of others?
These questions will be hotly debated at SAMAG’s April Seminar.

Hardly any of these questions were dealt with and those that were, were merely given a cursory glance.

And they were certainly not hotly debated.

Granted, the event started off very well. It was clear that I got under someone's collar after criticising the gaping hole on the panel. Marguerite Pepper used that opportunity to throw a great quote at my feet from David Adams in the New Welsh Review. It's an excellent piece.

And that started off the debate nicely. Marguerite was on the front foot and throwing ideas around the room - What is the role of the critic in the post-modernist age? The role of theatre and criticism as 'national conscience'? What is 'good criticism'? What is the connection between practice, identity and criticism?

But that lasted a total of five minutes and then the debate denigrated into cattle fodder. We got as far as discussing the role of critic as a marketing tool for publicists and how to get a critic to your event, we spent a good twenty minutes talking about how newspapers are cut up the day before print and we heard how important one of the panel was in the realm of the arts market.

We didn't even venture into the new media critic and we only briefly touched on the mediocrity of arts criticism. Blogs were mentioned twice - Alison Croggon was brought up once and an indigenous arts blog in the US was mentioned. But then we were told that if you are a critic and not paid, 'then you are an idiot' and that a blog 'probably only has an audience of 6'. We then delved into the world of maybe critics need to attend rehearsals to get a better idea of what the show is like, on the basis that new technology is changing the forms so much.

It was all so parochial. It was all so old-fashioned. It was all so yesterday.

Arts criticism is the thing that is changing so quickly and so dramatically and it is changing for the better. Suddenly mainstream critics and arts writers are being asked - What is your role? What is your relevance? And who is your audience? It is not the other way round.

But none of these questions were asked last night.

On one occasion, an intelligent question came from the floor - 'What is the difference between opinion and criticism?' His question was blown down as irrelevant, rephrased and thrown back at this poor man who had paid his $10 to get into the event.

The age of print media is quickly disappearing. Audiences, consumers, members of our community are starting to select where they get their information from, and it is increasingly being removed from the power of the print media.

If you had attended last night, you could have been forgiven for thinking that black and white ink was the only force still relevant to arts criticism. (And only if you ignored the fact that Rupert Murdoch is throwing millions of dollars at News Interactive and the online medium of interactivity, blogs, comments, reactions.)

If you look at my previous post where I quote from the 1968 book, Entertainment Arts in Australia, it showed that the level of debate then was more sophisticated, forward thinking, constructive and provoking.

The present mediocrity of opinion and the stale academic approach to arts criticism is leaving itself left behind. The critical writing you find is mostly clinical. I have argued that theatre criticism needs to shake off the dust and start looking into its relationship with the industry and the audience. Where is the passionate voice within arts criticism? I mean, seriously, can we just put a bomb under it all and get some passion going?

Last night fell into the typical trap of looking to New York as a model for the arts critic as personality/as passion/as a force. But that debate is totally irrelevant to what is happening in Australia right now. That is an American society of consumer entertainment, the quick buck and the hot dog stand. That is not how Sydney's arts community works, nor should it.

There is something deeply wrong with how arts debate travels in this community and last nights event was the perfect example. Let's not talk about the elephant in the room. Let's try and please everyone and let's be mediocre about where OUR arts are today. It's no wonder we are left with a few column inches at the back of the paper every day.

(This post owes a debt of gratitude to my companions who attended last night where a lot of the above originated from)

To be continued...