Chekhov's Mistress
Arts Criticism: From the Old Media to the New
Last week I had the pleasure of sitting down with Bill Marx and some others to talk about arts criticism online, or more specifically about blogs and criticism. Bill was interviewing James Marcus and me for an online course he’s directing at Boston University this summer. If you’re reading this there’s a good chance you’d be interested in the topic too, so here’s what you need to know:
CFA FA 501 Arts Criticism: From the Old Media to the New
Online offering. Since the late 18th century, criticism of the arts has been featured in general circulation newspapers and magazines. Today, cultural and economic forces are endangering that tradition of public cultural discussion. Increasingly, the mainstream media is curtailing the column inches it reserves for serious reviews of the fine arts. This class is dedicated to keeping critical thinking about the arts alive. Students explore the history of journalistic reviewing while also learning the craft. By bringing critical skills into the realm of blogs, websites, and podcasting, the class will be on the cutting edge of new journalism, exploring the direction public dialogue about the arts will take in the future. For further information, please call the Office of Distance Education at 617-358-1960. 4 cr. Tuition: $1940; technology fee: $200; total charge: $2140
Summer 1 (May 22-June 29):
taught by William Marx
Bill Marx has been critiquing the arts in Boston for over 20 years, starting about four years after graduating from Bowdoin College in Maine. Besides writing on theater for WBUR, he has reviewed books regularly for the “Boston Globe” and the “Boston Phoenix.” He has contributed essay-reviews to a variety of national publications, including “Parnassus,” “Ploughshares,” “Washington Post Book World,” the “Nation” and the “Village Voice.” He has been a finalist for the National Book Critics Circle’s Reviewers Citation three times. He has also won U.P.I. and AP awards for his radio reviews.
comments
Very interesting curriculum he seems to be developing. Public discussion of the arts has always been a bit of a fluid space. Much that makes many papers, magazines, etc. is not written by people who have actually ever studied the art form they are presuming to critique. This is not always the case, but more often than not it is. Now to be honest, this is a particularly sore spot with me - I have a PhD in theatre crit - you get where my prejudice is stemming from!
Anyway, as for the blogosphere - theatre is largely on the fringes because it does not have a wide appeal, but film, on the other hand, now has to contend with a whole slew of self-professed blog critics of film. I’m guilty of same, though I tell myself I am closer to it than they are . . . my own blind spot, admittedly.
Is this arts critique on the web, on blogs all a bad thing? I don’t know, to be honest, but it certainly bears serious consideration and study.
Sorry for the long comment - but you got me thinking
– Anna (05/14 at 09:11 PM)
Hello Bud: You get me thinking too. That’s why I’ve nominated you for a thinking blogger award. You’ll have to check out the latest entry on my site. Have a great evening - XINE
– Christine (05/14 at 11:02 PM)
Why stop at the end of the eighteenth century? What about the pioneering work of Addison and Steele in The Spectator, bringing ‘high’ culture to the swelled ranks of the middle class in the eight-teens?
I would have thought that their contribution more closely resembles what litbloggers are doing, than what came later, in the Quarterly and the Edinburgh Review. By that time, culture reporting had become established, as well as highly politicised.
The blog that reminds me most of The Spectator is probably 3 Quarks Daily, although Sarsaparilla is nice, too.
– Dean (05/16 at 07:10 AM)
Page 1 of 1 pages of comments
Creative Commons License Deed Attribution-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported
You are free:
- to Share — to copy, distribute and transmit the work
-
Attribution. You must attribute the work in the manner specified by the author or licensor (but not in any way that suggests that they endorse you or your use of the work).
-
No Derivative Works. You may not alter, transform, or build upon this work.
- For any reuse or distribution, you must make clear to others the license terms of this work. The best way to do this is with a link to this web page.
- Any of the above conditions can be waived if you get permission from the copyright holder.
- Nothing in this license impairs or restricts the author's moral rights.
This is a human-readable summary of the Legal Code (the full license):
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/3.0/legalcode
This site employs rank-denial and other anti-spam measures.
Your link here will do nothing for your rankings or traffic. Off-topic comments will be deleted.
Previous entry: All This Useless Beauty: Judging a (free) Book by its Cover
About this Post
- Posted by: Bud Parr
- Date: May 11, 2007
- Filed Under:
Wise Men Fish Here: Literature
- Comments:3
- Links to this Post: Technorati
