Tuesday, July 18, 2006
CultureGrrl Leaps to Her Own Defense!
Blogger Tyler Green incorrectly claims today that I object to NY Times critic Michael Kimmelman's flipflop on the new MoMA.
"Critics," my blog-colleague wrote, "shouldn't be locked into one viewpoint for life."
Hey, CultureGrrl's been known to change her mind every now and then. That's a woman's (and a critic's) prerogative. What I objected to yesterday was, as I wrote, "the manner in which Kimmelman chose to announce" his apparent about-face: in a discordantly gratuitous aside, buried in an article about something else.
If he's formed a substantially new opinion on something this important, the chief art critic of the cultural paper-of-record should, as I wrote yesterday, craft "a more considered article about what he REALLY thinks," instead of slipping a fast one by us, without explanation or elucidation.
Is "that too bad," Tyler?
More tomorrow on the problems and challenges that writers like me (and Michael?) face in appraising new cultural facilities.
"Critics," my blog-colleague wrote, "shouldn't be locked into one viewpoint for life."
Hey, CultureGrrl's been known to change her mind every now and then. That's a woman's (and a critic's) prerogative. What I objected to yesterday was, as I wrote, "the manner in which Kimmelman chose to announce" his apparent about-face: in a discordantly gratuitous aside, buried in an article about something else.
If he's formed a substantially new opinion on something this important, the chief art critic of the cultural paper-of-record should, as I wrote yesterday, craft "a more considered article about what he REALLY thinks," instead of slipping a fast one by us, without explanation or elucidation.
Is "that too bad," Tyler?
More tomorrow on the problems and challenges that writers like me (and Michael?) face in appraising new cultural facilities.
