Who is the Art Critic?
When discussing art history and criticism, it’s easy to imagine being in a grand museum, wandering through its halls, surrounded by paintings, sculptures, and installations from every era and style. In some rooms, it feels like stepping into ancient Greece, while in others, welded metal pieces are displayed as great masterpieces—improbable forms that only the artist could explain! Each era has its own peculiarities, much like different chapters in a novel: the classical chapter is all about beauty and proportion, the medieval one is rich in mystery and symbolism, and the modern chapter? Well, it’s like a cry of rebellion against everything that came before. It’s obvious to everyone that contemporary art, by its very nature, is like a punch to the gut, aiming to interrogate contemporary issues rather than celebrate harmony and beauty—thereby exposing itself to fierce criticism, ranging from “I could do that too” to “it looks like it was drawn by a donkey’s tail.”
But what happens when a new chapter is written? — or, to stay on theme, when we move to a different room? This is where the critic becomes the advocate for art in the court of public opinion. If art history is a journey into the past, criticism is the GPS that helps us navigate the present. However, it must be said that the critic sometimes plays the role of defense attorney and other times that of prosecutor; but instead of defendants, there are paintings and sculptures, and the public is the jury! The critic’s mission, their task, is to convince the jury—that’s us—of what is valuable, innovative, or moving, a legacy for future generations. In the end, art history and criticism are like two inseparable friends traveling together in this grand museum that is the world. One looks to the past, striving to understand and document everything, while the other focuses on the present, trying to determine what is worth carrying with us into the future.
Art as a Crime Scene: Science in the Service of Aesthetics
Let’s imagine a work of art as a crime scene: every detail, from colors to shapes, from shadows to the smallest particulars, represents traces, clues waiting to be discovered and interpreted. Following the old principle that “nature loves to hide,” it’s wise to start with the simplest, most probable elements. Often, what seems complicated or hidden from view can become clear once we focus on the essentials. Starting with what is simple not only helps to reveal the complexity that lies behind appearances but also allows us to gradually approach the truth, one step at a time. Looking beyond appearances is crucial, and this approach challenges biases, enabling us to uncover the truth behind every detail. By following a deductive method, inspired by the Aristotelian tradition and enriched by experience, I strive to draw conclusions from specific observations. I don’t have all the answers, but I seek a balance between rigor and sensitivity, getting as close as possible to an authentic understanding.
Beyond the Evidence: Looking for the Anomaly
Just like in a forensic investigation, what truly interests me is not so much what is evident, but what escapes the superficial gaze. In my experience, I’ve learned to seek out the anomaly, the out-of-place detail, the irregularity that can radically alter the interpretation. This approach allows me to uncover unexpected connections between ancient and modern works of art, revealing how art, regardless of its historical context, transcends time and maintains its relevance in the present. For me, “all art is contemporary” because each piece lives and breathes in the moment it is observed, unveiling new meanings and truths that go beyond time and space. There’s nothing more thrilling than discovering a new detail in a work I thought I knew perfectly! This demonstrates how art is an inexhaustible source of inspiration and reflection, capable of surprising us every time. Thus, art criticism evolves into a process of truth-seeking, driven by passion.
A Different Critical Analysis: The Image and the Sign
Cesare Brandi, by distinguishing between what we see and what a work of art intends to communicate, teaches us that art is not merely a matter of aesthetics but a complex language composed of symbols, signs, and cultural connotations that require careful and sensitive decoding. Analyzing a work of art means understanding its historical, cultural, and social context, but also interpreting how these elements intertwine to create something unique and powerful. Through the analysis of images and symbols, we can deepen our understanding of art and its role in society. Furthermore, a different critical analysis helps us transcend the limitations imposed by the labels of styles and artistic movements, allowing us to appreciate each work as unique and unrepeatable.
An invitation to discovery
Imagine art as a mystery wrapped in chaos, where only attentive eyes can see the delicate thread that connects every detail. The method I use is not intended to be an orthodox analysis; rather, I see it as an exhilarating treasure hunt! I dig into works with passion, searching for that hidden secret longing to be revealed. G.D. Birkhoff discusses the mathematical formula for understanding beauty, “M = O/C,” where the aesthetic value “M” emerges from the correct ratio and balance between Chaos and Order. At the same time, psychologists Schwarz, N., and Bless, H. assert that we find pleasure in simplicity (Cognitive Fluency), or more precisely, in what we cognitively recognize. My intention is to explore new territory, where art serves as a gymnasium of complexity, a place where we constantly seek beauty—finding it where no one expects it to be.