Editor’s Statement on Art Critic Christian Viveros-Fauné

Your decision to sack Christian is considered a mistake in many circles. It has provoked discussion on http://www.artworldsalon.com/blog/2008/01/21/art-writing-reality-check-time-for-a-new-code-of-ethics/

It’s a real pity that Christian Viveros-Faune has been suspended from his lively biweekly column at the Village Voice. CVF’s arguments were always a pleasure to read, even if one did not always agree with his assessments. Every so often he would bravely go against the grain of the wearisome paeans that are routinely churned out by the artworld’s self-serving critical apparatus. CVF juggled with problematic issues that most of us acknowledge but shy away from addressing publicly; from widespread but shoddy curatorial practices to the reverence of icons become hacks. The reason given for CVF's ousting—that his job as promoter of two new artfairs creates a conflict of interest for his practice as an art critic—is quite debatable. The clients of an artfair promoter are galleries per se, and the currency that makes galleries and artfairs tick is dollars and cents (or better still euros or pounds whenever possible). On the other hand, the objects of criticism are artworks and their presentation, and the coin of criticism amounts to a thumbs-up or thumbs-down. There certainly is in the artworld, as there’s always been, money exchanged for legitimacy. But it is impossible to establish an exchange rate, or even sometimes for the parties to be sure that an exchange has taken place. In the case of CVF’s writing, I cannot discern any suggestion, let alone evidence, that Viveros the critic has skewed his published criticism in favor of one or another gallery in order to flatter either existing or potential clients of Viveros the artfair promoter. If anything, it has been the very oposite, since his reviews in the Voice have tended to focus on institutional exhibitions. As CVF states in the interview he unwittingly fell pray to, the artworld is up to its neck in conflicts of interest: Patrons meddling with museum programs, collectors backing galleries, dealers in cahoots with auctioneers, artists marrying curators, critical journals taking gallery advertising. Perhaps such things seem normal to us because they are so utterly pervasive, but every one of them is way more troubling than Christian’s purported sin. For an art critic every artist friend, every gallery dinner attended, every penny received for a catalog essay, every paid consultancy service constitutes a conflict of interest. It is up to the critic, however, to gain the public trust not through saintly hood, but by the sheer force of good, solid, sensitive, intelligent and original writing. The whole affair is ultimately a regrettable loss for the Village Voice. Those of us who have enjoyed CVF’s articles will be looking forward to finding them in a less parochial publication.

It’s a real pity that Christian Viveros-Faune has been suspended from his lively biweekly column at the Village Voice. CVF’s arguments were always a pleasure to read, even if one did not always agree with his assessments. Every so often he would bravely go against the grain of the wearisome paeans that are routinely churned out by the artworld’s self-serving critical apparatus. CVF juggled with problematic issues that most of us acknowledge but shy away from addressing publicly; from widespread but shoddy curatorial practices to the reverence of icons become hacks. The reason given for CVF’s ousting—that his job as promoter of two new artfairs creates a conflict of interest for his practice as an art critic—is quite debatable. The clients of an artfair promoter are galleries per se, and the currency that makes galleries and artfairs tick is dollars and cents (or better still euros or pounds whenever possible). On the other hand, the objects of criticism are artworks and their presentation, and the coin of criticism amounts to a thumbs-up or thumbs-down. There certainly is in the artworld, as there’s always been, money exchanged for legitimacy. But it is impossible to establish an exchange rate, or even sometimes for the parties to be sure that an exchange has taken place. In the case of CVF’s writing, I cannot discern any suggestion, let alone evidence, that Viveros the critic has skewed his published criticism in favor of one or another gallery in order to flatter either existing or potential clients of Viveros the artfair promoter. If anything, it has been the very oposite, since his reviews in the Voice have tended to focus on institutional exhibitions. As CVF states in the interview he unwittingly fell pray to, the artworld is up to its neck in conflicts of interest: Patrons meddling with museum programs, collectors backing galleries, dealers in cahoots with auctioneers, artists marrying curators, critical journals taking gallery advertising. Perhaps such things seem normal to us because they are so utterly pervasive, but every one of them is way more troubling than CVF’s purported sin. For an art critic every artist friend, every gallery dinner attended, every penny received for a catalog essay, every paid consultancy service constitutes a conflict of interest. It is up to the critic, however, to gain the public trust not through saintly hood, but by the sheer force of good, solid, sensitive, intelligent and original writing. The whole affair is ultimately a regrettable loss for the Village Voice. Those of us who have enjoyed CVF’s articles will be looking forward to finding them in a less parochial publication.

two words: Gary. Indiana. fuck the village voice

i mean, it's good that the voice has gotten rid of vivernos-faune, but remember the excellent days at the voice when gary indiana...god, it seems like modernism those days. oy.

I thought you may want to review and publish this information : May 25, 2009 To: All people concerned with El Museo Del Barrio past, present, and future El Museo Del Barrio is rapidly losing its Puerto Rican roots Who I am I am a Puerto Rican who lived in El Barrio from 1955 to 1975. I lived the “West Side Story” experience of El Barrio. I lived the “Mafia Drug Experience” that destroyed the lives of thousands of young Puerto Ricans I lived the “Cape Man Experience” of El Barrio I lived the “Puerto Rican Gang Experience” of Geraldo Rivera I lived through the many disturbing and prejudicial “SPIC” jokes and insults I lived through the latin cultural experiences of Tito Puente, Tito Rodriguez, Los Panchos, etc I lived through the Black Harlem Puerto Rican Experience I believe most Puerto Ricans who have shared the above and many other Puerto Rican El Barrio experiences that are part of the early New York Hispanic Experience do not want forgotten. Present Problem Identification El Museo is rapidly losing its connection to the Puerto Rican heritage, culture, and community. This situation can easily be determined by 1. Assessing its organization chart and the people with the power to influence its operation and future - http://www.elmuseo.org/dept_info.html 1.1 The director Julián Zugazagoitia, is a Mexican and not an American citizen 1.2 None of Director direct reporting management are Puerto Ricans 2. At recent public events I’ve attended all the young people representing El Museo I chatted with were not Puerto Rican and had no knowledge of the roots of El Museo 3. The museum has very few and rarely exhibits Puerto Rican artists 4. The only long term Puerto Rican staff employee that I have met at El Museo theatre events is the lady Lili Santiago Silva who works in the theatre. Solution – needs to be done ASAP El Museo leadership can not be allowed to disconnect from its Puerto Rican roots. El Museo must have leadership and management that knows and has the cultural sensitivity and history of the Puerto Rican experience in New York City. The power of the director needs to be checked with an equally powerful Puerto Rican Director. Long term Puerto Rican employees who know and value the Puerto Rican heritage, culture, and community should be developed, supported, and promoted. All present and future plans for El Museo need to be reviewed and changed to reflect El Museo high regard and value of its Puerto Rican roots