The future of art criticism is not promising. A telling indicator is the
MFA program in Art Writing at the School of Visual Arts (SVA) in New
York. Founded a decade ago, it is described as “one of the only graduate
writing programs in the world that focuses specifically on criticism.” Its
first director was Thomas McEvilley, whose avant-garde bias I cited
above. According to his initial statement for the program, “the function
of art and the nature of art criticism have both undergone change and
expansion. Art has... expanded its purview into social engagement and
critique.” Current SVA literature notes that the program has “a special
emphasis on the history and current transformations of the image.”
Judging from the work of “notable” faculty members and guest lectur-
ers, anything “innovative” can qualify as art, while “traditional” con-
temporary work is ignored.^38The NEA
The slogan “A Great Nation Deserves Great Art” was long emblazoned
atop the home page of the National Endowment for the Arts website.^39
Images fading in and out beneath it ranged from that of a conductor lift-
ing his baton to those of ballet dancers, a theatrical presentation, and a
detail from a realist painting. The “disciplines” supported by the NEA
included far more than just the traditional fine arts suggested by these
images, however. Projects were also funded in such areas as “design”
(including urban planning and landscape architecture) and “media arts”
(film, radio, and television). Grants for new work in the visual arts were
often described in such general terms—for example, “a professional
development program for artists,” “residencies for artists to create new
work,” and “an exhibition series featuring the work of emerging visual
artists”—that the avant-garde character of the work was not evident. But
it was often quickly revealed by a visit to the website of the organization
receiving the grant, as it was by the frequent use of the term contempo-
rary. One could be certain that none of the recent grants supported the
work of academic or Classical Realist sculptors or painters.
Some of the grant descriptions clearly reflected the NEA’s avant-
garde bias (which affects even the traditional disciplines). In one “col-
laborative public art project,” for example, the alleged artists would
work with the residents of a public housing complex to “address the use
of public space within the various buildings.” In another case, a large-
scale public art work would “cover a section of a building in a heavily
trafficked neighborhood,” and would “resemble a vertical sheet of rip-178 Louis Torres