Art criticism in the age of social media!
Art critics, beware of artist’s followers and fans!
Alright. I confess. I did not see artist Devon Rodriguez’s debut solo exhibition, titled Underground, in Chelsea, New York, at a pop-up space by UTA Artist Space, the art extension of the Hollywood talent agency.
But happened to have read both the reviews by Ben Davis, National Art Critic of Artnet and seen images of Devon Rodriguez’s artworks on a few websites. Also saw chain of Instagram ping-pong posts between Devon and Ben! Was there any entertainment value in that social media square boxes? I leave it to my readers if any! :)
Of course, no one asked my opinion; exactly the reason, you are reading this now. Anyways, my comments or retelling the scenario or a mix of both are below.
Ben Davis’s review of Devon Rodriguez’s art exhibition, “Underground,” and his analysis of the artist’s meteoric rise in the art world and social media is both insightful and critical. He raises few key points about the intersection of art, social media, and celebrity-influencer, and his observations merit commendation, criticism, and further analysis.
Davis commends Rodriguez for acknowledging the phenomenon of artists gaining explosive popularity through social media, noting that it raises important questions about the traditional art world and how it should respond to this new trend. This is a crucial discussion that many in the art community should engage in.
Davis effectively distinguishes between Rodriguez’s art and his social media persona. By recognizing that Rodriguez’s popularity is largely tied to his engaging personality and feel-good stories, Davis highlights the distinction between being an artist and being an influencer.
Devon Rodriguez is a TikTok sensation and artist who has achieved immense popularity through his unique approach to art and social media. His rise to fame, driven by his subway sketches and viral social media content, presents an interesting case study for understanding the evolving landscape of art and celebrity in the digital age.
Ben Davis’s review explores the paradox of Rodriguez’s fame as an artist or social media influencer. While he is labeled as “the most famous artist in the world” by some measures, many in traditional art circles have never heard of him. The review questions whether his popularity is based on the quality of his art, craft, or his skill in engaging with social media platforms. This raises important questions about the evolving dynamics of art appreciation and the role of traditional art institutions.
Davis highlights the role of social media in Rodriguez’s art practice. His content on platforms like TikTok has become a significant part of his artistic persona and brand. The review emphasizes the staged nature of many of his subway encounters, which challenges the authenticity of his content. This unclear reality and performance in the digital age raises questions about the nature of art and influencers in the modern social media world.
While Davis raises valid questions about Rodriguez’s popularity and the role of social media in his career as an artist, the review could delve deeper into the impact of this shifting attention economy on art and culture. It hints at the challenges but does not thoroughly explore their implications.
The review touches on the subject matter and style of Rodriguez’s paintings but does not provide a detailed analysis of the artworks. A more in-depth examination of his artistic technique and themes would enhance the review’s critical aspect.
Davis acknowledges Rodriguez’s talent as a painter and notes the technical skill but highlights the need for more innovation and a deeper exploration of subject matter to distinguish his work from others in the same genre.
Davis’s review offers a thought-provoking analysis of the cultural and artistic significance of Devon Rodriguez’s career. It encourages readers to consider the changing landscape of art in the digital age.
He raises critical questions about the role of social media in shaping artistic careers and the impact of staged content on audience perceptions. This is a relevant and important discussion in the contemporary art world.
The review recognizes Rodriguez’s status as a role model for young social media-savvy artists and the potential impact of his approach on the art world. It encourages readers to think about the evolving expectations of artists in the digital era.
Davis criticizes the art world’s shift towards consuming artists as content rather than consuming art. This raises concerns about the longevity and depth of engagement with art when it is primarily presented as content for mass consumption.
However, Davis acknowledges Rodriguez’s immense popularity and clout in the art world, he criticizes Rodriguez for reacting defensively to his review. Davis questions Rodriguez’s thin-skinned response to what should be a standard part of an artist’s journey: receiving criticism. It raises concerns about Rodriguez’s ability to handle critical feedback.
Rodriguez’s success represents a more “inclusive” approach to art appreciation. He has made art more accessible and appealing to a broader audience. This accessibility and relatability are commendable as they break down some of the traditional barriers to art appreciation.
Rodriguez’s ability to monetize his art and online presence is a testament to his entrepreneurial spirit. He has leveraged his fame to collaborate with brands and expand his reach. This entrepreneurial aspect of his career is a reflection of the changing landscape of the contemporary capitalist art world.
What is more interesting is, Davis introduces the concept of “parasocial aesthetics,” which refers to the one-sided relationships people develop with celebrities and influencers through social media. This concept deserves further study and analysis in the context of art, as it reflects a fundamental shift in how audiences engage with artists and their work.
The question remains of the role of art criticism in the age of social media. How should art critics approach artists who are also social media influencers? How can critics provide meaningful assessments of both the art and the persona without alienating the artist’s fan base?
Okay, somehow I just thought of my favourite art critic here. Jerry Saltz , indeed. I am sure both Ben and Devon have already read his works! By the way Devon, I like your work.
