So now what? Is there a show worth reviewing? Always. Do I want to? Not particularly. Or at least not excessively.
Instead, a more economical (modern?) form of art review consistent with the decline in what those who write reviews are paid, a decline that parallels a decline in the publication of art reviews (because the robots at places like Canadian Art are telling their employer that not enough people are reading reviews within the first fifteen minutes of their publication), not to mention an overall decline in the attendance of the exhibitions that generate reviews (see Ben Davis's latest article).
Something like this: three questions. And from each, a brief response.
What is it?
It is a “propaedeutic device” (same as a hermeneutic device?), an online graphic from an article by Ben Davis that professes to explain something called the Art World.
How is it made?
It is made with a software program like Excel.
What does it mean/How is it relevant?
It means people are still holding to distracting categories like “Mass Culture” and “Art World” when they could be attempting more intuitive or indeed telepathic forms of communicating the kinds of sensations that are lost in that most reified form of thought: not so much knowledge but its spawn -- information.
Hands up all those who have for some time now committed themselves to the transmission and reception of sensation. Hands up all those who don't mind the wait.