On August 26, Observer published an op-ed by anonymous provocateur The Art Daddy, largely focused on the ways staff cuts and editorial reshuffling at arts publications—or media outlets with once robust arts coverage—and the rise of influencer culture are eroding cultural criticism and why that’s bad for everyone. Reasonably speaking, no one should disagree that this is real and happening and that it’s more than likely going to have a negative impact on culture writ large.
Cultural criticism matters because it does more than tell us what’s “good” or “bad.” It digs into the forces shaping life: art, media, fashion, politics and so much more, which seems like it should go without stating, but what is obvious anymore? Cultural critics expose power structures, assumptions and blind spots. That is important because analyzing how culture reflects and reinforces values reveals who benefits from prevailing norms and who gets left out. Without critics interrogating the hype, culture coverage is flattened into marketing, at which point what sells becomes what matters.
Shortly after our Arts Section ran The Art Daddy’s message to The Art World, our inbox pinged (kidding; does anyone’s inbox ping anymore? Can you even imagine?). As it turns out, allowing an anonymous source to call The Art Newspaper and Hyperallergic “the last real barometers of independent art journalism” upset some people.
Now might be the time for a sidebar on who The Art Daddy is (to the degree that it can be explained) and what the art world has to say about that. The Art Daddy emerged in July 2023 on Substack and Instagram, as “a coping mechanism, a career pivot, a cry for help, and a developing performance piece that may or may not end with a cease and desist from a legacy gallery,” on a mission to “name the psychic undercurrents of the art world.”
Sometimes, The Art Daddy’s cries are broad: The Aspen Art Fair happened, and depending on who you ask, it was either an airy, mountain-fresh escape from the New York grind or a hotel ballroom full of recycled booth arrangements and white wine that tasted like regret. At other times, The Art Daddy is specific: Think Marianne Boesky with a Selldorf-designed pop-up, Sean Kelly holding court in a private chalet, and a collector dinner where the wine budget outpaced the emerging artist roster. Often, The Art Daddy gossips (Erica Pelosini is rumored to be on the Gagosian compound) in ways that make us laugh: Basel is a psychological event. By day four, reality will feel like a VR loop of Anna Weyant whispering “institutional context” into your eye. The best thing to do is surrender. Put on sunglasses. Sit on the floor. Text Larry something cryptic. That The Art Daddy is a woman* has been confirmed by the woman herself.
When The Art Daddy contacted Observer about publishing anonymous op-eds, we agreed because her online influence is already anonymous. (Already Anonymous vs Going Anonymous = a critical differentiation. We wouldn’t allow a public figure to do the same, and what public figure would even want to?) What’s the alternative…? Asking The Art Daddy to reveal her identity for the very first time in a single essay in a publication only partially focused on the art world’s machinations? Or publishing under her real name, and potentially allowing another piece of cultural criticism to sink to the bottom of the vast puddle of muck that is media today, because there wouldn’t be a brand with an audience already attached, and without that, it is impossible to get anyone to care about anything anymore?
Word on the street is that The Art Daddy is an Art Newspaper full-timer. Well, so what? Under her real byline, she’s also written for Observer, Artnet and ARTnews. And we’re flattered that a journalist from one of the most respected art publications thinks enough of Observer’s reach and arts coverage that it’s worth their time to publish here. Also, it’s possible to work for an excellent company and call that company excellent while offering thoughtful perspectives and opinions on the industry in which it operates.
Back to the fuss. We understand how “the last real barometers of independent art journalism” could be read as dismissing the efforts of publications still investing in criticism, even if in smaller, more local or hybrid forms. On Instagram, The Public Review’s Genevieve Lipinsky de Orlov points out, “Hyperallergic gets named here, but missing are so many important smaller pubs sustaining meaningful, incisive and largely independent criticism.” We can’t be everything to everybody. We can (and do!) publish some of that meaningful, incisive and independent criticism and respect others doing the same—and if anyone wants to pitch an article or op-ed about the last remaining critics at the last remaining, respected art publications, we’re interested (artnews@observer.com).
Editors from several such publications reached out after the essay went live. Some, because they weren’t included in The Art Daddy’s short list of leading independent art publishers. Others because The Art Newspaper is owned by AMTD Group—the implication being that it’s less independent than The Art Daddy claims. And one, because The Art Daddy allegedly** harassed his publication so much on social media that The Art Daddy had to be blocked. Obviously, we don’t condone this sort of behavior—though, given The Art Daddy’s aforementioned identification as “a developing performance piece that may or may not end with a cease and desist,” it tracks. Consider this our apology to those we indirectly omitted, and also for anyone hurt by someone else.
Though we need to believe in Hakim Bishara’s crystal ball (“Insightful, incisive and inventive writing will always have a future and an audience”), let’s not forget that the thesis of The Art Daddy’s essay is that mass media layoffs have disproportionately targeted arts and culture desks. We also hope we can all agree that omission doesn’t equal a rebuke. It would be impossible to name every publication that is still elevating critics’ voices—those that, in The Art Daddy’s own words, are valiantly keeping the torch burning.
“The Art Newspaper and Hyperallergic serve as the last real barometers of independent art journalism.” Every editor who reached out referenced this half-sentence in a 1,300-word essay. We think it’s important to gently point out that a barometer is not the same as a stronghold. But semantics aside, this statement bothered people whose work we follow and respect. Whatever questions linger about the health of traditional criticism, independent art journalism shows no signs of dying. Are we shocked that art critics criticized an essay we ran about art criticism? We’d expect nothing less, and we welcome the conversation.
*A not-small part of us believes this fact could never have been kept a secret, given how strongly the language patterns in The Art Daddy’s writing mimic a version of the well-documented and oft-criticized Valleyspeak. An even not-smaller part of us wonders if the merit of The Art Daddy’s ideas and opinions would be taken more seriously if they read less like a very online woman. This deserves a larger conversation.
**At request for a comment, The Art Daddy confirmed with Observer that something dramatic happened on Instagram, but the whole ordeal was so petty and fleeting that she’d rather not rehash.
Other Articles
Gillette Corner’s famous Art Deco clock has been refurbished
No Comment! Be the first one.