Accent masterclass x Anna Mikela Ekstrand | Dare to to Write Negative Critique of Art
In this workshop, we will discuss negative critique and how to include it in our art criticism respectfully, that will not burn bridges, but uphold our own integrity while benefiting the public.
Part lecture, part writing workshop.
Art critics and art writers work under precarious circumstances, and relationships with galleries, public relations firms, and various colleagues can be paramount to continue to write; however, we as writers should not let this impede our ability to judge negatively. A term I coined, PR-ism, explores how art criticism is affected by public (and personal) relations in the art world. PR has become a pervasive force shaping the contemporary art world, blurring lines between criticism, promotion, and creative practice, and PR has become an inherent part of the artwork and its market. The rise of political art, identity politics, and exploring socioeconomics in the art world is and remains extremely generative; however, engaging with these themes does not exclude our ability to pass judgment. And, as writers, we must understand the invisible hand of the art market and the PR machinery that accompanies it and navigate it deftly. Clement Greenberg was never canceled, but for meme-artist Jerry Gogosian, it has been a slow burn towards cancellation—it is easier to judge art than the market and its players. In this workshop, we will discuss how art critics and outlets engage in PR in different ways and different approaches to negative critique.
To give you some background, a brief history of U.S. art criticism 1960s-2026—Artforum was founded in 1962—Clement Greenberg lauded Abstract Expressionism and centred his writing on the rational. Stanley Cavell asked if the artwork is compelling, using it to find deeper truths about the human experience. Post-modern writers, like those who covered Minimalism and Donald Judd, took an opposing view to Greenberg, rejecting beauty and exploring the hypnotic. Linda Nochlin questioned the art historical canon of “good art”—populated by male artists and created by men—putting institutional structures at fault and rewriting history to include women. Rosalind Krauss questioned and analyzed judgment itself; it was of the past. To her, self-interrogation and identity were more interesting. Lucy Lippard linked art, activism, and explored social contexts of artistic production and founded the feminist art publication Heresies. Boris Groys considers phenomenology in our media-saturated age. What matters is that we say something. Not if it is positive or negative. Jerry Saltz has revolutionized form (while marking a return to judgement); he is not academically trained and besides being an art critic writing for magazines he has also brought art criticism to TV and social media and speaks directly to artists about their experience and the social and economic pressures leaning into the professionalization, catering to artists and their desire to succeed within the field. Abandoning print and digital art media, Jerry Gogosian, an artist-critic, centres a biting critique of the art market, platforming her critique over memes on social media platforms. True for art critics, in comparison to many other journalists, is that we work marred in conflicts of interest, ones that help generate deeper critique and understanding of our subject matter. These writers that I have mentioned have broken rules, both upset and impressed friends and colleagues, and work on the cutting edge. So can you.
Rewinding, early art criticism and theory have focused attention on Immanuel Kant’s analysis of our judgements of beauty, the “analytic of the beautiful.” This dichotomy, beautiful and unattractive, good versus bad, is foundational for modern aesthetics and based on taste. This is not only linked to the artwork itself, but also to the artist and their intentions. Kant wrote: “genius must be considered the very opposite of a spirit of imitation.” To Kant, genius comes from the rather slippery term power (gewalt); it is talent, originality, and it has no model or rule—artists themselves cannot describe where it comes from. Nature works through genius, and, in turn, geniuses are artistic. Art pretending to be nature is deceitful and unattractive, while art depicting nature, produced through the power of choice that bases its acts on reason, is (or can be if accompanied by genius) beautiful. In addition to gewalt and genius, beauty and freedom are central themes for Kant’s judgment of art. Art must be, or perhaps in today's art world, seem free. TBD by you, the art critic, perhaps. These ideals structure a lot of conversations we have amongst colleagues in the art world, don’t you think? Let’s put them on paper (or a word processor, as it were).
Taking a Kantian approach, however complex it might feel, offers the critic much leeway; as an Enlightenment philosopher, he attempted to find the limits of human reason and found judgment to be the transition from the sense of enjoyment to a moral feeling. So, taste is both stable and dynamic, which makes sense as aesthetics are not logical, but rather based on the cognition of a subject and its feelings. One can read Kant for days and come to life-changing conclusions, or understand nothing at all. Most importantly, for this workshop, let’s add to our mind-archive the idea that judgment benefits humanity.
Suggested Reading
Anna Mikaela Ekstrand. “From Art-Criticism to PR-ism, What Gives?” Whitehot. November 2, 2024. https://whitehotmagazine.com/articles/pr-ism-what-gives-/6640
Cement Greenberg. “Cement Greenberg #4: Seedy Spring,” Cultbytes. April 5, 2023. https://cultbytes.com/cement-greenberg-4-seedy-spring/
Jed Perl. “The Curse of Warholism,” The New Republic. December 6, 2012. https://newrepublic.com/article/110175/the-curse-warholism
Bonus
Sean Tatol. “The Manhattan Art Review's Best & Worst Art Shows of 2025.” The Manhattan Art Review. Accessed January 14, 2026. https://19933.biz/bestandworst2025.html
Clement Greenberg. “Problems of Criticism II: Complaints of an art critic,” Artforum. October 1967, Vol. 6, No. 2. https://www.artforum.com/features/problems-of-criticism-ii-complaints-of-an-art-critic-214918/
Photo by Alina Yakirevitch.
Anna Mikaela Ekstrand is an art critic, curator, and the founding editor-in-chief of Cultbytes, an online art publication, and runs the communications firm Cultbytes Agency. She has been published in BOMB, Cultured, IMPULSE, Odalisque, Time Magazine, Vogue Scandinavia, Whitehot, among others. Ekstrand co-edited Assuming Asymmetries: Conversations on Curating Public Art Projects of the 1980s and 1990s and Curating Beyond the Mainstream: The Practices of Carlos Capelán, Elisabet Haglund, Gunilla Lundahl, and Jan-Erik Lundström, both published by Sternberg Press in 2022. She holds dual master’s degrees in art history and design history from Bard Graduate Center and Stockholm University and is currently pursuing a PhD. Her group show, Tricky Collaborations, opens at Accent Sisters in March 2026.
Web (and free book and chapter downloads): https://cargocollective.com/annamikaelaekstrand
Instagram: instagram.com/shrimp__sandwich