Should critics point out how exhibitions could have been done differently? What I mean is, if I am reviewing a show, should I complain that it isn't the one I would have liked to see? I find most exhibitions quite interesting, but often wonder if they could have been done another way, or used a different theme instead. If critics actually expressed these feelings, very few exhibitions would get positive reviews. But wait a minute: I'm a critic and it's my job to express my doubts – isn't it?
Let me give an example. A while ago, I was upbraided by a curator from the National Gallery about an exhibition I was rude about. Part of his complaint seemed to be that I had not so much disliked the show in question, as believed it was the wrong one to put on. And it was true.
In other words, it seems to be expected that if an exhibition does more or less what it says on the tin, and gets a reasonable attendance, it deserves a soft ride from the critics. By this criterion, the job of a reviewer is not to think about larger, long-term issues of the policy of galleries, or the overall picture of art they present, but always to remain focused on a particular exhibition without any wider consideration of its purpose.
In fact, it's hard to see much long-term purpose in many of the programmes offered by our big galleries. What, over the next few years, is the exhibition lineup at Tate Modern or the National Gallery designed to achieve? Does Tate Modern want to teach its audience about a certain list of artists, ideas, approaches? Does the National Gallery?
The only London museum that appears to think in a more ambitious way is the British Museum. Its success is a triumph of large-mindedness: for several years now its exhibitions have followed a master plan and its blockbusters have linked together to offer an argument about world culture. This is brilliant, and gives me the feeling of being taken on an educative journey. I would like to see similar approaches by other galleries. And if I see a show that is fine on its own terms but totally myopic about the larger history of art and humanity – well, I'll continue to say so.
