Always a pleasure for me to receive critical thinking and insight from you Sherry. That said, I find the haughtiness of Black-only critique or reserving the right to the critiquing of Blackness — with its art and its purveyors inessential and unrealizable to the cause.
The negative and non-constructive criticism which is stupidity (and stupidity is a choice) doesn’t warrant that sort of threat validation and can be easily dismissed as ignorance, or seen as ignorance of ignorance, especially when it is being used to uphold and perpetuate this scam of a social construct to begin with.
Those who use this unsolicited subscription to whiteness will use aspects of perception is the reality to satisfy their inflated self and or groupthink ideology at the expense of others. All the more proof that they hold inaccurate or insensitive beliefs that don’t comport with facts. They fail to fully consider their perversion of reality which is counterintuitive and dehumanizing — not just of others more plainly, but of themselves.
This is why I grimaced at the false perception and the false reality that inspired Glover’s piece along with the added culpability of our collective complicity.
Constructive critique however, is what survives art long after the relatively short development process which inspires, morphs and shapes a conceptual framework into a finality, and to which only exists for and because of the critique. It is the conclusiveness that sparks a plethora of rationalizing or in my instance reconciling with a motivating factor being perception is the reality.
Elle L’s evenhanded approach in her critique was splendid and duly noted, but one cannot truly separate the art from the artist. This only encourages a false narrative of genius. Human motives are never clearly stated or thoroughly contemplated prior to the action taken place. We don’t always know why we do what we do, especially while we are doing it. In most instances it is seemingly not possible given the influx of stimuli or advantages or perceived benefits of the proposed action. We simply don’t have that sort of high level adaptation of hindsight at this stage of human development.
Furthermore, what is creatively striking and or disturbing to our sensibilities doesn’t always equate to or have to be considered genius. However, it seems by consensus, that we have already granted that license.
What we can’t ignore is the often understated or unstated quality of interdependence that guides us, motivates us, inspires us, and conditions us in ways that contour the arbitrariness of our actions.
Your thoughts on this too would be appreciated.