Stuart Morgan

Upon reading over the writings of Stuart Morgan, [my interpretation of] his texts appeal to my understanding of art/art photography. 

Homage to the Half-Truth
Lecture given at Van Abbemuseum, Eindhoven, 1991, at the symposium "Writing About Art"

He states that criticism over art, offers interpretation. More importantly however, "its function is didactic". The very notion of learning through anthers problem-solving/approach is something many can agree on. The aim, he states, is to sample models/ways of thinking. To approach art, intuition, sympathy and imagination is necessary to understand the possible interpretations. 

"I know nothing in art criticism that equals the impact created by William Empson's analysis of a single Shakespeare sonnet in his first book Seven Types of Ambiguity, where he returns to the same poem time after time, producing interpretation after interpretation like a conjuror pulling rabbits out of a hat. This unrelenting display was based on the assumption that, at least as Empson saw it, greatness can be equated with multivalence, so the more things a poem means, the greater that poem is."

The possible number of interpretations for a piece of art, be literary or visual, is potentially limitless. Perhaps, as Empson stated, it means for a greater work of art. The artists reasons for its creation may not necessarily be why it is so appealing to the masses, but it is appreciated all the while. 

Stuart Morgan goes on to say that criticism must be rhetorical, "... because thinking is not writing; it must be reflexive". What you write may differ to what you think, therefore criticism is indirect and conventionalised. It is this that banes many artists, for it is not the paragraphs they create for, rather the freshness of new eyes and minds on their work to look for themselves.