Survey Reveals Most Artists Primarily Read Reviews of Their Own Work
The Curious Disconnect Between Artists and Art Criticism
A groundbreaking survey of over 20,000 artists has revealed a surprising trend in the art world: the vast majority of artists engage with art criticism primarily — if not exclusively — when it concerns their own work. The study, released on April 1 via Substack, found that 73% of respondents believe there is “little to no value” in reading reviews about the work of other artists. This seemingly egocentric approach opens up important questions about the role of criticism today, how artists view community feedback, and whether the ecosystem of art engagement is sustainable without a vibrant critical discourse.
A Landscape of Vanishing Art Criticism
To understand the implications of these findings, context is crucial. Art media has suffered significantly in recent years due to the consolidation of publications by media conglomerates, declining ad revenue, and the rise of social media as a primary avenue for art exposure. As art magazines shutter and local critics lose platforms, the once-thriving space of written reflection and rigorous critique is dwindling.
Against this backdrop, the survey sheds light on how creators are adapting — or arguably, failing to adapt — to this shift. Rather than filling the gap left by disappearing critics with reciprocal support or insightful analysis, many artists are doubling down on self-promotion. “Hell, if I don’t read [my reviews], who will?” mused one anonymously quoted artist, encapsulating the air of self-reliance and neglect of broader discourse.
The Rise of the Self-Google Artist
The experience of one Malibu-based artist, who shared that they rely primarily on a Google Alert for mentions of their name, is far from an anomaly. This behavior aligns with the survey’s broader finding that artists consult criticism primarily as a form of self-monitoring — especially for potential negative press. “If I’m getting a bad review, I wanna be ahead of the curve,” declared a Brooklyn-based artist half-jokingly. “I wanna know which writer to shit-talk!”
While obviously tongue-in-cheek, remarks like these reflect a larger theme: even among artists who do read criticism, it’s often to assess reputational risk or engage in “hate-reading” — the act of reading negative reviews about other artists they dislike. This trend, noted by 28% of respondents, is particularly prevalent among “multi-hyphenate bespoke creators” and “landscape painters,” according to the survey.
Criticism, Press Releases and That “Free Booze” Confusion
One of the survey’s most telling insights lies in responses about the very definition of a review. More than half of respondents skipped this section; of those who answered, many confused reviews with press releases or flatly admitted they didn’t know the difference.
This distinction, while critical, has been increasingly blurred in the modern art media landscape. Some artists expressed frustration that writers often attend gallery openings for the social aspect rather than offering informed critique. One respondent summed it up with a side-eye emoji and a complaint about writers showing up for “the free booze.”
This superficial engagement is not limited to writers. Another artist uploaded a meme reading: “i ain’t reading all that — i’m happy for u tho, or sorry that happened.” It humorously illustrates widespread apathy and disengagement from detailed text-based discourse.
What This Means for Art Criticism — and Artists Themselves
The disconnect uncovered by the survey points to a troubling paradox. While artists depend on visibility and legitimacy — often bolstered through critical coverage — they increasingly reject the notion that criticism unrelated to their own work holds value.
This self-centric consumption model has broader implications. Without genuine, mutual engagement with others’ work — and without a shared commitment to reading, writing, and responding — the health of the entire artistic ecosystem is at risk. Thoughtful criticism provides context, challenges assumptions, and fosters evolution; shedding that infrastructure in favor of social media shout-outs and one-line comments can flatten the discourse and leave emerging voices marginalized.
Moreover, critique is a form of artistic dialogue. To limit it to something transactional — a potential networking move or a reputational calculus — undermines its power to incite change, promote excellence, and reflect culture. Without readers willing to engage deeply, criticism risks becoming an echo chamber of self-reference or disappearing altogether.
A Call Toward Reengagement
If there’s any takeaway from this survey, it’s that the art world must reevaluate its collective relationship with criticism. Artists, writers, curators, and institutions alike should recognize that reading and engaging with the work of others — critically and generously — is fundamental not only to artistic growth but to a vibrant cultural memory.
Supporting independent platforms, reading beyond ourselves, and even grappling with unpleasant reviews are all part of a more holistic, respectful, and sustainable art community. As a respondent from Manhattan’s Meatpacking District noted in reference to their discreet dislike-fueled reading: “It just hits different… but obvi, I still