Criticism – a word that can cause the hackles to rise and the blood to curdle! The subject of arts criticism is coloured by a concept of adversarial – even gladiatorial – combat between the defenceless ‘artists’ and the ‘critics’ armed with their mighty pens. This image is provoked by the reviews in our daily newspapers, which represent one small aspect of a potentially much larger and more valuable forum of critical discussion and debate. Perhaps we need to rethink the choreography, and broaden the spectrum of critical discussion into a pas de trois or, indeed, a ménage à trois between artist, critic and reader.

The scope of critical debate is inevitably defined by the opportunities for publication, and the perceived readership or audience for particular publications. Daily broadsheet reviews may figure most hotly in the artist-versus-critic conflict, but the maturity and health of an artform, and its capacity to withstand incompetent reviewing, can be measured by the range of in-depth discussion that informs the understanding of its constitution and practice. Artform-specific magazines and journals, radio and television arts magazine shows, open forums and curated programmes are all important means of generating discussion, informing potential audiences and provoking practitioners to clarify their intentions.