Art Writing

I just read an awesome interview with Glenn O'Brien in an older Bergdorf Goodman catalogue/magazine. He's a writer, blogger and so on, and focuses alot of his work on art. I was so so so glad to read this, because alot of times art history and theory gets a horrible reputation because of the overly wordy and almost condescending way it is written. I try to argue this all the time in art history classes, but it gets me no where. I loved this little bit that I cut out to use in future arguments. I wish I had written it. Most of my art theory books sound exactly like his satire.

Q: You're working on Art in America now. What is the problem with art writing today? How come I can't understand the writing in art magazines?
A. The problem with art writing is that it isn't good writing. I believe in putting out a plain-language art magazine that any smart person can read, without a degree in jargon. Also, I think there aren't enough artists writing in art magazines. I'd like to see more primary material from artists, not just people reacting to art.

Q: I went to college, own a dictionary and I make art. If I can't understand it, who can? Can you?
A: You're preaching to the choir, baby. Didn't you ever read my satire on artspeak, "Progress here is no longer a subtextual gloss, but a condiment, as it were, related sidereally to a parasite morphology that has been elevated to a counter-theological syntax among its proponent..." Had enough?

Q: Do you like art?
A: It's my life. It's my wife.