Initially, we were encouraged in the daunting task of starting a new art publication by noticing that so much of the art writing that we saw elsewhere was frankly terrible: jargon-filled, pretentious, and needlessly obscure. Since art is one of the most exciting of all human activities, it struck us as inexplicable that so much art criticism was so boring. Once, critics who were also poets and artistspeople like Frank O'Hara, John Ashbery, James Schuyler, Elaine de Kooning, and Fairfield Porter wrote about art with clarity, wit, and enthusiasm.
So we knew from the beginning that there was a precedent for the kind of writing that we wanted to present in G&S. We knew that art writing, in order to be intelligent, did not have to be dull. We¹ve made it our business to put this belief into practice.
Not only has the response from our readership been gratifying; our reviews and feature articles have been reprinted worldwide, resulting in increased recognition for many of the artists we have covered.
We are determined never to succumb to the tendency of many other publications to cover only artists who are already well known or who fit into some currently trendy category. This strikes us as criminally narrow, not to mention shortsighted. Never before in the history of art has there been such exciting diversity, such delicious uncertaintysuch a 'loose canon,' so to speak.
All of which confirms our conviction that there is a real need for a magazine such as G&S, presenting a more balanced view of visual culture; covering established artists, as well as artists who stand a good chance of being well known in the future. In fact, for many artists who had not yet received the attention they deserved (at least, before we wrote about them and other publications, including The New York Times and the Times of London, followed our lead) we have often been the only forum in town. We are proud of this fact, and we take the responsibility that goes with it very seriously.
Jeannie McCormack Editor and Publisher