CHATTERING CLASS

A new generation of design critics is talking. Are you listening?

By GLENN ADAMSON Artwork by JESSE TREECE

WHEN THOMAS HEATHERWICK’S ESCHER-LIKE STRUCTURE VESSEL OPENED THIS SPRING IN MANHATTAN’S HUDSON YARDS, THE GENERAL PUBLIC’S RESPONSE WAS FAIRLY MUTED. People stood in line. They went up and down the structure’s nearly 2,500 steps. They posted their pictures on Instagram, and then they went on with their lives.

Critics, on the other hand, exploded. “The depth of architectural thinking at work here,” Kate Wagner wrote in the Baffler, “makes a kiddie-pool seem oceanic.” Along with Michael Kimmelman in the New York Times, Alexandra Lange in Curbed, Elissaveta Marinova in Icon, Matt Shaw in the Architect’s Newspaper, and myself in Frieze (among others), Wagner denounced the project as the hood ornament of a real estate development lacking in public spirit but built at public expense.

Given the vast resources passing through Heatherwick’s hands, it is unlikely that this wave of hostile coverage bothered him much. But it was an indication of a certain maturity in the field of criticism itself. Quite unexpectedly, we seem to have arrived at a golden age of writing about architecture and design. Not since the 1970s, when postmodernism was roiling the scene and theorists were lining up on all sides to make their points, have there been so many voices speaking about design, or so many platforms for them to be heard.

Back in 2005, graphics specialist Rick Poynor wrote an article in Design Observer plaintively entitled “Where Are the Design Critics?” One might expect things to have only gotten worse in the years since. Newspapers struggle, while the sheer accumulation of capital in many fields—particularly film and fine art—rolls right over bad reviews. But the peculiar formation of contemporary media is well suited to the design field. Spurred by competition, design websites and magazines have outgrown the merely promotional role that they once had. Though still image-hungry and quickreflexed, these outlets have also learned that sharp writing attracts readers.

Meanwhile, social media has provided a means for critics to establish themselves (Wagner, with her widely read site McMansion Hell, is a great example), even as new courses in design writing—at the School of Visual Arts and the Design Academy Eindhoven, for example—cultivate new talent. Most important, independent design practices are thriving. They are also positioning themselves more discursively, engaging in sophisticated ways with the theoretical and political implications of their own work.

The result is a wealth of intelligent design writing. Much of what’s out there consists of hot takes, of course, particularly on news sites such as Dezeen and Hyperallergic. But there are also new magazines such as Disegno that carry long-form pieces, and podcasts like 99% Invisible and Design Matters that offer a deep dive in each episode. Design galleries, following the lead of their peers in fineart criticism, have begun investing in publications programs; I’ve served as an in-house writer for New York’s Friedman Benda over the past two years, and Carpenters Workshop Gallery Paris has founded an ambitious new online journal, Design Edit. And let’s not forget documentaries, museum catalogues, full-length books, and, yes, newspapers, too.

It’s probably too early to say what this burst of critical response will mean for design. Will empty prestige projects and derivative copycats be called out? Will we see more transparency on issues of sustainability? And will the current intellectual vibrancy of design practice itself continue? Without great work, great criticism is pointless. Right now, there is plenty of both around—more than we can take in, probably. But keep reading this design criticism column anyway. For, if anything in 2019 can be said to be in its golden age, it’s worth savoring every moment. h