Artists are not apes.

Sol LeWitt provides some insight in writing about art in the article "Paragraphs on Conceptual Art" (Artforum magazine, June 1967).

First of all, the article hopes to justify the dismissal of "the notion that the artist is a kind of ape that has to be explained by the civilized critic." I take this to mean that some people have the idea that artists are wild animals to be studied by the civilized person. Some people think that only "the civilized critic" can decipher art work and it is the job of the critic to explain the artist to the world. LeWitt argues that the artist is not a wild animal and not an enigma. I would say that artists have the ability to explain themselves and do not need critics to do it for them. As artists we have the inside knowledge of what our work means and what we are trying to say. It is up to us to divulge this information.

All art is subject to criticism. To the artist, the work might mean one thing, and to the critic it might mean another. Because art is an image, It is the nature of art to be up for interpretation. We all view images with personal biases and make associations with images that the artist may or may not have had in mind.

The artist statement is one tool artists have to clarify their work and to give the work some context, history, or meaning.

I think it is smart to write artist statements so that critics have a context in which to consider my work. Not only does the audience have the physical work, but they also have an artist statement to consider. The statement informs the work with informs the statement.

One last thought from LeWitt seems to apply to writing about art: "If the statements I make are unclear it may mean the thinking is unclear." It is up to the artist to write with clarity and fluency to convey the desired meaning or message to his or her audience.