Blog John Haber - a critics response…
John Haber did indeed come through and respond to my letter. He was also gracious enough to allow me to publicize his reply. It’s really worth your while to read my previous post in order to understand the dialog better). Here is John Haber’s response word for word:
It’s not worth arguing, but here goes:
First, people read reviews looking to keep up with the arts. For New Yorkers, that means wondering what to do with the weekend; it’s one reason I read newspapers and TimeOut — to see if I missed a show. For others, it’s to experience the scene vicariously. These are legitimate reader interests, and I bear them in mind.
Second, no, I can’t judge the quality of work legitimately from the Web, although I often preview shows that way.
Third, it’s a matter of simple fairness. I can’t legitimately cover worthy exhibitions as it is, with so many fine museum shows and 300 galleries in Chelsea alone, not counting the rest of the New York area. I know I’m slighting people. But any attempt to judge “what’s out there” on the Internet is impossible, and the inequities would increase.
Fourth, it would put me in the position of a dealer, evaluating artist submissions (which, as I say, could be in the 10s of thousands, which mostly stink, and which would introduce the bias of who wrote to me). It’s not my job.
Anyhow, I say that to be polite as well to all artist like yourself who write me.
That way, I don’t have to say, “I visited your site, and the work is crap.”
John
I continued this dialog with John however I don’t think that the rest of the conversation is interesting enough for publication here. I will say that it was really refreshing to correspond with an art critic who has the courtesy and professional acumen to bother to respond to pesky fledgling artists like myself : )
Wanna 
