When Art Requires a Translator, Something’s Wrong. On artspeak, gatekeeping, and why intuition still matters
I recently filled out an art application that required me to describe my work in a language I don’t naturally speak. I could do it. I did do it. But when I read it back, I felt disconnected — not because it was untrue, but because it didn’t sound like me.
The art world has a way of talking about art that feels learned, coded, and strangely detached from how many artists actually make work. Sometimes my work has meaning. Sometimes it doesn’t. Sometimes I just like how it looks. And I’m starting to wonder why that feels like the wrong answer.
This isn’t just personal frustration. It’s a documented phenomenon.
Art critics Alix Rule and David Levine coined the term International Art English to describe the dense, theory-heavy language commonly used in artist statements, gallery texts, and press releases. Their research showed that this language functions less as a tool for clarity and more as a signal of insider status — a way of demonstrating fluency in the system rather than communicating with the viewer.
When art requires specialized language just to be taken seriously, it creates a barrier. If you don’t know the rules or the vocabulary, you’re already behind — regardless of the work itself.
Even insiders have acknowledged this problem. Art critics and writers have openly mocked the way contemporary art is often explained, pointing out that gallery texts frequently obscure rather than illuminate. When language becomes performative, it stops serving the art and starts serving the institution.
This obsession with explanation isn’t harmless. In her influential essay Against Interpretation, Susan Sontag argued that excessive interpretation actually weakens our experience of art. She warned that reducing art to meaning strips away its emotional and sensory power, turning it into something to decode instead of something to experience.
That resonates deeply with me.
Art doesn’t always need justification. It doesn’t always need a framework. Sometimes it just needs space.
This idea — that meaning is not owned by the artist or the institution — isn’t radical. Marcel Duchamp famously said that the viewer completes the work. In other words, art isn’t finished when the artist stops working; it’s finished when someone stands in front of it and responds.
Which brings me to collectors.
Collectors should never borrow someone else’s interpretation. Not the gallery’s. Not the curator’s. Not even the artist’s. History and context can add depth, but they should never override the personal response. Loving a piece because it moves you — even if you can’t explain why — is not shallow. It’s honest.
There are contemporary critics and writers pushing back against the old guard, advocating for emotional, subjective responses to art instead of academic distance. This shift matters, especially now, when authenticity is increasingly valued and people are less willing to accept systems that feel closed, elitist, or performative.
Art should not be an untouchable club where fluency matters more than feeling. It should not demand a translator before it allows itself to be experienced. And artists should not be required to perform meaning in order to be taken seriously.
What This Means for How I Show Up With Collectors
When you stand in front of my work, what YOU feel is what matters. What it means to you is the meaning. My process, my emotions, and the reasons I made the piece are important to me only — not to the collector. I won’t guilt you into understanding my backstory or ask you to adopt an explanation that doesn’t feel true to you. And please don’t ask me what it’s “supposed” to mean — because it doesn’t matter what I think. Art doesn’t need my permission to exist in your life. It needs your eyes, your intuition, your reaction. If a piece speaks to you, that’s enough. The work should breathe on its own. That’s it.
Sources & Context
This essay is informed by ongoing conversations and critiques within the contemporary art world regarding language, accessibility, and interpretation. Influences include:
Alix Rule & David Levine — International Art English (2012), a critical analysis of the specialized language used in contemporary art writing and its role in signaling insider status.
Susan Sontag — Against Interpretation (1966), an essay arguing that excessive interpretation can diminish the direct, sensory experience of art.
Bianca Bosker — Get the Picture (2024), an investigative account of insider culture, language, and gatekeeping within the contemporary art world.
Contemporary art criticism and commentary addressing the growing disconnect between institutional art language and public engagement.
Personal experience navigating grant applications, exhibitions, and professional art spaces as an emerging full-time artist.
