At Abstract Critical, we take words seriously — because the way we write about art shapes how we understand it.
We’re not here to chase trends or echo press releases. We’re here to think critically, write clearly, and invite readers into a deeper engagement with abstract and contemporary art.
To make that possible, we hold ourselves — and our contributors — to a high editorial standard.
Here’s how we do that:
Our Editorial Philosophy
We believe art criticism should be:
- Intelligent, but not exclusionary
- Thoughtful, not reactionary
- Challenging, but respectful
- Curious, above all else
Every piece published on Abstract Critical aims to contribute something meaningful — whether it’s a new perspective, a deeper question, or a well-reasoned critique.
We publish criticism, theory, interviews, reviews, essays, and visual commentary — all rooted in independent thought and a love for visual culture.
What We Look For in Our Content
Our editorial team considers the following criteria when reviewing a piece for publication:
- Originality – Does the piece bring something new or insightful to the conversation?
- Clarity of Voice – Is the argument or perspective communicated clearly and confidently?
- Context & Research – Are claims backed by knowledge, history, or thoughtful reasoning?
- Relevance – Does it speak to current practices, exhibitions, or theoretical frameworks in contemporary/abstract art?
- Tone – Does it maintain professionalism, even in critique?
We believe art writing can be poetic, sharp, theoretical, or personal — as long as it’s authentic and well-considered.
Our Editorial Process
- Submission
Writers submit either pitches or completed drafts to our editorial inbox. - Review
Every piece is reviewed by at least two members of our editorial team for substance, structure, and fit. - Editing
We collaborate with writers to shape the final version while preserving the author’s voice. Our edits focus on clarity, accuracy, and depth. - Approval & Publishing
Once approved, content is scheduled for publication and formatted for web presentation.
Conflict of Interest & Integrity
Transparency is key to our credibility. We ask all contributors to disclose any personal, professional, or financial relationships with individuals, institutions, or artworks mentioned in their writing.
We do not accept payment in exchange for editorial coverage. Sponsored content — if ever published — will be clearly labeled and kept separate from our core editorial work.
Corrections & Accountability
We are committed to accuracy and fairness. If an error is identified in a published piece, we will:
- Promptly correct the error
- Include a note indicating the nature of the correction
- Update the piece transparently without altering the writer’s intent
Readers may report concerns or corrections via editorial@abstractcritical.com.
Contributor Expectations
When you write for Abstract Critical, you’re not just submitting a piece — you’re contributing to a dialogue. We expect:
- Respect for artists, readers, and colleagues
- Fact-checking and honesty in claims
- Disclosure of any conflicts or affiliations
- A commitment to thoughtful, inclusive critique
We welcome diverse voices, experimental formats, and boundary-pushing ideas — but we hold every contributor to the same standard of rigor and responsibility.
Our Promise to Readers
We promise to keep Abstract Critical:
- Free from hidden agendas
- Rooted in real dialogue and inquiry
- Curated with care, not algorithmic hype
- Open to questions, challenges, and ongoing growth
Because great criticism doesn’t just reflect the art world — it helps shape it.