Terry Richardson Has Been Called A Sex Offender, But It's What He ISN'T Being Called Now That Will Probably Burn Him The Most!

While business hasn├óΓé¼Γäót exactly slowed down for Terry Richardson, neither have the criticisms against him!
It was only last month that Benjamin Wallace penned an article for New York Magazine, “Is Terry Richardson An Artist Or Predator?”, which in turn sparked tons of backlash, highlighting that the two are not mutually exclusive and just because he├óΓé¼Γäós an artist doesn├óΓé¼Γäót make sexual assault excusable!
Though the question did ignite a whole new conversation of whether Terry could even be considered an artist to begin with!
Well, after a poll asking several different critics, the responses were essentially unanimous.
Sebastian Smee, Pulitzer Prize-winning critic for the Boston Globe, shared:

“He is more a fashion and celebrity photographer than an artist, not that these distinctions count for very much. Is he a good fashion/celebrity photographer? Sure. On occasion.”

And Paddy Johnson, founding editor of Art F City and the arts editor for L Magazine, seemed to agree, saying:

“Most of his images wouldn├óΓé¼Γäót make sense in a gallery ├óΓé¼ΓÇ¥ they aren├óΓé¼Γäót using that visual language. I don├óΓé¼Γäót want to talk about any of that in the context of art. He├óΓé¼Γäós a fashion photographer who uses the word ├óΓé¼╦£art├óΓé¼Γäó to get women to take their clothes off.”

Check out more of the HIGHlights (below):

Jessica Dawson, an art critic and visiting professor at UCLA, confessed:
“I actually don├óΓé¼Γäót consider Terry Richardson part of the art world…Like Annie Leibovitz, Richardson├óΓé¼Γäós first allegiance is to whoever hires him, and his work├óΓé¼Γäós primary purpose is commercial…He├óΓé¼Γäós a journeyman, not an artist at all.”
James Panero, executive editor for the New Criterion, on Terry:
“The question ├óΓé¼╦£Is Terry Richardson a good artist?├óΓé¼Γäó assumes that he is an artist at all, which he is not. He is merely a perpetuator of celebrity sleaze with a penetrating flash.”
Corinna Kirsch, senior editor at Art F City, also shared:
“His style├óΓé¼Γäós remained incredibly similar over the years; it├óΓé¼Γäós made him an easy sell because he├óΓé¼Γäós got a brand. But is he deep? No. Does he keep on innovating? No. Does he add any statements of value to the world? No. Aesthetically and ethically, he├óΓé¼Γäós a poor artist.”
Poet and critic, John Yau, shared a similar sentiment:
“The ones of the landscape with the motel signs, etc., are straightforward and artless, driven by their supposed content. The portraits are also straightforward and part of this country├óΓé¼Γäós preoccupation with youth ├óΓé¼ΓÇ¥ ‘beautiful’ teenagers. They are ‘fashionable,’ but are not otherwise interesting.”
And lastly, Alicia Eler, writer and critic of Hyperallergic‘s opinion was revealed as:
“Terry Richardson makes images that ask you to look at them not because they ask hard questions or question cultural norms, but because they are glossy and filled with celebrity.”