Die Kritik an der Kritik. Eine metapragmatische Topos-Analyse der Be- und Verurteilung von »KunstSprech«

For many years, if not decades, there has been ongoing criticism that texts about (contemporary) art are often incomprehensible. Their language is criticised as devoid of content or artificial. Although researchers have hinted at this problem repeatedly, a systematic (linguistic) analysis of the argumentation patterns »Topoi« remains a desideratum. This article aims at giving an overview of the current allegations by systematically looking at approximately 150 texts (and 70 memes) that criticise so-called »artspeak«. By adapting the method of argumentation analysis as established by Wengeler, Römer and others, six thematically relevant patterns were identified, e.g. the allegations, that »artspeak« is made deliberately incomprehensible to promote the speaker’s/writer’s own prestige or that this specific type of writing is used to sacralise and auratise art. This method not only allows to point out frequently used patterns in argumentation and in readers’ expectations, but also indicates prominent paradigms that are specific to art discourse. Furthermore, this approach provides a solid basis for a subsequent analysis of the linguistic patterns responsible for the allegations of (alleged) incomprehensibility.