NYT Defense: An Onomatopoeia from Holland Cotter

I set out to analyze an article that was short and dense; instead, I was captured “A Line Both Spirited and Firm.” Though not in our 500-word style, Holland Cotter’s review of Mannerist painter Bronzino at the Metropolitan does three things exceptionally well.

First, Cotter’s review impresses the vitality of his subject. The hook in his opening paragraph is pure significance: if you haven’t seen this master’s work, his words implore, you need to keep reading. “A Line” continues to elucidate why Bronzino is worth Cotter’s expertise, the Met’s exhibition space, and the reader’s ticket price.

Second, the piece piques and then holds the reader’s attention without contrived theatrics. Cotter’s watertight writing guides the story from historical context to artistic techniques to curatorial controversies, changing subject matter just frequently enough to sustain curiosity. Solid zingers -- “style that erupted, like a repressed libido” -- are more effective here than Technicolor word gymnastics.

Third, Cotter imbues his discussions of context with his opinion of the art. His word choices and story lines create a sort of onomatopoeia in which his review sounds like what it is describing: “Both Spirited and Firm.” Passages like the fourth to last paragraph further connect subject to presentation, in Bronzino’s art, the Met’s show, and Cotter’s writing.

Cotter’s authority comes in part from his excellent writing but also from his extensive knowledge of art and art history. He holds three art degrees and taught Indian and Islamic Art at Columbia University. He has been writing for the New York Times since 1992, and in other arts journalism publications since the 1970s. Last year, his talent was recognized with the 2009 Pulitzer Prize in Criticism.