Hilton Kramer is in a huff about a new study of visual arts criticism published by Columbia University’s National Arts Journalism Program. He’s pleased to see that in a name-recognition poll, he rates highly among fellow critics – an 80! But a few sentences later he reveals that he only earns a 12 – can you believe it? – among other critics for his influence on the field. In conclusion? “The Visual Art Critic is in every respect a perfectly useless enterprise—perfect, above all, in its flawless incomprehension of the subject it addresses…” So there.