London-based artist and critic Sherman Sam talks about: His circuitous geographic history, from Singapore to Parsons in Paris to Otis College of Art in Los Angeles, to Oxford to do a history of art degree, finally to London, where he's been since the late-'90s, and which he moved to because it was the biggest art world he could move to at the time because that's where he knew the most people; Singapore, where he's from and still goes back to visit family once or twice a year- it's laws around gum and drug dealing, its rather modest size (for a country), that it's one of the fastest growing in the world, and how it's probably not the ideal place for creative types; characteristics of South Asian (in particular Singaporean) art, which he sees as identity politics-based and morally concerned to the exclusion of object (art) concerns; we talk extensively about Artforum, which he writes reviews for (and is still baffled that he's able to); how when he writes a review he believes the only people who will read are the artist, the artist's parents and the artist's dealer, and the next person who's going to write a review of that artist's work; how to test how good a writer you are: by reading it on public transport; how he fell into art criticism accidentally, but feels that all voices – professional writers, historians, curators, artists, fans – should be heard, because there's so much out there that it needs it; how he was reviewed in Artforum himself, before he began writing for them; how he goes and sees shows in person because he doesn't trust what he sees online, and that can mean eating up a whole day to see something way across town; how what he does as a critic, by bringing attention to artists and shows, is akin to being a 'social worker;' how he favors following galleries' programs over the course of a year over art fairs, and how he favors art fairs over biennials, because he doesn't trust curators, who, he says, have an agenda; and how when it comes to his own sensibility, he favors the intuitive in art, and he sees the small abstract paintings he makes as being anti-corporate, in opposition to the neo-Expressionist work being collected by large corporations, which were going on when he first started making abstractions.