Unreadable art writing

Nice post on C-Monster about art writers who compose reviews, critiques, and articles that make no sense. I've been wondering why so many write in this unintelligible manner. I think one of the commenters on C-Monster's post is onto something:

In my opinion the retreat to “academic” writing styles is because many art writers are unwilling or unable to commit to their actual relationship to the work. They’d rather simply be agents of transmission for what they believe the proper “academic” reading of the work should be.

Art writing doesn’t have to be easy to read, but it doesn’t have to be difficult, either.

One reason I love art is because I can have a personal experience with it, usually one in which I learn something about myself or about the world or about people. If a writer doesn't feel any connection or doesn't feel enlightened in some way, then it's just easier to write academically or ambiguously. I think some writers dissociate themselves from the reader as well. If you really cared about your reader, why would you write in this way?