Terry Teachout posts wisely today on readers disagreeing with critics. Like Terry, I’m baffled by people who fly off the handle and launch ad hominem assaults simply because my judgment differs from theirs. Here’s a characteristically mature sample:
“Perhaps the most common complaint I get is from people who claim that my writings are full of `unsubstantiated pronouncements’ (or nastier words to that effect). This never fails to throw me. Virtually all criticism, after all, is full of `unsubstantiated pronouncements.’ They're called opinions, and yours are as good as mine. The only difference is that I get paid to write mine down. To be sure, I like to think that my opinions have at least some validity, based as they are on a lifetime of intense professional involvement with the world of art. In the end, though, you must be the judge. If my opinions rarely tally with your perceptions, then chances are you'll stop taking my criticism seriously, no matter how cleverly written it may be. Conversely, if I have a history of steering you straight (or at least making you think twice), then chances are you'll be inclined to give me the benefit of the doubt when I praise a book you haven't read, or a play you didn't see. That's the main reason why I write criticism: I want to share my pleasures. Yes, I sometimes feel the need to smite the heathen, but I'd be perfectly happy to spend the rest of my life writing solely and only about things I like.”
Thursday, March 23, 2006
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment