4 of 5

Write now Article Tools

Page 2 of 3

the perceptive judgements of the uninformed are of greater import. Is not the purpose of art to speak to "the masses"?

If art is merely self-expression then what anyone thinks of the results is of no import.
Criticism and review rather than being elite activities are actually irrelevances.

On the other hand if art is to serve a purpose be that purpose expression of ideas, or beauty, or provocation then it must speak to everyone. Everyone must therefore (by definition) be capable of expressing a critique upon its impact.

We do not, as Schickel asserts, require "disciplined taste, historical and theoretical knowledge and a fairly deep sense of the author's.entire body of work". We simply need to know whether the work in question as merit on whatever level we choose to judge it.

I acknowledge that a literary critique of a book may draw upon such things, and will produce an entirely different result from a straight-forward review by the average reader. But the question must be raised how often does one need such a criticism' in order to determine whether the book is worth reading? I'd go further and argue that such academic assessments are precisely that. Academic.

In both senses of the word.

They are not relevant to most people who might be looking to discover whether they would enjoy the book, or not. Worse: they risk eroding any pleasure to be gained from the book by far too detailed an analysis of its contents, which cannot be properly understood until one has read it and which detail one specifically does not want to know in advance of reading it.

They are, however, of value in the other academic' sense. If one wishes to study the progression of literature and how it reflects changes in society, for example, or the development of the psyche of the author, then the greater prior knowledge does have bearing. But I suspect the busy bloggers don't purport to publish this kind of criticism.

Back to Mr S's original complaint: that against the "hasty, instinctive opinion". I have two problems with this assertion.

Firstly, what gives him the right to assume that my opinion (and/or that of my co-reviewers) is "hasty"? I read for pleasure. I read for instruction. I think about what I read. I absorb it. I consider it before falling asleep at night. At times it intrudes upon my dreams and I think differently about it in the morning. I ponder it while doing the washing up or the gardening. Phrases and ideas will assail me as I walk (not the streets Mr S.! but the river-banks and

• << previous page
• 1
• 2
• 3
• next page >>

Add your voice

Know something about Critiquing your critics?
We want to hear your view. Write now!