4 ms·

What function do critics serve? A critical analysis of a book or movie is entirely unlinked to whether or not the piece is enjoyed by its audience. Why should t

What function do critics serve? A critical analysis of a book or movie is entirely unlinked to whether or not the piece is enjoyed by its audience. Why should the audience care what a critic says if they enjoyed a film? Indeed, should they feel ashamed that they enjoyed something that some snobby wanker told them they should shun? So what point do critics serve? The only critics whose work I enjoy are either a) enjoyers of the same genres and pieces I enjoy, and who compile vicious and humorous snipes at pieces I do not, or b) who don't tell me why I should love or hate a piece, but instead explain the critical elements I may not understand or might have missed without judgement. And, out of these two types, the impact of team b) lasts much longer.

rainonmoon 3y ago
You resolved your own mystification at the end and yet chose to publish this anyway, so I can only assume you're looking to be further corrected. What you're missing is that criticism is (capable of being) a work of art itself. As your more perceptive self illustrated, criticism is not about telling you why you should love or hate a piece and someone who feels their perspective on something has no room to move or grow shouldn't care what a critic says. The audience for criticism is not "people who like film" or "people who read books". The audience for criticism is people who want to read criticism. Conflate at your own peril.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
ramphastidae 3y ago
The value is in finding a critic who aligns with your tastes. Once you’ve found them, you can learn about (or avoid) all kinds of art you wouldn’t have known about before.
reducesuffering 3y ago
The very same function that we do on HN, discussing the merits of the article. You can just simply read all the primary sources by themselves if you wish, and then no criticism and discussion of the primary source is useful to you. For most people though, we like to understand peoples different interpretations and analysis, and they often provide new insights we never realized. Mostly though, I can’t watch every movie or eat at every restaurant so I need recommendation data.
zimpenfish 3y ago
> So what point do critics serve? You've answered your own question. > [critics] who don't tell me why I should love or hate a piece, but instead explain the critical elements I may not understand or might have missed without judgement. Someone who is just saying "good/bad/yay/nay" on a piece of art isn't a critic, I'd suggest, but just an opinion-haver. Being a "critic" requires some level of thoughtful critique.

rainonmoon 3y ago

You resolved your own mystification at the end and yet chose to publish this anyway, so I can only assume you're looking to be further corrected. What you're missing is that criticism is (capable of being) a work of art itself. As your more perceptive self illustrated, criticism is not about telling you why you should love or hate a piece and someone who feels their perspective on something has no room to move or grow shouldn't care what a critic says. The audience for criticism is not "people who like film" or "people who read books". The audience for criticism is people who want to read criticism. Conflate at your own peril.

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]

ramphastidae 3y ago

The value is in finding a critic who aligns with your tastes. Once you’ve found them, you can learn about (or avoid) all kinds of art you wouldn’t have known about before.

reducesuffering 3y ago

The very same function that we do on HN, discussing the merits of the article. You can just simply read all the primary sources by themselves if you wish, and then no criticism and discussion of the primary source is useful to you. For most people though, we like to understand peoples different interpretations and analysis, and they often provide new insights we never realized. Mostly though, I can’t watch every movie or eat at every restaurant so I need recommendation data.

zimpenfish 3y ago

> So what point do critics serve? You've answered your own question. > [critics] who don't tell me why I should love or hate a piece, but instead explain the critical elements I may not understand or might have missed without judgement. Someone who is just saying "good/bad/yay/nay" on a piece of art isn't a critic, I'd suggest, but just an opinion-haver. Being a "critic" requires some level of thoughtful critique.