Hmm..I think art remains art without criticism because criticism is an analysis of the art itself, but it doesn't need the critique to simply exist and be appreciated, but it is probably necessary to launch the recognition of what will become a renown work of art/lit (for better of for worse), whereas the critique can only exist when it has a work of art to analyze. Interesting and well developed criticism can certainly enhance our views and understanding of art & literature, so it can be quite valuable in helping to bring to light the work or to frame it in certain contexts, but a work of art/lit isn't guaranteed any added value or the reverse just because it is critiqued.
Just an added note, I'm actually sadly not as optimistic as Suze made me out to be lol :-) I suppose what I meant in the other thread is that I was just stating negatives (because I was so disgusted with a book I recently read) without any intelligent arguments behind it. I think it's great to point out the both the strengths and flaws of any work, but it has to be done intelligently with the understanding that each individual's experience of a book is subjective. My own pet peeve is when people completely rip apart a work without giving any reason. For me, without a logical argument or making a few points, their comments have no value and it's not real criticism. I do try to look for interesting things in any work I read, and even if I don't adore a book, I think there are usually interesting aspects to find in just about any book, even if I don't 100% endorse it. For example, some books might be poorly written but contain interesting ideas or vise versa. However, earlier, I did exactly what I said I dislike and that is I blew off steam criticizing a book without explaining why. But honestly, it's been a long time since I've been so completely underwhelmed...I have the feeling I'm more profound in my pajamas before my first cup of coffee than Coelho is and if you knew what a morning person I AM NOT, that's truly saying something :-) So, again, I like it when people can state reasons for their opinions on a book (though we're only human so I'm allowed to be a big old hypocrite about Coelho right? right? and if anyone is really interested, I'd be happy to go more in-depth as to why I hate it). I also like it when people recognize the gray areas between good and bad, because most books I find aren't really one or the other, but each has its own appeal or interest factor (so I guess that's my positive side speaking? maybe I"m more optimistic than I thought). A good example is, I can't stand readers who only read to find characters with whom they can relate. Me thinks it's time to get real friends in life and look for what's interesting in the story/style/ideas even if you can't stand the protagonist. Ok, now I'm going off on a tangent about the problems I see with people's anti-analytical/uncritical reading skills...sorry, but perhaps it is worth mentioning because I think we need good criticism in the world for our own learning... so I think criticism is very important, but not so much to legitimize art and literature for the individual.
posted 2 years ago. ( permalink )