Elitism Killed the Critical Star: Print Critics Whine Their Way to Irrelevance

BenjaminShapiro.com ^ | 4-13-10 | Ben Shapiro

[UltraConservative]

Yesterday, Howard Kurtz wrote a sad-sack column about the death of the legitimate entertainment critic. “It can be revealing to find out what people like you, uncredentialed as they may be, think about the new Meryl Streep movie, Philip Roth novel or noodle joint down the street. But why does that supplant the need for full-time reviewers?”

Kurtz’s column follows hot on the heels of a smiley-weepy piece by A.O. Scott in the New York Times, entitled “A Critic’s Place, Thumbs And All.” His conclusion is that arts criticism will always be around, since “The future of criticism is the same as it ever was. Miserable, and full of possibility. The world is always falling down. The news is always very sad. The time is always late. But the fruit is always ripe.”

It is linguistic Hegelian dialectics like that A.O. Scott paragraph that tell us why “mainstream” criticism is dying: who the hell wants to read that crap? Kurtz’s piece is whinier, but at least it has the merit of clarity. He hates the common man, and he thinks that even though the common man may give you better advice on whether or not to see a movie, that common man is still common. There’s a refreshingly honest elitism in Kurtz’s commentary.

To read more, click here.

[GeronL]

I bet those can catch a lot of crappie

[BenKenobi]

“I just watched a movie—do I recommend it? How can I answer that—who’s asking, my mom, a teenager who likes horror movies, someone who likes love stories?”

Yep, exactly. I try to do that when I report on a story. I give my opinion about it and you should know straight away where I am coming from. It’s up to you to decide.

The problem is the vague recommendations that many people put out. This is how the paid reviewers lie or distort.