Excellent article. I disagree with his point about literature. The idea of the Great American Novel was an aspect of the power of New York critics. New York critics don’t have the power they once did - not with cheap publishing and distribution and electronic communications allowing anyone to publish a review.
More books published means more garbage, of course, but it also means that one can read many good novels every year and many good nonfiction books.
His complaint about movies also runs up against technological change. Yes, comic-book and action spectacles lack depth, but television allows for the kind of development that is very difficult to accomplish in the two hours of a feature film. The proliferation of distribution channels and the disappearance of gatekeepers/bottlenecks means a lot of good “film” (I date myself ...) finds an audience, as does a lot of garbage.
In just the past 2-3 years, two of the best-written TV drams (well, in my opinion) ever, concluded. Breaking Bad and Mad Men were outstanding examinations of the human psyche, delving into the human condition. Yes, they were riddled with violence and, with Mad Men, sex, and we're not for the faint of heart - this was not TV for the family. But the writing was excellent and the character development gave us characters that serve as an ugly mirror, a sort of "get thee to Church lest ye become like them" event.
It is very fashionable to look back to the good old days and say our best is behind us. And, to be sure, there is a lot of dreck out there and there isn't anything like Veggie Tales for kids, and I can't recall any memorable film coming out in a LONG time. That said, I see Trump's election, the stiffening backbone of Deplorables against the media's bashing of all that is good, and, yes, shows like those that I mentioned as indicators that all is not lost and that maybe, just maybe, the best is yet to come. The good nature of mankind coming out in Texas is further evidence of that point.