CornerScribe

The Literary Elite, or Not

First off, take a second to read this. Northcoast Exile: A Classic Example Of Why Newspaper Book Pages Are Dying. In short, he talks about the elite view that “just anyone” can’t write a book review or (GASP) criticism.

Read the block quote and take a second to think about it.

Let me put this bluntly, in language even a busy blogger can understand: Criticism — and its humble cousin, reviewing — is not a democratic activity. It is, or should be, an elite enterprise, ideally undertaken by individuals who bring something to the party beyond their hasty, instinctive opinions of a book (or any other cultural object). It is work that requires disciplined taste, historical and theoretical knowledge and a fairly deep sense of the author’s (or filmmaker’s or painter’s) entire body of work, among other qualities.

Let’s see… In order to write criticism, or a “humble” review, I need

• taste
• historical knowledge
• theoretical knowledge
• “deep” sense of the author’s body of work

What surprises me is that anyone does meet these guidelines. Since I have a M.A. in English, I think I’m relatively qualified to speak to his argument. AHEM… Climbing on soapbox.

• Taste. There’s a subjective one to kick things off. Spend about an hour talking to a handful of English instructors, and you’ll find that one’s classic is another’s swill. So, whose taste should we be following? Ah, yes, other critics’, of course.
• Historical knowledge. I won’t argue this one much. Yes, it’s beneficial to understand the historical context a book is written in. Is it necessary to reading and enjoying the book? No. Necessary to writing a good review? Maybe. I’d say it depends on the book.
• Theoretical knowledge. This one is almost as bad as “taste.” In my opinion, those enamored of literary theory have a bad case of “emperor’s new clothes.” I’m not saying there’s nothing useful to be found there. However, most people make too much of other’s theories and spend too little time thinking on their own. One night, two of my classmates locked themselves in my professor’s office because one had accused the other of being a “new critic.” For the unititiated (and you’re really, really lucky!) , that’s a pretty nasty insult. I’m surprised they didn’t come to blows.
• “Deep” sense of author’s work. I’m guessing this guy reviews a book every couple months, if he’s lucky? He has to read the book, review the author’s other works (and what the prevailing critics have to say about all of them). Then, he needs to consider the historical times in which the book was written, and set, if different. Finally, he’s free to form his own opinion, if he’s still able to.

I think the notion that normal, everyday people can’t read, and more importantly, form useful opinions about, literature is one of the many reasons fewer people read today.

I used to teach English, and the occasional literature class. I always dreaded the first reading assignment, particularly with Freshmen. I’d toss out a question to open up discussion and get nothing. Another question. Nothing. I might get a brave soul or two who’d make a comment, but these were usually older students.

Those students fresh out of high school tended to sit quietly and wait, pens in hand, for me to give them the answer, which they would dutifully memorize and spit back to me on the test.

Except, literature doesn’t work that way. There’s no right answer. No right opinion. Forget about what critics and reviewers say, what do you say? It was so much fun when my students were finally able to break out of that mindset and really read and enjoy what we were working on. And it was so sad to realize that so many of them had had reading ruined for them forever because they kept searching for the right answer.

I’ll climb off my soapbox now.