So a couple of weeks ago now someone linked to this post written by some person I'd never heard of. Maybe she's a big wheel in the publishing industry or just a big fish in her own small pond. I suspect the latter. Anyway, most of the post was about the glory of "real" reviews, those written in newspapers and literary journals. Those are way better than "reviews" written by Bloggers or people on Goodreads. In fact those all but twenty of us who aren't lucky enough to call ourselves "professional" book reviewers can't even call what we do "reviewing" in her world. Those people who lucked into those jobs then have the God-given authority to be righter about books than the rest of us.
OK, yeah, some people suck at writing reviews. Readers of my old blog know who I'm talking about. Miss "I don't get Slaughterhouse-V." Yeah, that's a shitty review. Some of us do try to be more specific in why we don't like a book, or why we like a book. Some even try to put some background and research in their reviews. Not me; Amazon friend and blog lurker Ethan Cooper does far more of that. But we don't work for the Palooka University Journal so we don't matter.
Except here's the thing: "professional" critics are a dying breed. Why? Because publishers and studios don't need them. They can get a hundred of us nonimportant schlubs to review the book/movie for free on the Internet and spread the word of mouth. Cases in point were all those dreadful "Saw" movies and the like that didn't have critic screenings and yet made money anyway. Why? Because often critics are out of touch with ordinary people.
That's what the author of this blog post didn't understand. "Professional" critics are not much more impartial than the rest of us. They have their prejudices too. They're just not going to swear and threaten an author because they're posting under their real name and could lose their meal ticket for misconduct. But more than that, "professional" critics are the type of people who went to film school or got master's degrees in Victorian Literature. That gives them their own ideas of what makes a "great" book or film and what makes a "bad" book or film.
For example, when I read "The Marriage Plot" by Jeffrey Eugenides I knew critics would like it. Why? Because it involves lengthy discussions of books and the main character is getting a degree in Victorian Literature. In other words, it's a book that resonates with book reviewers, despite that the plot is as stale as the fruitcake your family has been regifting for the last 20 years. Someone like me, who didn't waste his life studying Victorian literature, doesn't care about any of that.
By the same token "The Artist" and "Hugo" are the two most nominated movies for Oscars this year. Which I predicted months ago for one reason: they both deal with movies. And since there aren't any WWII/Holocaust/British royalty movies this year, what else does Hollywood love more than Hollywood? Now, are those the best movies of the year? How the hell should I know; I haven't even seen them. Chances are you haven't either because they were probably released in five theaters in New York/LA or you were too busy taking your kids/spouses to "Kung Fu Panda 2" or "Mission Impossible 4" to find out. The point being, there's a gap between critics and real people. Critics are paid to be snobs while the rest of us who work for free don't have to be so elitist. So if anything that makes the "professionals" even less objective than the rest of us. I mean if a "professional" critic came along and said, "OMG, 'Transformers 3' was the most awesome movie EVER'" he/she would get laughed out of every cocktail party in New York/LA/etc. because "professional" film critics are not supposed to like Michael Bay movies. (I think that's on the front page of the handbook.) Whereas someone like my brother can say that on Facebook/etc. because no one but me is going to laugh at him for it. So he doesn't have to worry about protecting his reputation or anything like that.
Going forward, criticism is becoming far more democratic because now anyone can be a critic. That certainly creates hazards. In the end, what you see or read is still largely going to be determined by your interests and the buzz from your corner of the Blogosphere. In other words, if people I somewhat trust like a book or movie, then I'll be inclined to read it/see it. It doesn't matter so much then what some "professional" says or what some non-professional I don't know thinks.
As Billy Joel once sang, "It's a matter of trust..."
I've thought about that as well. I used to have this idea that movie reviewers especially didn't like good movie - and liked bad ones - because they see good movies all the time and are bored with them.
ReplyDeleteI've since refined my hypothesis, but I do think that after a while, you just get bored watching the standard formula used in lots of books and movies, and you just want something to feel new.
And I think that's why they fall in love with non standard stories so often. Whether they are actually good or not.
Well, that and the self referential thing, which is how all those hollywood movies about hollywood get made. They are almost always lame and we still get flooded with them, which is why if I ever tried to pitch a script there, I would make it a script about hollywood.
Uh, I have a degree in literature, but I don't think my opinion on a novel is more important than anyone elses.
ReplyDeleteI think it's awesome there's a huge range of movies and novels available to suit different tastes. My husband and I are a lot alike - sometimes we love the same movies and books, but my favorite is guaranteed to be the one he hates the most and vice versa.
I mentioned in an old post that I reprinted on my sports blog an article that Malcolm Gladwell wrote about how our attitudes of people indelibly shape our impressions of people
ReplyDeletehttp://www.gladwell.com/2000/2000_05_29_a_interview.htm
And our attitudes about ourselves do that, too. One thing I think critics forget is to decide what the POINT of a movie is. "Transformers 3" doesn't want to be "Hugo," and there's nothing wrong with that. So to say "Transformers 3 is big and loud and full of explosions and doesn't make any sense" and then DOWNGRADE it is to ignore the fact that all those things are why the movie existed.
It's as if critics are reviewing roller coasters to try to advise people how to feel about watching a Shakespearean play.
But it's to be expected for critics to fight for their relevance as gatekeepers -- otherwise, they'd have to get real jobs.
I forgot to mention: your advice about who to trust is dead-on.
ReplyDeleteThis is what I really like about self-publishing and self-marketing, though I probably will not start off very well with the latter. Who cares what someone "professional" thinks? If I see readers like myself - unprofessional and simply into reading - generally the validity of a good book, I don't need someone paid to do it offering the same opinion. Readers will do this stuff freely from their own minds.
ReplyDeleteI personally think that my opinion about something is just as relevant as anyone else's opinion on something. Just because they have been knighted by the industry, and I haven't shouldn't mean that I have no voice on something. I looked at the article you linked and it just seems to me that people in the industry are mad that others now have a voice. They may be bitter that they put in all those years to get to where the New Yorker might print what they say, yet a schlub like me can go on YouTube, make a video where I express my opinion, and there's the possibility that it could go viral and get more views than the article in the New Yorker.
ReplyDeleteAs an artist I've always enjoyed the following words by John Ruskin:
ReplyDeleteWhen God made artists he created critics from the scraps that were left over."
I personally like the opinion of "real people over the "professionals." Then again, you know what kind of books I like. ;) LOL
ReplyDeleteI wrote a nice long post that didn't go thru...dammit blogger! So I'm now just going to basically say I agree with Michael and your post.
ReplyDelete