25 October 2008
Normally, the critic one can be found in academic circles, art scenes and political groups. Nowadays one can also find proclaimed critics in actuality programs, commenting on the news or on soccer matches. The critics are the ones who criticize the status quo and enlighten the world with their supposedly original opinions, which should somehow turn the status quo for the better. The critic has an opinion about anything whatsoever, generically a negative opinion. Here is where the genuine critics separate from the corrupt critic.
The corrupt critic knows what is wrong but not in light of a respected ideal or a principle that one should live by. The corrupt critic gets worked up about all sorts of things, angry even in case of a dramatic temperament. The corrupt critic is a nay-sayer and believes that saying 'no' appears - in itself - intellectual. The critic only finds companions in those that criticize along with them. They have a hard time being happy, they have a hard time being around 'just' good natured people. There is a critical breakdown or deconstruction without orientation or construction. These are the sophists of our time.
The true critic has an ideal and sees reality fall short. Pointing towards the value that is lacking, they help rendering the phenomena fuller, more human and meaningful.
Posts
Fortunatly we have another word for people who lack the latter abbility, Pessimist. It is a virtue for someone who can really critisice and to shovel them into the group of wannabe frustrated intellects, isn't fair I think.
regards,
a reader.
In any case, of course I would agree with you that there are good and bad critics and that I am talking about the bad critic only; its indeed a sketch of the corrupted type.
Thanks for comment!
I actually don't imply that critics are naturally pessimists and the uncritical therefore optimists. Instead I say most bad critics are just pessimists in disguise. To assume that the uncritical are optimists is kind of easy, anyone who is uncritical can leave most sorrows and problems as they are and concentrate about stuff that might make them happy like britney spears or MCDonalds. And most of the uncritical/optimistic you can find in the sort of people who just go with the flow; do school, get a job, watch mtv, dress like your idol, get a boy/girlfriend, marry happily.. after that just a few will stay uncrittical but hey that is getting old and wise.
The line between optimistic on one end and pessimistic on the other is very linear. On top, uncritical and optimistic do kind of meet but diverge very quickly. And as we move to the uncritical end the line becomes jagged and chopped, popping up here and there, changing color, getting bigger and smaller. Because if we leave the academic and scientific criticality out of it (which is or should be seeking the truth) Critisism is all about opinion. Why is certain music good why are certain paintings better then others whats was wrong with hitler. That is very difficult to answer if not impossible for most of these questions. You have to take in account so many variables one can make a live long study of just one painting. (like the mona lisa) And then there is still the factor of taste. For sceptics, I think someone who is sceptic just has a premature opinion over something based on early experiences getting on their way being pessimistic or critical about it.
That said I must say I find your blog most inspiring! please keep up the good work!
regards,
a reader, definitly one of many..