Critical Condition Response

“Critical Condition” offers up many coinciding and contradicting views about the current state of criticism in these changing times. Through all of the discourse on the subject, the voice of Donna Seaman (the books critic for Booklist and WLUW’s Open Books) stands out as a voice of clarity and inspiration.

Seaman begins the conversation with one of her more profound statements. When the question, “What qualifies someone to be a critic?” is posed, she responds with, “Passion first and foremost. You must find consolation in the art you dedicate yourself to and devote your critical attention out of hunger for what books or music or, literally, food grants you. One must be receptive and adventurous, while also sustaining enough distance to see the work in context.” Seaman makes her passions clear right off the bat. Her view of the critic isn’t one with a “holier-than-thou” attitude, but one with an admiration and passion for the art. To truly write good criticism, one must love the art, while still managing to maintain intellectual distance in order to create context. She then states that “passion must lead to discipline and immersion” and that “expertise is gained from sustained attention.” Passionate people will immerse themselves in whatever they love, and an incredible knowledge of the subject will blossom after such an immersion.

Of the criticism itself, Seaman asserts that it needs “to be clear about what matters in a work of art.” The best criticism is that which explores the important aspects of the work of art, not simply expounding a “good or bad” opinion. A critic should interpret and reconstruct the art in terms of their personal experience with it – to “be clear about what matters.”

As the conversation shifts to the state of criticism in the Internet age, Seaman likens web-based criticism to a “stream-of-consciousness monologue” as opposed to the “sonnet”-like criticism that exists in print. She asserts that the role of the editor is downplayed on the Internet, and that there are less “constraints regarding form, length, and voice.” The analogy to poetry is an insightful and accurate one. The Internet allows much for freedom, which is often a double-edged sword.

Seaman goes on to lament many things about the digital era. She states, “Creative, thoughtful work is undervalued,” and that, “We want everything for free.” She later advocates for a mix of professional and amateur criticism. There are no barriers to entry with web-based criticism, and that can be a force for both good and bad. What Seaman advocates is a mix or professional critics and amateurs. In her eyes, both are valuable. While the amateur critic may not be as informed as the professional, it would be remiss for us to deny their experience with a piece of art. It’s possible for the two to coexist.

Seaman’s view of criticism is exciting and insightful. A clear passion is communicated throughout the entire interview, and the analysis of today’s playing-field is on the mark.