Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site hyper.UUCP Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!columbia!topaz!packard!edsel!bentley!hoxna!houxm!ihnp4!stolaf!umn-cs!hyper!brust From: brust@hyper.UUCP (Steven Brust) Newsgroups: net.sf-lovers Subject: Re: critics Message-ID: <240@hyper.UUCP> Date: Mon, 26-Aug-85 13:30:56 EDT Article-I.D.: hyper.240 Posted: Mon Aug 26 13:30:56 1985 Date-Received: Thu, 29-Aug-85 08:43:28 EDT References: <3383@topaz.RUTGERS.EDU> Organization: Network Systems Corp., Mpls., Mn. Lines: 85 > From: Peter Reiher > > > Ken Moreau writes: > > >But I won't depend on some pompous critic > >(or even you, Mr. Tucker) to tell me that some piece of sh** is art > >simply because I don't immediately like or understand it. If it is > >art (and to me that is a very select, very praiseworthy term), then > >it will be immediately obvious to everyone. If it is not, then it > >fails the test, and no critic can sneer at my taste enough to make > >me admit it is art. > > What I find most disturbing is your contention that, if one doesn't immediately > recognize the value of a work, or if a book isn't a good read, then it is > not a great work of art. .................................................. Waaaaaiiiit a minute. I saw you palm that card. Imediatly recognizing the value of a book is not the same thing as said book being a good read. It is my considered (and I do mean considered) opinion (and I do mean opinion) that to be great art a book must be, first of all, a good read. If something is sufficiantly inaccessible that it cannot be read for fun, it fails as art because it will only speak to that small segment of the population that is already prepared to listen; its exploration of (if I may) the human condition is wasted on those who could otherwise get the most out of it. Something that is ONLY a good read is something that I can respect (there's so much that isn't even that), but, for me, great literature must be a good read and more. One test of literature that I'm particularly fond of is: how long is the author remembered? This isn't one hundred percent; not matter how hard I try I cannot convince myself that Cooper was writing great literature. BUT--what writer who is remembered and, more, STILL READ after a hundred years failed to write stories or books that were fun to read? I have no patience for intellectual arrogence, which leads us to: > .... Perhaps you have read books like "The Sound and the Fury" and "Ulysses" > and been immediately blown away by what good reads they were. ............. > > And Power.wbst@Xerox.ARPA writes: > > > Peter Reiher > reiher@LOCUS.UCLA.EDU > {...ihnp4,ucbvax,sdcrdcf}!ucla-cs!reiher I will confess, hanging my head and whimpering, that I have not read THE SOUND AND THE FURY. I have read ULYSSES. It fails as great literature. It speaks only to the inellectual elite. This isn't bad; the intellectual elite could use some speaking to, but great literature must be inclusive, not exclusive. I wish I were good enough that I could have written ULYSSES. But I say that the same way one says, "I wish could afford an elephant." I don't want the elephant, I just wish I could afford one. Nevertheless, I agree with a great deal of what you said. Good writing can be found anywhere, from children's books to the "literary" genre. Perhaps there is outstanding writing in romances, or westerns, or even pornography. But the point about critics is this: I believe that good writing must be accessable. But "accessable" varies from person to person. I also believe that it is reasonable to discuss writing in terms of certain standards that transcend "I liked this" or "I didn't like this." THAT is the role of a critic. A good critic. The role of the bad critic is ego fullfillment. I think Gene Wolfe is accessible. I know others who don't. I think Wolfe's BOOK OF THE NEW SUN may prove to be great literature. Others don't. The subject happens to interest me. A good critic, whether or not I agree with him, will help me organize the issues in such a way that will help me decide, and, MUCH more important, get more out of the book. And I want to get more out of the book. It was so much fun to read. . . . -- SKZB