Reviewers should be judged too.

Message Topic Search Topic Options Post Reply Create New Topic Printable Version Translate Topic

 HolyMoly wrote:

Formalized "criticism" of artistic pursuits in general is an odd 
pastime, when I think about it.  Part of me knows that their purpose is 
to inform the reader of the reviewers considered assessment of the 
"value" of the work, in the hopes that the reader will have a similar 
point of view (making it a persuasive piece of writing, in essence).  

But
 then another part of me also knows that art and music are really above 
and beyond objective criticism (apart from a purely technical 
description of the music), and that no two people can hear an album the 
same way (kind of what Walton Street is saying above), so then the 
purpose of the review is primarily to entertain rather than inform.  And
 if the purpose is to entertain, then there is some "value" in a piece 
which harshly criticizes a piece of art - because for some people, that 
kind of thing is fun to read.  But in doing this, one must also be 
sensitive to the parties involved.  And in the case of a music review, 
the artist who made the album is most definitely involved.  

I 
always tell myself that whatever I publish on the internet could very 
well be read by the subjects of my review, and I will have to answer to 
whatever I write.   This doesn't mean sugar-coating everything, but it 
does mean using tact - and if you make a bold claim, be sure you're 
ready to back it up.  We are all responsible for what we do and say.  In
 the internet world, it's easy to forget that, as we all hide behind 
masks and sometimes think we can do or say anything without any 
consequences.  Those are the kind of environments I try to avoid on the 
internet, because then it resembles actual human interaction less and 
less, and I'm just not into that.  Some are.

Conclusion - take 
ownership of your reviews.  Say good things, say bad things, but be 
prepared to back it up, and use a level of tact befitting actual human 
intercourse discourse. 

As is your norm, a very perceptive post. However, I don't get the 'didactic, persuasive' bit as for me, I couldn't give a discarded fig if anyone agrees with my review or not. How needy would someone have to be to offer: Here's my opinion, please make it mandatory?  Someone as clearly as perceptive as yourself must realise that 'objective' criticism is a laudable but futile pretense, as any articulated opinion must reveal more about the subject than the object. In the light of recent European atrocities perpetuated by the 'intolerant/offended' in our midst, I applaud your recommended caution vis a vis published opinion and personal responsibility but to temper the articulation of our ideas by the potential ramifications of their interpretation by either violent dicks or fleecing solicitors has to be tantamount to countenancing a death warrant for sincerity. We cannot legislate against the mentally ill/opportunistic.

Edited by ExittheLemming - January 23 2015 at 08:52