Hear hear! I've been telling everyone who will listen to me that there needs to be more humility and respect in art criticism . . . your "hospitality" is a perfect term for what I've been thinking about. And of course, such hospitality does not preclude sober-minded objection to an artwork's form, structure, methods, or style. But there ought to be a difference between objection and dismissal. There have been several films, books, music albums, etc. which I've found boring but I would rather keep that judgment to myself most times.
Thanks William. And another thing I should have mentioned in this piece is this: there have been MANY works of art that I didn't "like" at first, then came to understand them and develop an appreciation and even love for. In these cases, it is clear that the problem wasn't with the work, but with ME. I was the one who lacked something.
Danny, thanks for your post. It reminds me of the book Experiment in Criticism by C.S. Lewis. He's talking about books, but I think he suggests something to the affect that a good reader opens up to a work and tries to be receptive and generous. I appreciate people who are like this while still being discerning. Also, weirdly I feel like attempting to make your own creative works/art lends some humility and greater appreciation when critiquing others.
Thanks so much Tynan! And this is kind of eerie, but your last point, about creation, happens to be what I'm working on for next week's post. I just finished drafting it last night. I really appreciate that insight and I agree with you. If it's ok, I'll point to this conversation in the piece? Much appreciated.
The Derridean idea of “hostipitality” comes to mind: as if to say “you’re welcome to come in (to my home, my conversation...)but on very specific terms that I may not explain to you!”
That's actually fascinating and I'll have to admit that one is new to me. And I think it works. (I love the little puns Derrida plays with so often!). That does seem to capture much of what goes on. Except of course in the case of people who are such obvious partisans that their terms are both apparent and non-negotiable. :) Thanks for the new term!
I think a good HUGE recent example of this was the Barbie Movie. I admit I was snobby about at first but suspended my apprehension for a little while to go see it, and ended up enjoying it. Not in its full entirety but at least for its messaging, talent, and design. I recognized it wasn't a movie for me- not in regards to "its just not my type" but it literally is not made to appeal to me. It's a film that discusses the experience of women in modern American life, and while it does gear a message towards men, the main idea revolved around women's lives. And I very much appreciated that. When I told friends about this I was mostly laughed at, and been told that I'd wasted my time, and that when I used Barbie as an example for a point, more laughter, and criticism came my way. I was utterly dismayed how suddenly everyone was a film critic and dared not "stoop so low" as to spend 90 minutes watching Barbie. Folks really get into a narrow mindset for art, and cinema et. all.
That's a great example. I saw the movie twice and enjoyed it. Alongside that enjoyment were real eye-rolling moments for me that I just accepted and moved past. (The one that stands out is the use of the Matchbox 20 song to symbolize toxic masculinity. That song and that band were always beloved by female listeners, not great numbers of toxic hetero men - they were all listening to hard rock--it was a fake argument. But still FUNNY!!!).
Hear hear! I've been telling everyone who will listen to me that there needs to be more humility and respect in art criticism . . . your "hospitality" is a perfect term for what I've been thinking about. And of course, such hospitality does not preclude sober-minded objection to an artwork's form, structure, methods, or style. But there ought to be a difference between objection and dismissal. There have been several films, books, music albums, etc. which I've found boring but I would rather keep that judgment to myself most times.
Thanks William. And another thing I should have mentioned in this piece is this: there have been MANY works of art that I didn't "like" at first, then came to understand them and develop an appreciation and even love for. In these cases, it is clear that the problem wasn't with the work, but with ME. I was the one who lacked something.
Exactly. It’s very foolish to assume that we’re not being critiqued by the art itself!
...and isn't that one of the functions of art? Didn't Kafka say something about it being ax that breaks up the frozen sea in side us??? Wonderful
Perfect. For when we get a little too frosty! 😁
Danny, thanks for your post. It reminds me of the book Experiment in Criticism by C.S. Lewis. He's talking about books, but I think he suggests something to the affect that a good reader opens up to a work and tries to be receptive and generous. I appreciate people who are like this while still being discerning. Also, weirdly I feel like attempting to make your own creative works/art lends some humility and greater appreciation when critiquing others.
Thanks so much Tynan! And this is kind of eerie, but your last point, about creation, happens to be what I'm working on for next week's post. I just finished drafting it last night. I really appreciate that insight and I agree with you. If it's ok, I'll point to this conversation in the piece? Much appreciated.
Wow, that's awesome. Sure. Speaking from my own minor experience, making stuff can be hard!
The Derridean idea of “hostipitality” comes to mind: as if to say “you’re welcome to come in (to my home, my conversation...)but on very specific terms that I may not explain to you!”
That's actually fascinating and I'll have to admit that one is new to me. And I think it works. (I love the little puns Derrida plays with so often!). That does seem to capture much of what goes on. Except of course in the case of people who are such obvious partisans that their terms are both apparent and non-negotiable. :) Thanks for the new term!
I think a good HUGE recent example of this was the Barbie Movie. I admit I was snobby about at first but suspended my apprehension for a little while to go see it, and ended up enjoying it. Not in its full entirety but at least for its messaging, talent, and design. I recognized it wasn't a movie for me- not in regards to "its just not my type" but it literally is not made to appeal to me. It's a film that discusses the experience of women in modern American life, and while it does gear a message towards men, the main idea revolved around women's lives. And I very much appreciated that. When I told friends about this I was mostly laughed at, and been told that I'd wasted my time, and that when I used Barbie as an example for a point, more laughter, and criticism came my way. I was utterly dismayed how suddenly everyone was a film critic and dared not "stoop so low" as to spend 90 minutes watching Barbie. Folks really get into a narrow mindset for art, and cinema et. all.
That's a great example. I saw the movie twice and enjoyed it. Alongside that enjoyment were real eye-rolling moments for me that I just accepted and moved past. (The one that stands out is the use of the Matchbox 20 song to symbolize toxic masculinity. That song and that band were always beloved by female listeners, not great numbers of toxic hetero men - they were all listening to hard rock--it was a fake argument. But still FUNNY!!!).