Sam Anderson's view on criticism, was well not quite what i'd had in mind for criticism. His views on the changing art that is literature was optimistic. Not only did he point out that every generation curses and predicts the demise of something due to new technology, but that each generation can take that as an opportunity for growth. With things like Google, Twitter, Facebook, and other technology, the way we interpret literature has also changed. There are now a million other things we can be doing with just the click of a button. Anderson says that it is the critics job to step it up. In this new age of literature, a critic needs to be the bridge. A critic makes art in the same medium that it critiques. As Anderson put it, in this new age of technology critics aren't just referees; they're equal players.
I agree with a lot of what Anderson had to say. There isn't a use in debating if literature has changed, because it has. And along with that change is our change of perception. Something will only die when we stop believing it will live. Anderson's optimism for criticism is refreshing and real.
Nice-- I'm grateful for an optimistic look at the future of literature. I just read a book called Readicide that was very doom-and-gloom about young people and reading. I'm glad people like Anderson are sounding a more hopeful call.
ReplyDeleteI think that your ending statement is a very deep read into what Anderson was trying to get across to us. People are starting to think that the critic is a dying art, which it can be, but it's only dying because we have stopped believing in the power that our criticisms bring. You make a very strong statement.
ReplyDelete