expressed frustration at the lit critic not because
he unwaveringly backed one aesthetic, dismissing
others varieties but because the critic couldn't
distinguish between exemplary and bland.
"can't tell a good (particular writer) poem from
an uncharacteristic average (particular writer) poem".
4 comments:
BS he couldn't! Probably just didn't want to go on record.
no, that's not my meaning.
he can tell what's great among stuff he likes but not what he doesn't.
meaning that he doesn't understand what he doesn't like well enough to tell the difference when someone who writes like that is doing it well or poorly.
even if I don't understand hockey, I can tell when someone is doing it well. I don't know the words for it but can tell when they're playing sloppy. this critic doesn't know his stuff yet still talked as if he did.
Wait, I see what you mean. perhaps too there's a picking apart the other team of writers on the basis of poorer performance than judging on best performance.
I think I've got you now. Guy's playing professor when he's still in school eh?
Post a Comment