Blogcritics Comments on Book Review: The Death of the Critic by Ronan McDonald

Comment by Nigel Beale on Book Review: The Death of the Critic by Ronan McDonald

Sun, 29 Jun 2008 07:42:40 EDT

"The Tradition is more flexible than McDonald gives it credit for, as works jump back into prominence and fall out of favor at a relatively rapid pace, considering the length of time a work has been around." The reason works 'fall in and out of favour' is precisely because of evaluative criticism. McDonald criticizes academia for failing to provide this. However, without some agreed upon criteria, conversation is useless, which is what, as opposed to your extreme example, McDonald is calling for. In short, what is required is this: "It is ... the task of criticism to establish principles; to improve opinion into knowledge; and to distinguish those means of pleasing which depend upon known causes and rational deduction, from the nameless and inexplicable elegances which appeal wholly to the fancy, from which we feel delight, but know not how they produce it, and which may well be termed the enchantress of the soul. Criticism reduces those regions of literature under the dominion of science, which have hitherto known only the anarchy of ignorance, the caprices of fancy, and the tyranny of prescription." Samuel Johnson: Rambler #92 (February 2, 1751)

Comment by Natalie Bennett on Book Review: The Death of the Critic by Ronan McDonald

Sat, 28 Jun 2008 05:03:40 EDT

This article has been selected for syndication to Boston.com. Nice work!

Comment by Kevin Eagan on Book Review: The Death of the Critic by Ronan McDonald

Fri, 27 Jun 2008 23:31:51 EDT

"The tides are increasingly turning away from postmodern detachment and towards a world where students rediscover the arts from the bottom up. The increased focus on literary forms and the discovery of leading young authors, the rise of creative writing programs, and a return to mixing academic and journalistic sources of criticism are all signs that society is trying to redefine culture." I have read that many of the principles that defined high modernism are coming back into academic circles. While I do not believe in a "rubric" approach to criticism, I do believe you have to judge things based on something cultural from the past, not just a 100% descriptive argument toward criticism. As someone who is about to start an MA in English and American Literature, I welcome a return to a more prescriptive approach toward literary criticism. However, we cannot ignore or dismiss the importance of postmodern/poststructuralist theory, because it has shaped modern literature so deeply that to ignore it would be to destroy all of the progress and acceptance we have gained of other cultural views. Hopefully, in a couple years we will have an approach to criticism that is accepting of cultural changes while cautiously defining what is good and bad in art. That will help cut through the ambiguity of postmodernism and reinforce the critic's role. Excellent review!