The role of the art critic

I recently posted this on my church's message board as part of a conversation about how one judges works of art. This deals with the role of the critic, and the extent to which we should let a critic's opinion form our own:

Regarding the role of critics, I'd say that the least important job of a critic is to say that something is good or bad -- one should mostly talk about how and why a piece "works" and show how it can be placed in various contexts (regardless of whether it should -- that's the decision of each interpreter). There is an art and a certain amount of science to this. As music critic Amir Nezar noted to his colleagues, "... being a music fan is not being a music critic. If you don't understand some basic things about how music is made, and what that tradition of composition is ... I don't think you should be doing this job."

A good critic investigates the how and the why and then uses his skill as a writer or an orator to explain it in an interesting way. The subjective part should be seen by the reader not as Joe Critic coming down from the mountain to tell you whether something gets four or two stars, but as someone starting a dialogue, attempting to engage you, to get you to think and to debate -- even to disagree. When I wrote in the Johnny Cash article in the most recent Travelogue: "it's a lesson that many a weepy, young neo-folk singer should heed: unrelenting lament creates melodrama, not gravitas," I realize that's a debatable statement. Could someone fight me on it, if even just an imaginary conversation in one's mind -- perhaps bring up the "unrelenting lament" of the prophet Jeremiah and ask me if I'd deny him gravitas? Yes! I'm fighting YOU on it in my mind. And thus, we're both thinking more seriously about the work in question.

That is the role of art criticism. Certainly let it inform your opinion, particularly in matters where you were ignorant (like, if you didn't know something about the historical context of the work). But let it become your opinion? Not if you disagree.

I do agree with Michael's statement about judging something for yourself before you listen to the "story" behind it or reading someone else's opinion. This, incidentally, is also the best way to study the Bible. We often rely too much on commentaries and not enough on the text itself.