Oh, Deleuze. D+G are interesting and thought-provoking but all but impenetrable. Imagine a textbook written in the style of an experimental novel. Surprise! That’s actually your textbook. As with Derrida, I suggest you start with others’ synopses, not the originals. Alternately, if you don’t have any actual reason to read it (such as actually having a use for something that could reasonably be termed “critical theory”), just throwing them against the wall will likely save a lot of time.
Pretty much. I have always tried to keep in mind that the actual justification of criticism is turn people onto good stuff and warn them off bad stuff.
It can also be justified by helping people who liked or didn’t like something understand why, so they can seek or avoid those qualities in other works.
In my case, being a rock critic. (The money is much better in IT.) But really that I’m interested in art criticism for its own sake and read it for entertainment even when I know little or nothing about the art in question.
Oh, Deleuze. D+G are interesting and thought-provoking but all but impenetrable. Imagine a textbook written in the style of an experimental novel. Surprise! That’s actually your textbook. As with Derrida, I suggest you start with others’ synopses, not the originals. Alternately, if you don’t have any actual reason to read it (such as actually having a use for something that could reasonably be termed “critical theory”), just throwing them against the wall will likely save a lot of time.
What uses do people normally have for something termed “critical theory”?
Rent seeking, signaling(mostly to pretty specific groups), fun.
Pretty much. I have always tried to keep in mind that the actual justification of criticism is turn people onto good stuff and warn them off bad stuff.
It can also be justified by helping people who liked or didn’t like something understand why, so they can seek or avoid those qualities in other works.
Oh yeah, turning noise into music. I think that’s covered, though.
In my case, being a rock critic. (The money is much better in IT.) But really that I’m interested in art criticism for its own sake and read it for entertainment even when I know little or nothing about the art in question.