One of the things I try to cultivate when I approach media is 'most creative decisions, though not all, were probably intentional' and evaluating them not on the metric of whether they are, in a binary sense, 'good' or 'bad,' but rather on whether or not they work for what I want out of them, and why. I think it's very, very easy to assume that something you don't enjoy is bad in a sort of universal, 'everybody can see it' way that removes the burden of self-ownership over your opinion on it; it allows anger and frustration to become a performance, a Bit you can do for the approbation of others. But I don't think that kind of theatrical disgust with something, even if it's atonal, ugly, or reprehensible, really accomplishes much. I think the best criticism comes from a perspective of trying to have an actual dialogue with a work, and I think even conventionally 'bad' works can be extremely memorable and rewarding to examine in close detail, to demonstrate what we take issue with, and figure out more about ourselves and our own preferences. Maybe this is all just media literacy 101 stuff, but I'd much rather have an awkward experience with a piece of art than an experience that was Generically Fine in a way that left very little impression.
- it/its
maple/ketra! space piñata, pointy horse, smelly animal. rock visualizer. leaf painter. number user. pfp: gogmazios
in reply to @hystericempress's post:
Thanks v. much for this post. The part about behaving as if something you don't think works is bad and Ontologically Evil becoming a bit you can perform is gonna stick with me.
It also helped me process some of my feelings about seeing the emergence of some really mean-spirited crit in the twitter era. Like even if they aren't wrong and hating is a real art form that's worth appreciating, when it collides with social media brevity and the tendency to just, well, punish people for failing, turns the people making these imperfect things into enemies to go after.
totally agree. i find it quite interesting how many "media guy"-y types can be so strictly critical and one-dimensional about the material in the media they consume. it always feels like the individual is refusing to approach their thing by looking at the whole. it's a very "itemized" way to approach media, imo. most things are more than the things they include or disregard on a checklist. context is always key.