At the beginning of my Critical Writing class, my professor, Professor Boyd, asked the class, "What do you think about the role of the critic?" It didn't take me very long to think about this; I've thought about it many times before and my mind was made up. I viewed reviews as a means of entertainment.
I love to read entertainment magazines like People, US Weekly and Entertainment Weekly, and I love films: love to watch them, critique them and read about them. I make sure to always read the movie reviews in these magazines, not even thinking of the effort that went into the writing, though I do now. I read the reviews as entertainment.
If I wanted to see a film, but a critic panned it, I would still see the film. Basically, I take a critic's advice with a grain of salt. After spending a long semester honing my skills in critical writing, I came to appreciate the effort that it takes to produce a good review. Throughout the semester, several critics visited our class to help us in our efforts. They believe strongly in the importance of their jobs and the skills that reviewing requires. Along with Professor Boyd, these critics taught me how to write a review. Every single one of them told us to write conversationally as if writing to a friend. Professor Boyd stressed the basic writing skills: grammar, structure and style.
I learned a lot about myself as a writer this year. Critical writing was fun for me, and one day it may be something that I pursue, but my mind has not changed. I do believe that reviewing is an art form that takes practice and skill, but I see reviews still as entertainment. I understand that critics are "experts" in their field, but everyone has an opinion, and that opinion is often different from others. Everyone has different tastes, which is why I'm sure some people will not agree with my view of the critic. If I ever do become a critic, I'll be fine with being just an entertainer.
No comments:
Post a Comment