I thought Zach Woolfe was already doing all that clicky stuff they wanted him to do. And if you're talking about generational issues, he ain't that old! As for Pareles, see Steve Smith's recent comments:
"I recall bumping into [Pareles] at a historic concert event I attended in 2020; I wasn’t reviewing it for anyone, but assumed that he must be. No, he said, he wasn’t reviewing it, either.
Shaking my head, I muttered something about the collective historical record we were in danger of losing. Where would future authors and scholars find reports and perspectives concerning the significant live events of our age?
'In YouTube comments,' Jon replied, deadpan."
But what you're talking about, Damon, seems to be something more dire: The artist-audience relationship we grew up with no longer exists. In fact, art as we knew it does not exist. Even "units" barely exist....
Back when I used reviews as way of knowing what to see, hear, or read (as opposed to my later practice of reading reviews only after I'd already consumed the thing under review), it was all based on personality and familiarity. I knew what Pauline Kael or Andrew Sarris or Vincent Canby liked and hated, what they were blind to or strong on, so I could triangulate from their reviews to decide whether I was going to enjoy the picture. You can't really do that with unsigned pieces or rotating freelancers. The NYT, the NYer, and the VV were floating authorities, to be relied upon only if you knew their kinks, but that authority wasn't nothing. If nothing else, the critics were road signs indicating direction. The abolition of standing critical posts could only be the work of people who took authority to be fixed and judicial, who mistook individual tendencies for institutional gravity.
The future Brody describes is, as you note, sadly here -- in full indifferent entertain-us-dammit glory. I’m one of the old head critics you mention and the thing that most troubles me is that there is no longer a discussion about music running throughout whatever’s left of the music ecosystem. This conversation once involved artists and critics and pure fans, and it allowed for not just opinions but actual insights to circulate. It was chaotic and healthy! Now we have artists who don’t interface with knowledgeable writers/critics on a real level, and listeners who know best about what they like and so don’t read reviews, and critics (who are among the most articulate in the field ) getting “reassigned” so NYT can chase the TikTok eyeballs.
I thought Zach Woolfe was already doing all that clicky stuff they wanted him to do. And if you're talking about generational issues, he ain't that old! As for Pareles, see Steve Smith's recent comments:
"I recall bumping into [Pareles] at a historic concert event I attended in 2020; I wasn’t reviewing it for anyone, but assumed that he must be. No, he said, he wasn’t reviewing it, either.
Shaking my head, I muttered something about the collective historical record we were in danger of losing. Where would future authors and scholars find reports and perspectives concerning the significant live events of our age?
'In YouTube comments,' Jon replied, deadpan."
But what you're talking about, Damon, seems to be something more dire: The artist-audience relationship we grew up with no longer exists. In fact, art as we knew it does not exist. Even "units" barely exist....
Back when I used reviews as way of knowing what to see, hear, or read (as opposed to my later practice of reading reviews only after I'd already consumed the thing under review), it was all based on personality and familiarity. I knew what Pauline Kael or Andrew Sarris or Vincent Canby liked and hated, what they were blind to or strong on, so I could triangulate from their reviews to decide whether I was going to enjoy the picture. You can't really do that with unsigned pieces or rotating freelancers. The NYT, the NYer, and the VV were floating authorities, to be relied upon only if you knew their kinks, but that authority wasn't nothing. If nothing else, the critics were road signs indicating direction. The abolition of standing critical posts could only be the work of people who took authority to be fixed and judicial, who mistook individual tendencies for institutional gravity.
The future Brody describes is, as you note, sadly here -- in full indifferent entertain-us-dammit glory. I’m one of the old head critics you mention and the thing that most troubles me is that there is no longer a discussion about music running throughout whatever’s left of the music ecosystem. This conversation once involved artists and critics and pure fans, and it allowed for not just opinions but actual insights to circulate. It was chaotic and healthy! Now we have artists who don’t interface with knowledgeable writers/critics on a real level, and listeners who know best about what they like and so don’t read reviews, and critics (who are among the most articulate in the field ) getting “reassigned” so NYT can chase the TikTok eyeballs.
The underbaked takes trend won't go quietly "Opinion: Influencer culture is kiss of death for restaurants" https://www.sfexaminer.com/forum/kis-cafe-influencer-spat-shows-modern-dining-culture-perils/article_c8fff728-5523-4ad4-9d14-1e5dbbe7bcd3.html