Fipresci Home the international federation of film critics  
  about usfestival reports | awards | undercurrent   contact | site map 
home > documents > Criticism as Art > Bence Nanay
 

documents

A collection of various documents, such as transcriptions of conferences, readings, discussions.

 

 

documents

Criticism as Art:
An Exceedingly Harmful Idea
By Bence Nanay

There are two questions that we need to distinguish: whether criticism can be art and whether criticism should be art. Whether criticism can be art or not is a question that needs to be answered on a case by case basis. Arguably, some essays of T. S. Eliot can be considered art. But in my opinion, Pauline Kael's cannot be. Also, it is not a particularly profound claim that criticism can be art. Lots of things can be art. Epitaphs, for example. I doubt that when some critics talk about criticism as art, this is the claim they have in mind.

My fear is that what they do have in mind is that criticism should be art, which is, of course, an entirely different question. I think that this is quite probably the most harmful view one can have about the nature of criticism. It is harmful because it makes criticism, and especially film criticism, seem easy.

Film criticism is not easy at all. One needs to know film history very well. One needs to be able to connect a specific flaw in the narrative of a film to similar narratives without this flaw. One needs to put films into context. If film criticism is conceived as art, then one does not need to do any of this. All you need is a good style and some originality.

This widely held belief may explain the surprising low quality of film criticism these days. A great number of film critics lack any kind of knowledge of the great classics or of film history in general. The idea of criticism as art can serve as a convenient justification for such critics to ignore this deficiency. The point is that ignoring it is both unprofessional and irresponsible. Probably we should start thinking about film criticism as a profession instead of an art form. No doubt that would mean more work for the critic, but would probably be more rewarding for the reader.

The film critic who had the greatest influence on the history of cinema was not Pauline Kael. Far from it. Nor Susan Sontag. It was André Bazin, of course. Without Bazin, Italian neorealism would not have been what it was and directors like Bresson, Fellini and Cocteau would have made very different films. And Bazin certainly did not think of his essays as art. Pauline Kael could have learnt some modesty from him.

Bence Nanay
© Fipresci 2004

Bence Nanay is the editor of Metropolis Film Quarterly, University of California, Berkeley.

top

 

selected items

bullet. Truffaut, Interviews
bullet. 5th Soviet Congress
bullet. Is Criticism Art?
bullet. Readings

bullet. archive


Criticism as Art

Ronald Bergan
Hassouna Mansouri
Bence Nanay