Fun Stuff > ENJOY

"Resident Evil: Afterlife is superior to Inception on every level"

<< < (2/6) > >>

Johnny C:
i mean, his audience isn't really everyone, you know? it's people who can understand that he isn't "trolling" in a traditional sense, but really is using high-art terms to discuss low culture, and denigrating high culture by the very language it's couched itself in. that's not trolling - that's writing. it was extant before trolling came around.

but the problem is that he condescends to that audience, treats them like he just discovered his shit is gold and surely you wouldn't turn down a handful? and people who don't even get that - people who think he's a troll or have an even less insightful reading of him - aren't even worth his consideration.

so i can't figure out what he hopes to accomplish. the problem is that such a condescending tone, even in the most well-read and -respected theoretical texts, is almost inevitably a point against x text. and the point those texts made was usually eloquent, or elegant, or visionary. the thought that maybe film as a medium is caught up in a high art=good/low art=bad or a correlation of what is popular with what is generally acclaimed, or at least given a free pass by the market-driven critical community, isn't exactly revolutionary. all we've got is condescending (though well-written) texts that are fundamentally incapable of engaging their audience, both through the intentionally hostile tone and the intellectually boring conceit.

Alex C:
My last post was dismissive and flippant only because White is guilty of the same all too often himself. As you said, it's a condescenscion issue. I'm a grown ass man, so it's not like I really get upset about what films he does and doesn't like. What bugs me is the way he undercuts his own work with his tone and posturing. It just seems counterproductive and more bratty than idiosyncratic. It's not even like I really want him to cut down on the vitriol all that much here, either. For example, I thought his Scott Pilgrim review was pretty strong and rather refreshingly accessible for him even though he opens up with a bit of a snarky dig at QT fans. But at least he didn't close by calling the vast majority of theater goers morons for once.

KvP:

--- Quote from: Johnny C on 16 Sep 2010, 23:00 ---what armond white writes is actually interesting from a conceptual and/or theoretical standpoint, my main problem with him is that he thinks his audience is dumb

--- End quote ---
You're thinking of Stephanie Zacharek. I have no real reason to believe Armand White isn't a contrarian.

Johnny C:
right but he's a contrarian with an intellectual axe to grind and i think that part has the potential to be interesting but as alex points how his being a total assface undermines that

Buttfranklin:

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page