Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Clint_L" data-source="post: 9635586" data-attributes="member: 7035894">Sure. 100%. Art is subjective.And a subjective opinion that is based on little knowledge or rigour is, to me, very uninteresting.I teach literature, among other subjects. I'm pretty expert at it, with years of experience, multiple degrees, etc. (I also teach film, to a lesser degree, but I am far from an expert). If I say a book is great, does that make my opinion any more valid than my student who hates reading and barely slogged their way through because it was required (or, let's face it, might have just read a summary online)?Well, on a personal level, no. Not for that kid. They like what they like.But at the level of shared knowledge...yeah. My opinion is more meaningful than theirs. If they have no knowledge or interest in the book in the wider context of literature, no interest or understanding in the various tools and techniques that authors use to create that art, no ability or perseverance to analyze theme, story arc, etc., then their opinion, while valid as personal knowledge, is pretty uninteresting as shared knowledge (trust me on this; I have to mark their papers).I can't tell you how many times, in my now long career, I have had a teenager tell me that Shakespeare is overrated. As it happens, I tend to agree. And I love Shakespeare, but I have also studied Elizabethan literature in graduate school. I have a lot of experience and context behind my opinion. But that student, who has (barely) read one or two plays, maybe watched a film adaptation, and doesn't understand more than 10% of the context or language, has not earned their opinion. They don't know what they are talking about. They can't justify it at anything beyond a personal level. Which is fine...at a personal level. And also profoundly uninteresting.Anyone can have an opinion about anything. And that is wonderful. It's good to have opinions. And it is also often good to keep them to yourself when you lack knowledge and understanding. Or to put out the effort and earn the respect of those who have done so.A good film critic who is dedicated to their craft, like any skilled person who is dedicated to their craft, enriches us. To me, their opinions matter more at the level of shared discourse. Because they know more than I do, and can point out things I might have missed, complexities I never considered, connections I didn't see. I can't say that makes them more "right," because art is subjective. And lots of time, I'll disagree with a particular review. Ultimately, how a film makes you feel is what matters most, and if you love it, you love it. My less informed opinion is still valid, for me. But I'm not adding a lot to the conversation.So someone who hasn't seen a ton of movies and doesn't know much about film is very much entitled to their opinion, and their opinion is valid. But it's probably not super enlightening.Edit: One way that I think the Internet has immeasurably harmed public discourse is by enabling a lot of people to think that their largely uninformed opinions are as meaningful as expert opinions. In the arts, this isn't a disaster, it's just tedious. But in the sciences, it's a disaster.</blockquote>

Verification