05-08-2012, 11:06 PM
It's a way to pretend/manufacture genius when it in fact doesn't exists. Pointing to the idiosyncratic aspects of Ed Wood films as indications of creative genius would foot Manny's bill, so to speak 
By and large it is more a problem of the "stupid critic" 
In theory it is not a bad idea, it is the application that was/is the problem. Of course it is always problematic when an unnatural structure is forced onto a work as a adjunct or form of analysis, it is why I have a problem with most modernist critiques, as they insist that the work be viewed through a filter, regardless of whether that aspect exists within the work being critiqued.
Dale
By and large it is more a problem of the "stupid critic" In theory it is not a bad idea, it is the application that was/is the problem. Of course it is always problematic when an unnatural structure is forced onto a work as a adjunct or form of analysis, it is why I have a problem with most modernist critiques, as they insist that the work be viewed through a filter, regardless of whether that aspect exists within the work being critiqued.Dale
How long after picking up the brush, the first masterpiece?
The goal is not to obfuscate that which is clear, but make clear that which isn't.
The goal is not to obfuscate that which is clear, but make clear that which isn't.