The Psychology of Good Critique

2min Snip

00:00

Play full episode

Summary

Transcript

Episode notes

"I would have to just like tell myself to undo what I heard you Blinch say," he says. "That's the mark of good criticism so we're not critics but we sometimes play one on the pod." He adds that movies that somebody enjoys or you could ruin with your criticism can work in the opposite direction. 'If I'll read a really stupid way of trying to understand a work that I really like it doesn't detract from the work for me well'

What’s the meaning of a work of art? Does the text mean just what the author intends it to mean? Does it matter what Kubrick and Arthur C. Clark thinks about the end of 2001? Or is the artist’s interpretation just one interpretation among many once the text is out in the world? We explore the question of authorial intent, and brace yourselves - this is just about as postmodern as David gets.

Plus – do we have what it takes to get an invite to the thought criminals club?

Links

The Party is Canceled [newyorker.com]

Was I Wrong About The Irishman? by Thomas Flight [youtube.com]

Authorial Intent [wikipedia.org]