Hacker News Reader

Comment by jl6 | Hacker News Reader

I think you’re right that criticism as an exercise in well-written insight is harder to find. However, criticism as a filter is abundant. Those YouTubers might not be producing erudition, but as long as they have watched a ton of content and decided what the good stuff is, and as long as their tastes seem to align to mine, then their opinion is still very useful.

View on HN

> as long as their tastes seem to align to mine

This is the crux of it for me. A good critic will be of great use whether their tastes align with yours or not.

What is this “great use?” It seems like the purpose of critics isn’t to entertain people with an opinion about a record, but instead bolster the feelings of the insecure who aren’t sure what to think and need someone else pointing the way to an ideal of what cool is.

Critics feed ideas to those that attend parties so those can have an opinion to express when they feel no confidence in their own taste. Critics are Cyrano de Bergerac.

Like always, one needs to engage with a critic over time to get an idea of how they view the world and to be able to project it onto your own preferences. YouTube greatly facilitates this.

And every decent reviewer makes an effort to lay out the facts in front of you and try to be somewhat objective, or at least account for diverse tastes, for a portion of the criticism, so you can reach your own conclusions.

There are tons of excellent full-time critics that know what they are doing. They might not sound as scholarly as in the past, but that was mostly a stylistic choice and I'm skeptical about there being much more substance behind the flowery language.

Yeah this highlights an idea that seems increasingly rare today: you should go see a movie/piece of art because it's important to see and not merely because it aligns with your preferences. A good critic can make you understand that.

Sure, they’re still useful as information for consumers. But that’s what makes them product reviewers and not critics. Someone like John Simon saw himself as upholding artistic standards in theatre, writing, and other art forms, not writing product reviews for consumers.

> Those YouTubers might not be producing erudition, but as long as they have watched a ton of content and decided what the good stuff is, and as long as their tastes seem to align to mine, then their opinion is still very useful.

In most of the (big) YouTuber movies and TV shows critics, I have a very hard time knowing what is their taste and what is a piece of art.

I think in the future the role of a critic will be more to the technical aspect of the piece, and how it fits in their lore than something related to the taste specifically.

In my case, I cannot watch most of the modern TV shows 'cause most of them lack good cinematography, character development, and sound which are important aspects for me in terms of immersion and engagement. Most of the shows today with CGI, only closed camera takes, and lack of external shooting look like sitcoms of the 90s.

That's I think most of the Youtube Critics channels lack, that kind of nuance around those technical aspects.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com