Remember that scene in Mel Brooks’ History of the World Part I where the first artist draws a picture on the cave wall, immediately followed by the first critic urinating on it?
It seems we have advanced, as a civilization, to the Believer magazine’s Snarkwatch. For those of you who are not self-absorbed literary types or Gawker readers, I will summarize:
- Heidi Julavits declares there to be too much “snark,” i.e., hurtful personal literary criticism in an essay in the premiere issue of the Believer.
- The Believer now has a blog of sorts with short posts by writers dedicated to denouncing various examples of snark.
- Aforementioned posts are… well, kind of ‘snarky,’ for lack of a better word.
Example:
” Every single aspect of Mark Ames’ piece was, though apparently heartfelt, nonetheless savage… I’m left seriously questioning his ability for sound cultural references and, frankly, his sanity.” –Don Hoyt Gorman, writing about writing about Chuck Klostermann’s Sex, Drugs and Cocoa Puffs.
I happened to read that piece in the NYPress, and I must say that it was quite, quite acid, which made it all that much more delightful to read. The review is art in its own right, and I think Ms. Julavits’ emotional attachment to the material is blinding her, for that which she calls ‘snark’ happens to make for enjoyable reading.
It should be known, I suppose, that if I were doing something like ‘Snarkwatch’ it would be no less than twice as snarky as the snarkiest snarkfest we had ever reviewed. But then, I’m more of a satirist, and the Believer’s calling card seems to be this (dare I say, quaint?) sincerity. This, of course, makes it perfectly in line with the recent trend, as detailed by Paul Krassner in the same issue of the NYPress, of reality overtaking satire.
Anyway, if you’re that type of sensitive flower who withers under criticism from the cave-wall-pissers, you should just do what Heidi says she does and stick your head in the sand when it comes to reading reviews of your work. Or, wait until you’re dead to publish your work. Personally, I think any criticism is constructive, or at least informative.
