The young people in Beijing have created a new word, called“play deep”. Several young men are talking nonsense together, one of them is silent, pretending to be deep in thought, or saying a few words of philosophy, the others will laugh at him,“This kid, play deep!”“play deep”is actually not deep, but just making a show, making him look a little higher than others. I think some critics are just playing deep.
The difficulty of understanding critical articles has already caused everyone to complain, including the critics themselves. Some reviews seem not to be written for readers or for the authors, but only for critics to read. They have their own set of terms, jargon, concepts, and methods. If one does not enter their door, does not master their symbols, one simply does not know what they are talking about. Moreover, the symbols they use are not unified, and even the critics themselves find it difficult to communicate. Recently, it has been fashionable for two critics to have a dialogue, sometimes for three or four people to talk, but I think they are not talking to each other, but each is saying their own thing, as the Shanghai people say, they are just . They have performed a , fighting for half a day, but neither has hit the other.” three-way intersection “” talking to themselves “
Some reviews are completely incomprehensible. Some, I forced myself to read, and it seems I understood something, and I think there are some new points of view, new meanings, but I think: one, there is no need to write it so long, it can be shortened by two-thirds; there is no need to be so clouds and mist, fighting cranes——strangling oneself. Some reviews, if they are said clearly in ordinary language, could have become a good article, I don't know why they are made so tortuous and difficult to understand. A certain评论of a historian by a Song person said that he loved to use“harsh words”. Our critics love to use“harsh words”, as if it is not like this, it is not like a review, it is not“deep”.
A considerable number of critics use the method of“Six Books Commenting Me”. They first establish a theoretical system of their own, and then dismember the authors and stuff them into the system as comments on his system.
“Six Classics Commenting Me”,
1. It is"me" worth mentioning, there is indeed a bit of sense, and it can be self-justified. One can do anything.
Second, one must be very familiar with“the Six Classics” (works), able to quote at will and use freely,“annotations” and“white text”, integrated as one, without any勉强. Let the author be convinced: I was like this; let the readers also feel that he (the author) or they were like that! You don't say, I don't understand; you say, it really is so, thank you, thank you!
But many of our critics do not go so far. Their theoretical systems are already a bit patchy and lumpy, and when they take writers as examples, they often abstract them, as if the writer were writing according to some theoretical concept, and the works were only the deduction of his theory.
I think a critic should first of all be a connoisseur."theory"兴趣 is much greater than the interest in the works for many of our critics.
I want critics to appreciate my work first before they comment on my work, instead of using my work to support their theories“to say”.
1988Year7July13Day
Follow Mr. Wang to appreciate beautiful writing
Appreciating the beautiful scenery with Mr. Wang
Follow old Wang to taste the delicacies
Wangaddict, Wang fan……Who***iron, who***fire, it's up to you:“Centennial Wang Lao”The internet celebrity's text selection competition has sounded the gong and opened the curtain!(For details, please click to read)
The illustrations, text, and audio in this article that do not have an attributed author.
Please have the author contact WeChat君 to add a note.
