It's a weird aspect of a career in arts criticism that you get, sometimes, heaps of criticism for your criticism. So one must needs acquire one of those little Goresque lockboxes.
As a musician and a creative writer, I was/am used to critical reactions (both positive and negative) to my own artistic endeavors. It's pretty much never personal, and opinions are just opinions. But it's a different equation in a public comment section–the dirty laundry just flaps in the breeze forever. I've had people say I should get fired for a negative review of a Hartford reggae band and other such stuff, but I think "rude" is a new one! (That from a comment on my current column.) Nothing like breaking new ground.
I did rather unload on Ken Burns, and not for the first time, so I expect some criticism for that fairly unpopular opinion. I would say that, just as I get the privilege of printing material in a widely available paper, Burns has acess to a much broader audience. He won't, I bet, be particularly concerned if he knows I don't always love his films.
When, I wonder, is unloading with both barrels appropriate? Too much in the sycophancy department just encourages mediocrity, so it has to be done in the name of better art. So I say it's worth it, as long as it's backed up, as I certainly hope I've done in my column.
So there's that then…
