For the last fifteen or twenty years the fashion in criticism or appreciation
7 c! n2 n6 Z+ e0 W2 p, b of the arts have been to deny the existence of any valid criteria and to make the __1__
8 J/ v1 x. s6 Y/ J y% ? words “good” or “bad” irrelevant, immaterial, and inapplicable. There is no such, N/ t6 }) Q2 P. t: T% y0 }
thing, we are told, like a set of standards first acquired through experience and __2__4 D" ]# [# Z' t+ F: Y. K* D2 I
knowledge and late imposed on the subject under discussion. This has been a __3__9 y& K2 x# S! |5 e! _' i8 @
popular approach, for it relieves the critic of the responsibility of judgment and the+ h. B1 ?& Q6 g& L* ?
public by the necessity of knowledge. It pleases those resentful of disciplines, it __4__- D D* P- b% ?2 t8 Y: ^" W
flatters the empty-minded by calling him open-minded, it comforts the __5__1 u4 W& `/ V" y9 ~- y% F
confused. Under the banner of democracy and the kind of quality which our
4 P- d& O l% I- u, i forefathers did no mean, it says, in effect, “Who are you to tell us what is good1 C7 [" w% Q( {! y& X" T8 z
or bad?” This is same cry used so long and so effectively by the producers of mass __6__- y& T* _% J: O. e5 s( ^' ]
media who insist that it is the public, not they, who decide what it wants to hear __7__) k# |9 j1 q% k, Q8 T; z
and to see, and that for a critic to say that this program is bad and that program; Y" ?6 A4 \+ \, o- I: y/ ?
is good is pure a reflection of personal taste. Nobody recently has expressed this __8__
0 A) x7 A4 a. z% |4 r philosophy most succinctly than Dr. Frank Stanton, the highly intelligent __9__8 _9 T: H# Z3 ^' I" q2 B
president of CBS television. At a hearing before the Federal Communications
9 t' P# f" ?7 ^5 ^# f1 t! N" } Commission, this phrase escaped from him under questioning: “One man’s mediocrity __10__# g" O1 X6 Z- v7 X
is another man’s good program”. |
发表于 2012-8-14 11:29:10
楼主