Is the Internet the death of objective literary criticism?

Real critics have been bullied into handling some writers with kid gloves out of fear of being rejected. PHOTO| FILE| NATION MEDIA GROUP

What you need to know:

  • Undoubtedly, social media has greatly changed the way literary criticism is tackled.
  • Arguably, reviewers have been rendered helpless and are now forced to either make their stands milder and less discerning or shower too much praise on an otherwise ‘ordinary’ but popular book.

Book critic and literary journalist Lev Grossman, in an online article dubbed ‘I hate this book so much: A meditation’ speaks of the perils of being a book reviewer who had read a book he doesn’t like. Without giving away the book’s title or author, Grossman goes on to examining the politics of book reviews and how at every point in time, one writer must be put to fame even though the said writer may be without talent. He decries the unfairness of having to look hard to find something praiseworthy and great about the work of the supposedly ‘great’ writer because, well, it is the sensible thing for any modern-day reviewer to do.

Undoubtedly, social media has greatly changed the way literary criticism is tackled. Arguably, reviewers have been rendered helpless and are now forced to either make their stands milder and less discerning or shower too much praise on an otherwise ‘ordinary’ but popular book.

The mildness, evident in Grossman’s essay in which he dares not name the book he hates and in fact says he will stop reading the book, is rather unfortunate for it means that slowly, the writer is being led into believing that a book is better than it actually is. This luke-warmness, unseen in critics of old, carries with it an unexciting, unstimulating tepidness  that is warmish  as to be spewed out of the mouth in the biblical fashion.

Another writer, Jacob Silverman, in an article published in the online platform Slate, titled ‘The Epidemic of Niceness in Online Book Culture,’ argues that today’s online literary culture does not allow for objective book criticism but instead leads to peer-hypes in a very non-objective I’m-doing-you-a-favour-so-when-my-turn-reaches-you-will-return-it.

Silverman says “if you spend time on the literary twitter or blogosphere, you’ll be positively besieged by amiability, by a relentless enthusiasm that might have you believing that all new books are wonderful and that every writer is every other writer’s biggest fan. It is not only shallow, it’s untrue and it’s having a chilling effect on literary culture, creating an environment where writers are vaunted for their personal biographies or their online followings rather than for their work on the page.”

He then goes on to show how those who do not join in this endless praise-singing book parties are considered outsiders, enemies and thus unfollowable.

Just like Silverman, some of us are a little weary about how modern day book reviewers are responding to changing trends. Most, in a bid to attract more online readers use praises rather than arguments and flair because they need to create traffic and thus lead to great marketing and advertising platforms for the journals they write for.

The old saying about no statue being put up for critics must be the other reason for many a critic’s discomfort with being completely honest on book matters.

As popular bloggers and opinionated social media users seem to have the ear of the public more and more, critics seem to look for safety in numbers. This need to have each other’s back is, sadly, leading to easily agreeable opinions amongst them. The stimulating, incisive debates and disagreements that were have been replaced by readily dished high praises that are unlikely to lead societal discourses towards innovative novel ideas.

Even as authority shifts from academic to populist book reviews and opinions, one suspects that the decision by social media enthusiasts to shun the seemingly ‘unfair’ views of mainstream critics maybe a rebellion brewed by longstanding ‘academic elitism’. In going against the grain, the keyboard warriors hope to teach a lesson to longstanding knowledge gatekeepers that kept them out in the cold for a long time.

SHIFT IN POWER TO BLOGGERS

Perhaps even this shift in power to bloggers is nothing but a reaction to the changing times. As certain young writers like to complain, maybe the older critics are ‘stuck in post-colonial narratives and are thus unable to give time and space to new writers who experiment with seemingly outlandish genres like science fiction.’

Whether all these retweets, liking and trending translate to actual book sales is a question for another day. When reading some of these blogs, like Pa Ikhide’s and the Africa 39 blog, one gets the feeling that some of the bloggers are unafraid to tell off stories they feel aren’t well told. If the same can be said of populist bloggers afraid of losing ‘followers’ is a question to be answered another day.   

Another could argue that the African fiction book industry is still young and as such the critics have to be accommodating and tolerant of all manner of writing because it is better for ‘bad’ books to be produced than no books at all.

Yet even as these new popular powers take over the shrinking space of mainstream hard lined critics, the readers must, desist from turning social media into affirmation engines. For the sake of knowledge creation, continuity and preservation, online readers should leave room for independent thinking, let us even go further and demand more than sensationalism and regurgitated news from our populist bloggers. They must, even in creating traffic, aim to create a traffic of ideas, After all, what is the use of begging an old man for a shoe if your leg can’t fit in there?

 

The writer is a teacher in Baringo County