Leslie Fiedler: 'All good criticism should be judged the way art is. You shouldn't read it the way you read history or science.'

All good criticism should be judged the way art is. You shouldn't read it the way you read history or science.

In a world where criticism often takes the form of objective analysis and evaluation, Leslie Fiedler's quote, "All good criticism should be judged the way art is. You shouldn't read it the way you read history or science," provides a refreshing perspective on the nature of criticism. Essentially, Fiedler argues that the experience of reading criticism should mirror the experience of engaging with art, rather than relying on the detached logic of historical or scientific inquiry.At its core, Fiedler's statement conveys the notion that good criticism should elicit an emotional response, provoke thought, and encourage introspection, much like encountering a work of art does. While history or science often aim to uncover objective truths and provide explanations based on rigorous analysis and evidence, art transcends such linear thinking. Instead, it taps into the realm of the subjective, the emotional, and the imaginative. Similarly, Fiedler suggests that criticism, too, should delve into this complex realm, embracing subjectivity and the nuances of interpretation.To delve deeper into the philosophical roots of this idea, we can explore the concept of phenomenology, a branch of philosophy founded by Edmund Husserl. Phenomenology emphasizes the importance of personal experience and consciousness in understanding the world. Applying this framework to criticism, we can view it as a subjective encounter between the reader and the critic's interpretation.When we read a work of criticism, we should approach it with an openness to embrace the unique perspective presented to us. By immersing ourselves in the critic's analysis and allowing it to resonate within us, we enter into a dialogue that mirrors the aesthetic experience when encountering art. In doing so, we not only expand our own understanding but also gain insights into the critic's interpretation and the artwork itself.However, it's important to note that this interpretation of Fiedler's quote doesn't dismiss the value of historical or scientific writing. Instead, it highlights the distinct nature of criticism and suggests that it should be evaluated differently.In contrast to historical or scientific texts, where the focus is often on facts, evidence, and objective analysis, criticism provides a subjective lens through which we can explore and appreciate the intricacies of art. It embraces ambiguity, multiple interpretations, and the role of the reader or viewer as an active participant in the artistic experience.By reading criticism in the same way we read art, we approach it with an open mind, allowing ourselves to be moved, challenged, and inspired. Just as art has the power to evoke emotions, spark intellectual curiosity, and prompt introspection, well-crafted criticism carries the same potential. It can offer new perspectives, enhance our understanding of an artwork, and shed light on its broader significance.In a world saturated with information and instant judgment, Fiedler's quote reminds us to approach criticism with a different mindset. By setting aside our expectations of objective analysis and embracing the more subjective and imaginative aspects of interpretation, we can fully appreciate the depth and richness of thoughtful criticism.In conclusion, Leslie Fiedler's quote urges us to abandon the traditional modes of interpreting historical or scientific texts when engaging with criticism. Instead, we should approach it as a unique form of artistic expression, open to interpretation, introspection, and emotional resonance. By doing so, we not only enhance our experience of criticism but also deepen our understanding and connection to the art itself. Ultimately, this perspective fosters a more nuanced and enriching engagement with both criticism and the art it seeks to illuminate.