Evelyn Waugh: 'Professional reviewers read so many bad books in the course of duty that they get an unhealthy craving for arresting phrases.'

Professional reviewers read so many bad books in the course of duty that they get an unhealthy craving for arresting phrases.

Have you ever wondered why professional reviewers often seem to favor catchy phrases over substance? Well, Evelyn Waugh, an English writer known for his satirical and humorous novels, provides us with a thought-provoking insight on this phenomenon. In his quote, "Professional reviewers read so many bad books in the course of duty that they get an unhealthy craving for arresting phrases," Waugh suggests that the inundation of subpar literature can lead reviewers to seek solace in the creation of memorable phrases. Although this interpretation alone offers an interesting perspective on the nature of literary criticism, let's dive deeper and introduce an unexpected philosophical concept to further explore this idea.The concept of aesthetic fatigue comes to mind when contemplating the plight of professional reviewers. Aesthetic fatigue, also known as desensitization or saturation, refers to a psychological state wherein an individual becomes numb or desensitized to their aesthetic experiences due to excessive exposure. This phenomenon is not limited to critics alone; it affects artists, musicians, and even the general audience.When reviewers incessantly read bad books, they subject themselves to a seemingly endless chain of disappointing literary encounters that slowly erode their enthusiasm. At this point, aesthetic fatigue inevitably sets in and the craving for arresting phrases emerges. Faced with a literary landscape dominated by mediocrity, reviewers may turn to clever wordplay and captivating rhetoric as a means of injecting some life into their work. These arresting phrases may serve as a coping mechanism, allowing reviewers to find solace and satisfaction in their craft despite the uninspiring material they must sift through.However, it is vital to note that this phenomenon is not without consequences. The danger lies in the potential shift of focus from the essence of the book itself to the reviewer's own linguistic fireworks. As literary criticism becomes more centered around delivering memorable soundbites, the true essence and meaning of a work may be lost amidst the flurry of catchy phrases. Moreover, this emphasis on arresting language may inadvertently encourage authors to adopt a style that appeals to reviewers rather than conveying their authentic voice.So, what does this mean for the world of literature? It highlights the delicate balance between critique and creativity. While the creation of arresting phrases may provide reviewers with a temporary respite from the monotony, it is important for writers, critics, and readers alike to remember the underlying purpose of literature – to provoke thought, challenge perspectives, and offer insights into the human condition. By recognizing the potential dangers of succumbing to aesthetic fatigue, both reviewers and authors can strive to promote meaningful discourse and preserve the integrity of their craft.In conclusion, Evelyn Waugh's quote captures the underlying struggle faced by professional reviewers as they navigate through a sea of bad books. Although their craving for arresting phrases may stem from the onslaught of mediocrity, it is essential to be mindful of the potential consequences this may have on the integrity of literary criticism. Additionally, the introduction of aesthetic fatigue as a philosophical concept sheds light on the broader implications of this phenomenon. Ultimately, by acknowledging these challenges, we can strive for a more nuanced and thoughtful approach to reviewing literature, emphasizing substance over style and preserving the integrity of the written word.