Literary criticism is somewhat "secular" and why not

The word "secular" always feels less good, even a little harsh and pejorative. Secular comments, not to mention, are basically seen as mediocre, crude, and unprofessional comments. Some professionals simply classify saliva comments, fast food reviews, media reviews, etc. as insignificant "secular" discourse, and scoff at them. The "secular" commentary is almost indistinguishable from the academic "tirades" that are usually seen in the ivory tower, which can be described as a lower riba, a yangchun white snow. These experts believe that such secular comments have lowered the level of comments and affected the so-called authority of comments, which should be resisted.

But what needs to be made clear is that secularism does not equal vulgarity, vulgarity, and vulgarity, and must not be confused with it. As we all know, there is secular literature in literature and secular art in art, so why can't there be secular commentary? Besides, who stipulates that comments can only have one pattern, one way of writing, one tone, and they must not be smiling and high? It should be noted that secularism is a neutral word, with a popular meaning on a large level, and it is closer to the public and easier to be understood and accepted by the public. It often analyzes and expounds in a simple and simple way, which does not lower the standard for critics and critics' own qualities and business capabilities, but puts forward higher requirements and tests. Writers are required to abandon some arrogance and prejudice, must break through the limitations and solidification of the original knowledge structure, language system, etc., truly integrate into real life and real context, go deep into actual cases and practical problems, consciously transform the discourse system, change the style of commentary, and fully narrow the distance between theoretical criticism and creative practice and daily life, so as to make more appropriate thinking, more accurate judgment, and more easy, vivid and vivid communication and interpretation.

So, here is a fundamental question: for whom are our comments and criticisms written and for whom? Is it just to say good words, official words, clichés, to please the "relevant" aspects, or just to entertain themselves in their so-called academic circles, or even in the embarrassment of "who writes who reads, who writes who reads"? Or is it out of some utilitarian need to put together papers and monographs, and the title is satisfied? Of course not, literary and art criticism, whether it is criticism or criticism, should serve the people and the masses, it is utilitarian, and it must also have the obligation of popularization and guidance. Therefore, literary and art criticism must also truly go out of the ivory tower and get closer to the people. From this point of view, there is nothing inherently wrong with the secular, let alone contempt, complaints, and denigration, but as long as it is well-intentioned and factual comments and criticisms, it should be allowed and accepted. Only those vulgar and vulgar words, as well as the behavior of completely abandoning academic ethics, principles and bottom lines, and wantonly trampling on academic ethics and conscience purely under the guise of academia, should be more vigilant and eradicated. However, from the current point of view, most of the vulgar and vulgar texts are manifested in the only words left by some netizens, not the real sense of comments and criticisms, which cannot be confused.

In the author's opinion, whether it is secular commentary or criticism that is moving towards the secular, there is not much of a problem, on the contrary, to some extent, the commentary should go to the popular, it should be grounded, cannibalistic fireworks, and its evaluation and reading objects should be extended to the public level, close to the public life, and adapt to the taste of the public. Today's literary and art criticism in particular needs to be more affinity, attractive, and more able to arouse the resonance of everyone's views and emotions, so as to more effectively meet, guide and enhance their ideological, spiritual and aesthetic needs. Only in this way will comments be generally concerned and valued, and the value, meaning and influence of comments and criticisms themselves will be more prominent, which will also play a very important role in maintaining people's traditional values, taking care of emotional self-esteem, and stimulating enthusiasm for participation.

But to put it bluntly, this is something that some people worry about, or even don't want to see. They do not really want commentary, especially slightly sharp criticism, to produce too widespread and intense repercussions and discussions at the mass level and in social groups. Even if there are problems, shortcomings, and deficiencies, in order to safeguard their own interests or for other considerations, the usual method is to deal with them as coldly as possible, and the big things are small and small, and they do not dare to face the problems directly, let alone dare to face the public's doubts. However, for some events and problems themselves, only by attracting enough media exposure, the public's widespread attention, and the active participation of secular comments and criticisms will they be paid enough attention to, will it be more conducive to promoting the benign development of events, solving the series of problems that actually arise, and fundamentally eliminating some problems such as irresponsibility and inaction.

In recent years, the mainstream voice on strengthening and encouraging literary and art criticism and literary criticism has never been interrupted, but in terms of concrete implementation and effectiveness, we still need to improve and strengthen, not only to shout slogans and make superficial remarks, let alone distort it into a disguised "praise" and dress up as a kind of "praise" in the name of criticism. We must conscientiously study General Secretary Xi Jinping's series of important expositions on literary and artistic work, critics, especially critics, must have the courage to have insight, the ability to distinguish between right and wrong, and complete and clear value judgments, otherwise no matter how many activities are organized, how many seminars are held, how many articles are published, and how many collections are published, it is likely to achieve twice the results and achieve little results.

The author sincerely suggests that as long as we adhere to the correct political stance, abide by laws and regulations, and do not violate professional ethics, we should leave a more open and relaxed space for criticism, especially literary and art criticism, and more active and effective support, only in this way can we fundamentally ensure the real vitality and rapid development of criticism and criticism, and can we truly prosper our literary and artistic undertakings, and will we be able to consolidate the cornerstone and confidence of cultural self-confidence.

(The author is an art critic)

April 24, 2022 China Culture Daily

Special reports were published on the 4th edition

"Why bother if literary criticism is somewhat "secular""

Editor-in-charge: Chen Xiaoyue