Musician and writer Sven Regner once formulated some tips that contain what it takes to make our lives more relaxing and beautiful, specifically the lives of all these artistically active people. He called them the “Golden Rules of Criticism,” and this is what they say:
1. Never complain about bad criticism. 2. Never be thankful for good criticism. 3. Never act like a critic.
The last of Regner’s advice means above all: never criticize critics—in the end the work is always rubbed with an unpleasant, ugly shade of green, the only thing to be about and not the sensibilities of the person who made it. The work has its dignity as something that can stand on its own, it doesn’t need an overbearing artist to guard and protect it with all his anger, words, and more.
The artist’s most prominent positions: silence
The artist’s highest attitude, therefore, is to bring the work into the world and to remain silent ever since, with an expression on his face that says, “All I have to say can be found in my book, my picture, my play. Apart from that.” From what you think I know, I am inclined to vehemently deny that I as myself could ever have anything close to it! A silent poet with these words is of course an idealist, a far cry from what is actually possible, and sometimes for good reasons such as a very good reason for wanting to participate in talk shows and public events by NDR Kultur. Poo, this is actually much more than that.
Open your eyes when choosing a profession.
The pathetic attack by choreographer Marco Goecki on a dance critic from FAZ eludes any further discussion. What he said, as well as his former boss, the impresario Laura Berman, who acted and spoke wisely thereafter, has been adequately and aptly commented on. When he uses the rigor of his work as proof that he is uncritical and laments the “unbearable stress” that criticism causes, one cannot put it better than Detlev Esslinger in the Sueddeutsche Zeitung: “Open your eyes when choosing a profession: life offers many opportunities for work Seriously without the women come from the FAZ.”
Criticism requires judgment and rhetoric
To add – and please feel free to discuss it more broadly – it would be at best to suppose that a professional art critic would have to admit an innocence for the creation of this publication. Perhaps it creates negative pressure: in times of free press and free speech, has criticism always been disparate, balanced, descriptive, half-hearted, light-hearted, and yes: very boring as it is today? You have to go back about ten years to come up with an example of criticism flowing out of sheer malice. When a reviewer from the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung deprived writer Judith Herrmann of all the skills required for her job with the stroke of a pen, one was really angry because all he could do was count beans. Indeed, composing a slate list requires a force of judgment and eloquence that few possess, especially under current conditions of media production. Literary critics, for example, read too many books in too little time, and little good can come of them.
But Judith Hermann, though the review affected her deeply, remained silent and continued writing; In the spirit of Seven Regner’s “Golden Rules” No. 4 and 5, which you can’t repeat often enough: “The world doesn’t owe you anything. But neither do you.”
keywords for this article
“Explorer. Communicator. Music geek. Web buff. Social media nerd. Food fanatic.”