compelling criticism isn’t about having the “right” take, it’s about having an opinion that you are willing to put your integrity behind no matter what. my general rule is: if you’re not willing to say what you’re criticising to the artist’s face, you should probably not write it. but many people write to mine engagement/foster outrage and sacrifice making convincing arguments bc they’re so bogged down by their own performance. which i suppose is fine, tbh as it seems we’re currently undergoing an orbital shift where you can say 59 incoherent things and 1 good point and that deserves praise. i’ve read takes i 100% disagree with but are great criticisms because the writer stands on business. roger ebert was a generational talent at this. substack makes me nervous sometimes because criticisms have done numbers but they’re some of the worst i’ve ever read and its not because they’re lower case or too woke or not woke enough or whatever thing people are saying is bad this month, its because there’s either a profound lack of inventory on self (one’s own argument/values/point of view) or a lack of knowledge on the subject (the film/musician/writer/artist/social context) and it makes the writing feel like a haphazard exercise in mean-girl hateration—which ironically is one of my favourite types of criticism as i love a sassy take down—but only when its self-aware enough to know what it is.

be real, be principled or be entertaining. all if you can.