Gore's rosebud

[Murthy Yenamandra]

Rodney Welch writes:
> [...] It is not axiomatic that brilliant artists make brilliant 
> critics. I think criticism -- really fine criticism -- takes as much time 
> and energy (if not as much talent) as the writing of a fine novel. I 
> don't know of many brilliant artists who make brilliant critics; I think 
> they are usually one way or the other. [...]

I don't really disagree with the above. The fact that Vidal is a good
enough writer is the major reason we take his criticism seriously enough
to debate it. When a critic knocks someone for being an academic writer,
it's only fair to enquire what his idea of a good non-academic novel is
(presumably including his own novels which we all seem to agree are not
that great). I concede that he's a brilliant cultural and political
commentator, but what are the grounds for taking him for a brilliant
literary critic? Neither his brilliance as a writer nor his dullness as
a novelist is an indicator of his literary judgment, but if one counts
then the other counts as well.

Murthy

-- 
Murthy Yenamandra, Dept of CompSci, U of Minnesota. mailto:yenamand at cs.umn.edu
    "I'm stubborn as those garbage bags that time can not decay
     I'm junk, but I'm holding up this little wild bouquet
     Democracy is coming to the USA" - Leonard Cohen