THE PLANK AUGUST 16, 2009
-
Read Later
READ LATERAvailable only to subscribers. SUBSCRIBE TODAY
-
Listen
ARTICLE AUDIO
- Font Size
TNR film critic Stanley Kauffmann expresses regret about some of his earlier pieces of criticism. Try to guess what this refers to: "I've been more embarassed about that privately than anything else I've ever written...".
This interview is part of a wider celebration of Stanley Kauffmann's 50 years at The New Republic. For more interviews with senior editor Ruth Franklin, choice reviews from Kauffmann's illustrious career, and more, visit our Kauffmann site.
--Ben Eisler
Check out the latest on TNRtv:
Johnson: What Obama Must Do To Pass Regulatory Reform
Eisler: Does Improvisation Signal The End Of Classical Music? Or A New Beginning?
Schmidle: Will Al-Qaeda Assert Itself In Pakistan?
5 comments
I'm guessing it's his notorious positive review of Yes Giorgio!
- timteeter
August 16, 2009 at 5:54pm
Sigh. Nope, he thinks he underrated Godard. Now I remember why I stopped reading his reviews a long time ago.
- timteeter
August 16, 2009 at 5:58pm
Goddard is overated, Stanley.
- J. Dyer
August 16, 2009 at 6:47pm
What is Kauffmann suggesting here?
This: That when we react to something not able to be accessed [and then assessed] objectively we can only take out of it what we first put into it. This: All of the accummulated experiences and relationships we have had that nudged [or yanked] us in one direction rather than another.
This is true for both aesthetic and ethical [political] assessments. If, for example, someone just viewed the film, "4 Months, 3 Weeks and 2 days", and another asks, "is this a great film?" or "does the film demonstrate abortion is immoral?", we will get answers to both questions all along the value judgment continnum.
Not only this but our answers are always subject to change as we accummulate new experiences and new relationships. In other words, everything is always in flux here. There is no objective manner in which to judge the aesthetic worth of flim, art, music etc.; anymore than there is an objective standard from which we can derive universal orders of morality.
Note for example how J Dyer pulverizes any possible ambiguity about the worth of Godard's films above. He assures us that Godard IS overated. As though something like this can be known....can be known epistemologically?
On one level, sure, most of us will readily agree things like this are just a matter of opinion. But on another level lots of folks out there can't bring themselves to admit this is an inherent aspect of human relationships. Value judgments are no less equivocal than the moral and political contexts out of which they are derived.
george walton
d/a
- iambiguous
August 17, 2009 at 1:34am
In this TNRtv exclusive, Bruce Riedel contends that the "Taliban are winning" the war in Afghanistan
- Anonymous
August 18, 2009 at 2:51pm