In her interviews with Francis Davis for the book Afterglow, Kael revealed that she was
often accused of writing about “everything but the movie itself.” Even though
she included many personal anecdotes and tangents in her reviews, she did so
with conviction. It was her lack of apologies for doing so that made her works
into art as a critic.
In Oscar Wild’s The
Critic as Artist, he frames the critic as interpreter; he believes that “the
highest criticism […] is more creative than creation, and the primary aim of
the critic is to see the object as in itself it really is not.” Here is where
Kael shines. While her opinions of film were sometimes in complete contrast to
popular opinion, it is her creative drive that keeps the reader coming.
From Disney’s The
Little Mermaid to Steven Spielberg’s Indiana
Jones: The Last Crusade, Kael reviewed it all. She did not shy away from
any film genre, and she made it clear that she loved every minute of it. By the
tone of her review, she even made it clear that she preferred Cameron Crowe’s Say Anything starring John Cusack to the
aforementioned films, hailing and praising the work of the actors and
screenwriting, while she only enjoyed the chemistry between Sean Connery and
Harrison Ford in the traditional classic, The
Last Crusade.
It is in this sometimes scathing pan that Kael finds her
greatest weakness. Although she was a bastion of independent thought, it does
beg the question on who the critique serves. While her sense of style, wit, and
descriptions provide a pleasant and entertaining read, it is hard to judge
whether or not her reviews mesh with the average moviegoer.
It is indeed laudable that Kael is able to demonstrate her
idiosyncratic critique abilities, but her extreme love and passion for film
creates a void between her and the reader. It may goad the reader into viewing
the film, if only from her masterful use of language and storytelling, but her
opinions on the films are extreme in almost all cases, and this drives a
barrier between in taste. Kael is a domineering writer to be sure, but her
prose may be just that: prose, instead of a critique for the everyman.
John. Good evening.
ReplyDeleteYou have a strong voice that is clean and focused. You are the master of your writing, with precise vocabulary and resources. I especially like the parallel you made with Oscar WILDE's (check your spelling!) words and Kael's work. It worked--well.
No doubt you believe she is a great critic, although you may not agree with her. The only recommendation I have is to take away the parenthesis in your title: "The (wo)man behind the myth." Even if this is some pun, I find it offensive, especially attributing it to such a fierce female artist...as if being "woman" wasn't enough.
:) Thanks for sharing.
Mara