Criticism vs Reviewing

I think reviewers are offering advice to consumers, while critics are engaging in a more canonical discussion.
--David Welsh

This was going to be my Quote of the Week, but two things changed my mind. 1) It's two months old, and 2) instead of just throwing it out there, I want to spend a little time with it. Usually when I pick an old quote it's just because I'm late seeing it. I saw this one when Dirk Deppey posted it back in November, but all I did with it at the time was think, "Hm, that's interesting" and go about my business. I haven't quit thinking about it since then though.

As someone who writes a lot of reviews, it's a really useful description of two reasons to do that. I've seen my role as advice-offering for a long time, but ever since I read David's comment I've been thinking more and more in terms of canon. As in: which comics deserve a place on the list of great work? The difference is art vs. commercialism. Criticism engages the work purely from an artistic standpoint. Reviewing, on the other hand, has commercial interests: Should you buy this? Had someone pointed this out to me earlier, I imagine I would've changed my motivation for writing about comics a long time ago.

Writing is Hard: Ebert's Rules for Reviewing

Since I do a lot of reviewing, I found Roger Ebert's thoughts on Review Ethics fascinating. They're all about movies of course, but just about every one of them applies to books and comics with a tiny bit of adaptation.

I especially like this one about whether or not it's okay to receive free product to review. I keep seeing this discussion over and over again about whether or not it's ethical for a reviewer to critique books he or she got for free. Some critics have even gone to the extent of disclosing in their reviews whether or not they paid for the book. I think that's unnecessary.

Ebert says:

Of course movie critics get tons of free DVDs, just as book critics get books, etc. You may review those you want, even going so far as to pay for those you don't get for free. Recently I ordered the complete Werner Herzog documentaries from Germany, for example. Herzog would no doubt have been happy to supply them, but I would have felt like a creep for asking. If I admire him so much, I should be willing to buy them. Your unwanted DVDs must never be sold, unless you are a starving critic, in which case you are exempted under the La Boheme amendment. Technically, you should put a scissors to them before discarding, but I don't think the FBI will come after me if I give some to our grandchildren, or donate them to a veteran's hospital.

Amen to that "don't sell your unwanted comp copies" bit. I know some critics see it as deserved payment and I'm not going to argue with them, but a) I'd feel icky doing it and b) Ebert backs me up, so that's where I stand personally.

I also love Ebert's thoughts on being prepared to give negative reviews even to friends. Man, that's hard to do. The best I can usually do is just not review something if a friend wrote it and I didn't like it. Ebert's bravery is inspirational.