In their staffing decisions and choice of assignments, they might even be said to create it. Liking rock 'n' roll and a tolerance for late nights in the hot clubs and crowded arenas in which the music is performed are thought to be the only relevant criteria for the critic's job. Consequently the music rarely receives the type of probing, authoritative evaluation that is accorded without a second thought to the more traditional artstheater or classical music, for exampleor even to the movies. If I seem to be singling out daily newspapers for criticism, I definitely don't mean to. Such publications are typically more adventurous in their coverage, often to the point of being proudly and willfully obscure.
Attitude substitutes for perspective and opinions replace ideas.
It's so tedious to have to explain it to you. Half-digested academic cultural theory combines with witless adolescent posturing and outrageously indulgent first person rantings to create writing that can be of interest only to the most hardened or masochistic insiders. Popular glossy magazines, on the other hand, often fetishize celebrity and hold matters of substance hostage to the trends of the moment. In the hands of witty, keen-eyed features writers, such profiles can be fascinating glimpses of lives trapped in the soft hell of notorietyor they can just be fun, journalistic bonbons. Most often, however, they serve to inscribe more deeply the idea that the rich and famous are not only different from, but better than, you and me.