Previous
Chapter 17
Themes
Key
LitCharts assigns a color and icon to each theme in On Writing Well, which you can use to track the themes throughout the work.
The Human Element
Simplicity vs. Clutter
Process and Organization
The Gift of Writing
Summary
Analysis
Unlike most writers, critics—or writers who evaluate art—are actually supposed to flaunt their opinions, sophistication, and wit. That said, most of their attempts at wit fall flat. It’s also much easier to insult poor work than praise good work, and critics don’t have nearly as much power as they think they do.
In the genres that Zinsser has explored so far, writers are mainly supposed to tell compelling stories. While they have to find their own voice, they shouldn’t necessarily tell the reader what to think. But art critics have to make and defend specific, often controversial, judgments.
Themes
Good critics have to love the genre of art they write about. They shouldn’t spoil the plot of a work they’re critiquing, and they should cite specific details from it rather than just describing it with general adjectives. Unlike reviewers, who mostly report on new output in a specific industry, critics have an important intellectual job: evaluating art and putting it in the context of its field. Therefore, they have to know the field inside and out, but they can also assume that their readers have some knowledge of it. They also have to make interesting, nuanced arguments about the work they’re critiquing.
Even if they sometimes overestimate their own power, critics still perform an important service to the public by helping evaluate and contextualize new art. While most writers have to learn from specialists when they deal with technical subjects, art critics are the specialists in the fields they write about. But otherwise, they still have to follow many of the same basic principles as writers in other disciplines. They should be clear, precise, and careful with structure.
Themes
Film critics are probably the most prominent arts writers today. They have to help the reader understand why a movie and its actors are important. For example, in her review of the film A Cry in the Dark, Molly Haskell evaluates Meryl Streep’s range as an actress by comparing her to Bette Davis, a famously versatile actress from the past. Television critics perform a similar role. For instance, Michael J. Arlen writes about how the television shaped the American experience of the Vietnam War by giving Americans a narrow, biased view of events. Arlen’s piece is excellent criticism because it forces people to reexamine their beliefs about familiar works of art.
Since the mid-20th century, film and television critics have taken on a relatively prominent role in American public life. By evaluating the most popular works of American art, they shape the nation’s self-understanding and touch on the most important cultural debates of their time. Haskell’s criticism is effective because she explains the historical context that leads her to a certain conclusion about Streep’s performance. Although Arlen’s criticism is completely different in tone, scope, and intention, it’s also successful because it gives readers the context they need to understand what American television culture reflects about the U.S.’s place in the world.
Themes
Since dance and music deal with motion and sound, they’re particularly difficult to critique through writing. The music critic Virgil Thomson did an amazing job of making classical music accessible and human.
It’s possible to pause, rewatch, and reevaluate movies and television—but not most live musical or dance performances. Moreover, audiences can watch the same movies and television shows that critics write about, but it’s rarer that they can attend the same live performance. Therefore, music and dance critics deal with two extra layers of complexity: capturing non-verbal forms through language and explaining a performance for a reader who may not ever be able to see it.
Themes
Get the entire On Writing Well LitChart as a printable PDF.
Critics can use humor to give fresh perspectives on a work of art. For instance, John Leonard negatively reviews James Michener’s The Covenant by joking about its length and earnestness.
Zinsser foreshadows his chapter on humor by showing how jokes can actually carry a serious message. Leonard uses humor to pan Michener’s book while still praising Michener’s remarkably thorough research. In other words, this lets him soften his criticism by showing that his negative opinion of Michener’s book is really a matter of personal taste.
Themes
Criticism also has to give audiences the context they need to understand a work; this is especially important in literary criticism. For instance, in an essay commemorating T.S. Eliot, Cynthia Ozick pointed out how influential he was in universities in the 1940s and 50s, before he quickly faded from the spotlight.
In addition to helping audiences understand what a work says about the culture, critics also help them understand what the culture says about a work. In literature, a work’s meaning and significance are always connected to its public reception, so this context can be extremely valuable.
Themes
In similar forms—like columns, editorials, and essay-reviews—writers’ personal opinions are the core of their pieces, so they have to take a stance with conviction. As one editor repeatedly told Zinsser and his colleagues back when he worked for the New York Herald Tribune, writers shouldn’t “go peeing down both legs.”
Even when they don’t focus on specific works of art, opinion writers play an important role in shaping public opinion. Like all other writers, they should organize every piece around a single provocative idea. As Zinsser’s editor pointed out, even if they see their proposals’ downsides, opinion writers should find the best possible way to defend them.
Themes
