Matthew Grayson: A Critic's Manifesto

The role of the critic is as a student of pop culture. He or she must absorb knowledge from all sources and then detach his or herself completely in order to write a brutally honest and painstakingly accurate account of his or her studies. The who, what, when, where and why are important, but also the why not.

Like any other newsroom employee, a critic must convey a certain amount of factual information in his or her pieces. A reader must know, at minimum, what subject is under scrutiny, how that subject can be found, viewed or purchased, and why that subject is momentarily cast into the limelight.

As with any form of media worth consuming, the ultimate purpose of criticism is simple entertainment. The secret to a great review is that the piece must not only form a convincing argument as to the merit of a particular subject but also be written in a style that cleverly mirrors, playfully contrasts or otherwise complements the subject at hand.

The easiest way to screw up a review is to forget the last part of the formula: conversation. Criticism should not read like a book report nor should it be structured like a news story. Rather, a critic should approach his or piece like a conversation and act merely as if he or she were talking to a good friend about a tasty meal or a lousy book.

The job of a critic, then, is essentially a circus act. He or she must juggle journalism, entertainment and conversation while somehow managing to have fun.