A second attempt at discussion was made by readers, bloggers and critics yesterday (June 5, 2017) at the Peroto literary club. This time the meeting seemed to be positive and in the development of the conversation many persistent points were expressed, from which a possible third such meeting could begin. The dialogue was attended by literary critics Amelia Licheva and Mitko Novkov; bloggers Iliyana Benova and Alex Krastev; writers Mihail Veshim and Alexander Chobanov, and the moderator was Angel Igov.
The main direction of the conversation, which Angel Igov submitted, was in relation to the expectations of readers who are interested in books, regardless of whether they read criticism or posts. Thus, the entire discussion took place under the sign of the quality of the written opinions (about foreign or domestic literature published in Bulgaria), regardless of what label they are attached to. Both sides agreed that there is a lot of chaff in both “genres”, but also many good texts that can form the taste of readers, express a position or even encourage changes. And here, perhaps we all think of the tales of the Brothers Grimm, which Amelia Licheva also highlighted, in which the criticism was so sharp, but well-founded, that the book entered a second edition.
One of the key theses raised by Mitko Novkov was that the main difference between bloggers and critics is their audience. While bloggers seek the attention of the reader, likes and followers as a reference feedback for their opinion, critics are “self-sufficient”. In this sense, the accessibility of bloggers’ reading was brought to the forefront and perhaps in a certain sense as a negative, compared to the high linguistic norm that criticism aims to maintain. But isn't this high style losing a large part of the readers, as a guest from the audience noted, because it too often reminds of a literary analysis or academic text?
Between the new social networks and old-school newspapers, we have recently discovered a third form that is gaining increasing popularity - the vlog. Alex Krastev noted that the statement in the five-minute video, which today everyone can play on their headphones while doing something else, is not intended to be pompous, but on the contrary should be a conversation between a person who has read the book and a person who has not read it. And here comes the question of the accessibility of professional opinion in limited printed publications, which cannot compete with the easy, fast and free accessibility of online platforms, emphasized Iliyana Benova.
Ultimately, both sides shook hands about the conclusions from this second meeting - the lack of more platforms for professional criticism is a major problem for it, so perhaps at some point "blog criticism" will appear, as Mitko Novkov called it. For the moment, bloggers are laying a foundation of knowledge among readers, from which critics should take over, Iliyana Benova wished.
And you will probably wonder why we have decided to cover these two events and what they have to do with our work in the field of illustration. If writers and critics realize that there is a lack of professional opinion in their field, then in art things are even rarer. There are two academic art magazines left and the bulletin of the Union of Bulgarian Artists, but to our joy, the newspaper Kultura is increasingly publishing texts about illustration. Last year, three events were covered on its pages, and this year – two so far. However, the problem of who should write about illustration still remains. I recently spoke with some local art critics and they admitted that illustration often remains outside their interests. Literary critics and writers on literature also assured me that this is not their field of work, because for illustration or children's books in which illustration is the leading element, people who both read and understand fine art should write.
Text and photos: Milena Radeva
Add comment