I just realized something about Edward Tufte. He's an existence proof that criticism, as a calling, is not inherently a waste of time. Imagine if someone did literary or art criticism the way Tufte does data visualization criticism.
-
I don’t think a direct analog is possible because of the pragmatic purpose of data visualization (hence Tufte’s usefulness.) A literary question like whether Shakespeare included the inner monologue of working class characters (etc.) has no immediate use like a chart does.
Art and literature can be done well or badly just like anything else. What you consider a literary question derives from what you've heard English professors talk about. But you could also talk about what Shakespeare cared about, like how to make a scene exciting.
-
-
I would love to read a non-fiction book (or take a video course) authored by W. Shakespeare on how to make a scene or a story exciting.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Not sure if you're familiar with Victorian art critic John Ruskin, he practiced the type of 'instructive' criticism that you seem to like. For example this passage where he praises Swiss cottages then explains why the British don't build them properly:pic.twitter.com/Ugcgfab3Dq
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.