Find an event

Previous: Web masters

Critical condition

Chicago's top taste makers discuss why they critique culture-and why anyone should listen to them.

By Kris Vire<br /> Illustrations by Jude Buffum

As bloggers’ fortunes rise and print space for criticism recedes, the once-rigid lines between professional critics and amateurs are now seriously blurred. Many self-published, self-decreed online critics are being taken seriously by businesses and PR firms, and some print publications are looking to the Internet for talent; meanwhile most print outlets have established blogs to which their critics are expected to contribute, and some critics, frustrated by their shrinking real estate in print, have turned to the Web on their own.

To try and make some sense of the changing critical landscape, we convened a panel of critics, from established newspaper writers to independent bloggers, to talk about what makes for good criticism in any medium. Appropriately for our topic, we got together in an online chatroom. Excerpts from this chat appeared in print, and the full version (edited only for grammar and clarity) appears here.

The players:


Jim DeRogatisJim DeRogatis, music critic, Chicago Sun-Times and Sound Opinions


Don HallDon Hall, theater blogger, An Angry White Guy in Chicago


Anne HolubAnne Holub, editor, Gapers Block’s music blog Transmission


Sam JonesSam Jones, pseudonymous books blogger, Golden Rule Jones


Nathan RabinNathan Rabin, head writer, The Onion’s A.V. Club


Donna SeamanDonna Seaman, books critic, Booklist and WLUW’s Open Books


Chuck SudoChuck Sudo, food writer, Chicagoist


Mike SulaMike Sula, food writer, Chicago Reader


Moderator: Kris Vire, theater writer, Time Out Chicago; blogger, Storefront Rebellion

Categories
January 24, 2008
Previous: Web masters
Share with your network
Comment
Comments

There are no comments