Chris Deerin

My new found enthusiasm for Twitter (I remembered the password) has run aground. I loved having loads of interesting people's opinions to read, between the self-regarding bullshit I slap up there. But then I was led to an article by a Daily Mail columnist called Chris Deerin.

I guess the main thing that lefties like me find hard to take is the authoritative tone of The Daily Mail column: there is no sense of provocation or suggestion, just the damning big statement. In this case, Deerin has a go at Alan Bissett, using him as a symbol for the 'indie lovey' brigade (artists that Deerin doesn't like, who support independence for reasons he regards as self-interested).

As it goes, I don't know whether I support independence. And I don't really like the poem that Alan Bissett wrote about independence, although I can relate to the anger and lively delivery. I do like his play Turbo Folk and his recent piece about Andrea Dworkin didn't smack of political opportunism - it had that very quality of doubt that I value in art (again, I don't agree with his take on Dworkin, but not liking something's position is not the same as saying it doesn't deserve to exist).

The thing is, Deerin's column makes a really big assumption - that he can judge Bissett's intentions (and that they are self-serving).

There's a nice bit in Alan Moore's Promethea  where a devil points out that he can only understand angels on his own terms (and thus, they must be running a scam). The angel looks at the demon and replies that she sees someone doing a rough job as well as they can.

A critic, or academic, assuming that they 'know' why an artist followed a certain path on an emotional level is dumb. It isn't unfair to criticise the poem - although starting the article with a comparison with writers inspired by the holocaust is a bit... melodramatic - and it isn't even unreasonable to make a few assumptions about the writer (it is a fair guess that he believes in a YES vote, eh?). But the assumption of self-interest, that Bissett is lining himself up for a big reward when Big Eck is crowned... it's too much.

I'll try to avoid doing it myself...

The other problem is making Bissett represent other writers. There are a few other playwrights who are up for independence but I don't see them as being much like Bissett in terms of  style or personality. But Deerin takes one writer and makes him stand for the whole (he pretty much takes one piece of poetry...).

It is kind of dumb. But that is the way criticism works - one piece at a time and vapid generalisations that masquerade as objectivity. What we need is a criticism of doubt, tentative assertion and playful methodology. Probably in blog format, written by someone studying dramaturgy.