85 Comments

User's avatar
TheOtherKC's avatar

As a general aside: I like reviewers like Freddie, that can differentiate between "this is not for me" and "this is a bad work". Too often I see reviewers go to one extreme or the other.

Some decide anything they, personally don't like must be objectively terrible, usually with much showy ranting and mockery for the amusement of their audience. Others embrace a faux-intellectual aesthetic relativism that ends up being "I'm going to review this work's political content, rather than think about whether or not it succeeds at its goal" in practice.

Being able to step back and say, "this is very well put together and thoughtful, but didn't resonate with me personally because of artistic choices A and B, and minor flaws C and D that might not bother others", is a rare but important talent.

Expand full comment
Xavier Moss's avatar

The metaphor that really matches our defensive stance to existing beliefs is that of our home. That's where we put down roots - literally, in agrarian communities. We want our house on a firm foundation, and to be unshakeable if the wind blows or the earth quakes. And yes, we want to defend it against attackers, which is where the soldiers come in. Someone defending an existing opinion is like someone defending a brother who's behaved badly - deep down they may know he's at fault but the instinct is too strong.

To use this metaphor, of course, Galef would have to make 'rational thinking' the analogue of 'betraying the family', which obviously wouldn't sell well, bu I do think 'defending the hearth' is what underlies the soldier metaphor.

Expand full comment
83 more comments...

No posts