Film critic A. O. Scott remembers Robin Williams

Robin Williams, an Improvisational Genius, Forever Present in the Moment
by A. O. Scott, The New York Times, August 11, 2014

Ryan Coogler's "Fruitvale Station" opens

A New Year, and a Last Day Alive
‘Fruitvale Station’ Is Based on the Story of Oscar Grant III
by A. O. Scott, The New York Times, July 11, 2013

A.O. Scott on Roger Ebert

AN APPRAISAL
Ebert Was a Critic Whose Sting Was Salved by Caring

by A. O. Scott, The New York Times, April 5, 2013

Conversing with film critic J. Hoberman

"MANOHLA DARGIS In one of Jonas Mekas’s first columns for The Voice he wrote that 'every breaking away from the conventional, dead, official cinema is a healthy sign.' There was an activist element to his rhetoric, and soon after he started writing for The Voice he decided that it wasn’t enough to be a critic, he had to become, as he put it, a near-midwife, so he could hold and protect 'all the beautiful things that I saw happening in cinema and that were either butchered or ignored by my colleague writers and by the public.' He was fighting, to borrow the title of a book on him, to free the cinema."

J. Hoberman Talks About Village Voice and Film Culture
by Manohla Dargis and A. O. Scott, The New York Times, January 20, 2012

Patti Smith as photographer

Patti Smith, Requiem Lass
by A. O. Scott, The New York Times, October 14, 2011

A.O. Scott asks "Who me? Elite?"

Neal Gabler Versus the Critical ‘Elite’
by A. O. Scott, The New York Times, January 13, 2010

Film critic A. O. Scott happens to be one of my favorite cultural writers from The New York Times. But I feel compelled to point out a couple of curious things about this article which appeared in today's Arts & Leisure section.

After working through all his snarkiness about the mainstream public's taste in things, I came to this very interesting graph:

Speaking personally, but also out of a deep and longstanding engagement with the history and procedures of my profession, I have to say that the goal of criticism has never been to control or reflect the public taste--neither is possible--but rather the simpler (but also infinitely difficult) work of analyzing and evaluating works of art as honestly and independently as possible.

Which, to begin with, really sounds like: Public, we're not even talking to you--or about you!

Which raises the question, Who, then, do you see as your readers?  A considerably smaller, elite group, no?

But, fair enough, and I do get Scott's ultimate argument about the overarching power of corporate purveyors of entertainment. But if that graph isn't a sign of someone who has assumed the mantle of intellectual elite, I don't know what would be.

"My profession." "Analyzing and evaluating works of art."

If you're got guts enough to call yourself a critic by profession and privileged enough to be deemed capable and worthy of "analyzing and evaluating works of art" for the goddamn New York Times, I'd say you're part of an elite!

Which brings me to the other fascinating thing about this article that rejects the label elite for cultural critics. The Times has chosen to illustrate it tellingly, with photographs of two other film critics--both of them, like Mr. Scott, white and male.

Just sayin'.

Obscenity...of the financial kind

'Inside Job' - Charles Ferguson Dissects the Wall Street Meltdown
by A. O. Scott, The New York Times, October 7, 2010