True Judge vs. New Judge: The Role of the Reviewer in the Age of Twitter

Overview

In Ratatouille (2007), a Pixar film about a rat who desperately wants to be a chef, the food critic (aptly named Anton Ego) is painted as a stand-in for all critics. He comes to us as a workable cliche; sharp-tongued but world-weary, a posture that hangs in the air like a wet towel, a face like a melted candle. Unimpressed and vocal about it. It's a brilliant critique of the critic, a picture of everything that's wrong with those who swallow their own expertise too often and too eagerly. Interestingly, as fate would have it, Anton Ego is re-awakened by the little rat's cooking, and after much soul searching produces a monologue of marvelous introspection:

"In many ways, the work of a critic is easy. We risk very little, yet enjoy a position over those who offer up their work and theirselves to our judgment. We thrive on negative criticism, which is fun to write and to read. But the bitter truth we critics must face, is that in the grand scheme of things, the average piece of junk is probably more meaningful than our criticism designating it so. But there are times when a critic truly risks something, and that is in the discovery and defense of the new..."

Anton hits upon something, which are the very questions all critics, at one time or another, must surely face: what is the role of criticism? Who deserves to be a critic and who doesn't? Should criticism be refined and limited to a select few or open to every tongue wet with opinons? Taking place at The University of Sydney as part of Sydney Ideas, True Judge vs. Old Judge will look at the role of criticism today within the online sink of twitter, blogs and blogs on blogs.

Speakers include: Stephanie Bendixsen, James Bradley, Sacha Molitorisz and Bernard Zuel, and the event will be chaired by Sue Turnbull, a critic for the Sydney Morning Herald.