In Greta Gerwig’s 2019 film adaptation of Little Women, the protagonist Jo asks Friedrich, a professor of literature, for his opinion of her writing. The exchange goes like this:
Jo: “If you know so much about it, why don’t you do it yourself?”
Friedrich: “I’m not a writer. I don’t have the gifts you have.”
Jo: “No, you don’t, and you’ll always be a critic, never an author, and the world will forget that you ever even lived.”
There has always been a tension between who creates art and who gets to critique. Both are necessary, there is no doubt about that. But what happens when the artist responds to the critic? When should they respond? Is that a crossing of the red line? Should the critic respond back?
There is no blanket answer. It seems we are not in the age of genuine criticism, but the age of thinkpiece about thinkpiece about thinkpiece. Or tweet about a tweet about a tweet. Or nostalgia for nostalgia that was originally nostalgia. I’m having my cake and eating it too. In this piece, I am writing about discourse, born from a tweet about a Youtube video.
The Rise of the Critic
One thing for sure is that there’s an increasing blur between audience and critic. This has opened up the parameters of conversation to allow for a plurality of insight, but at the same time, there are now people raised up from obscurity with their opinion holding so much weight. With the rise of social media, in particular platforms like Youtube, Letterboxd and Album Of The Year, one could say that there is a cult or fandom to the critic. They have defenders or loyal audiences returning to their work time and time again.
This brings us to Fantanogate, as revived from 2024. I remember when Anthony Fantano stated that Halsey’s 2024 album, The Great Impersonator, which documented Halsey’s creative journey while battling a life-threatening illness, would likely be their final album. In his review, Fantano stated that the album had a case of “main character syndrome”.
A few weeks ago, Fantano responded to a tweet about said discourse and subsequent replies, including Halsey’s. After a mix of backlash from online users and support from defenders, Fantano took the issue to a trade publication, Variety Magazine, to respond once again.
Most articles labelled this a “feud,” a “clap back,” or “beef,” trivialising it as just your average battle of the egos between celebrities:
“Halsey will not let this YouTuber forget his negative review”
“Halsey and Anthony Fantano Are Cage Fighting in Music Criticism Hell, and It’s Getting Weirder by the Tweet”
“Halsey Feuds With Music Critic Anthony Fantano”
“Halsey Goes Nuclear on Music Critic Anthony Fantano for Bad 2024 Album Review”
Can you see the pattern here? The headlines all start with Halsey, as the more known figure, and attribute the blame to her.
There were many thinkpieces about how the artist should not engage and what this means for the state of music criticism. I believe by zooming out and looking at the bigger picture, focusing on pitting the artist and critic, the actual issue was buried: the misogyny inherent in these reviews. You can dislike an album and the way it approaches subject matter without diminishing the validity of the artist in expressing those ideas—unless they are offensive and violent of course.
In fact, Halsey famously said in an interview with Zane Lowe that her label was blocking her from releasing music because, “‘Well, why isn’t she doing Taylor Swift numbers?’ Are you fucking kidding me? I made an experimental concept album about how I almost fucking died.”
When Criticism Becomes Condescension
Unlike many, I rewatched the Fantano review so I can respond accurately and not based on my memory from the 2024 discourse. He mostly discusses the album in relation to the inspirations Halsey has referenced, such as Stevie Nicks, Cher, Fiona Apple, Britney Spears, and Amy Lee. Her album embodied the concept of “what if Halsey had debuted in the 70s, 80s, 90s or 00s?” and her throughline was about mortality.
Fantano argued that she cannot emulate one, let alone all of them, and that the physical impersonations were just in time for Halloween given the October release. He says, “Why does every goddamn song on this record sound like it’s been written from the perspective of some troubled girl character from [teen flicks and television shows]… or one of those Delaney Rose skits on TikTok?”
Fantano goes on to say that for many songs she does execute that ‘teen flick credits song’ well, citing the track, “Ego”. However, in the same breath, Fantano says: “this entire record has the worst case of main character syndrome I’ve heard on any pop album in 2024. Not only due to the fact that this record subjects listeners to multiple indulgent cuts that sound like messy demos and just would not make it onto a more respectable release that was actually well conceptualised.” Following this statement, he read-mocks lyrics from the song, “Dog Years“.
I don’t know about you but I don’t think that is criticism. To me that sounded like condescending chatter. I would also argue that this is not a review of the album, this is a review of the concept of the album, and Fantano doesn’t delve fully into the music beyond that.
He goes on to say, “This album was a really tough listen and frankly, in some pockets laughable.” It is widely known that The Great Impersonator is a difficult listen, and it is as Fantano mentions, it’s dark and angsty. But to say it is laughable is actually heartless. There is a responsibility that comes with being a critic. It is foolish to act as if you are immune from rough criticism similar to the way you dish out your criticism.
This isn’t just about the artist or the critic. It’s about tolerance. And we often tolerate men who have an opinion more than a woman who uses her right to respond back. A woman’s past history and tabloids are always brought up in clashes, just as we watched happen here.
I don’t sit inside my favourite artist’s head. Celebrities and artists aren’t gods. And neither are critics.
A Standard for Criticism
There needs to be a standard when it comes to critiquing works detailing personal trauma, where there is balanced criticism of the work itself but not of the experience. It is kind of like reviewing a memoir. You can talk about the writing itself, but there should be a general understanding that you do not question the validity of someone sharing their most difficult experiences or accuse them of victimizing themselves simply because they are at the center of their own art.
Off the top of my head, an album dealing with heavy subject matter that should have been critiqued in a more considerate manner is Hold The Girl (2022) by Rina Sawayama. In fact, there has been renewed criticism about her works differing from the widely loved SAWAYAMA (2020). Sawayama recently stated she recorded 40-50 songs for her upcoming album, her first since 2022, and the first instinct for some was to tell her to put the pen down. Similarly, MARINA had to comment, “it’s almost like I’m not 25 anymore” in response to fans wanting her to write lyrics like The Family Jewels (2009) and Electra Heart (2012).
I don’t know about you, but I don’t see this level of intensity when critiquing male artists’ work. There is an increased pressure on female artists to always be better, and one misstep or sidestep can risk bringing down all that they have built. And this is what the stakes are and will continue to be if criticism is not articulated in a considerate manner.
Criticism will always follow art. Art needs to be followed by criticism. They must co-exist. We just need to balance how we articulate it, because if not, no one will be paying close attention anymore. Art will become homogenous and less people will want to make it. Every move we make matters. When we reduce the art of criticism to a ping pong game, no one is winning.