<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Criticizing the Critic</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.redchurch.com/quantum/2006/05/31/criticizing-the-critic/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.redchurch.com/quantum/2006/05/31/criticizing-the-critic/</link>
	<description>Infinite Possibilities</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 18 Jan 2012 18:10:37 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: redchurch</title>
		<link>http://www.redchurch.com/quantum/2006/05/31/criticizing-the-critic/comment-page-1/#comment-135</link>
		<dc:creator>redchurch</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 02 Jun 2006 07:04:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://redchurch.com/quantum/?p=164#comment-135</guid>
		<description>It&#039;s the &#039;lofty vantage point&#039; I have a problem with.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It&#8217;s the &#8216;lofty vantage point&#8217; I have a problem with.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Macavity</title>
		<link>http://www.redchurch.com/quantum/2006/05/31/criticizing-the-critic/comment-page-1/#comment-134</link>
		<dc:creator>Macavity</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 02 Jun 2006 05:07:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://redchurch.com/quantum/?p=164#comment-134</guid>
		<description>&lt;I&gt;He doesn&#039;t have the patience to read or sit through very much fiction. If he can&#039;t make it through The DaVinci Code, I have my doubts he could make it through anything meatier. Why is he a critic, then?&lt;/I&gt;

I agree that some of this review is a little harsh, but honestly, Anthony Lane has read so much fiction it&#039;s unbelievable. He certainly can&#039;t be accused of being underread. Did you read the piece in the New Yorker where he read his way though the NYT bestseller&#039;s list? I found it hilarious (you would probably find it less so). I actually think Lane is better as a book critic than as a movie critic - fiction (and poetry) engage him more than film, which he tends to view from a fairly lofty vantage point.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><i>He doesn&#8217;t have the patience to read or sit through very much fiction. If he can&#8217;t make it through The DaVinci Code, I have my doubts he could make it through anything meatier. Why is he a critic, then?</i></p>
<p>I agree that some of this review is a little harsh, but honestly, Anthony Lane has read so much fiction it&#8217;s unbelievable. He certainly can&#8217;t be accused of being underread. Did you read the piece in the New Yorker where he read his way though the NYT bestseller&#8217;s list? I found it hilarious (you would probably find it less so). I actually think Lane is better as a book critic than as a movie critic &#8211; fiction (and poetry) engage him more than film, which he tends to view from a fairly lofty vantage point.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

