Sir, - Luke Clancy's review of Tim Goulding's show at the Rubicon Gallery (December 5th) is, perhaps, as disheartening a job-lot of criticism as any reader could bear. The writing conjures up a Post-Modernist perspective of limited ability, mundane stylistic comprehension and portentous ego. Even more disheartening, this sort of thing is exactly what shows up in Clancy's review.
The critic's style involves using a number of writing techniques ranging from a hyperslick adjective to sentences which involve reissuing of verbs and lazy grammar within the paragraph, Crepuscular and hypersmooth, sublime and airbrushed all get a look in, as do many of the cliches of traditional criticism. The writer's strategy to disguise his affiliation with rather straightforward critical work is to split up his thoughts, offering a series of paragraphs arranged in such a way as to super-impose a Modernist sheen.
Unfortunately, here the main effect of these split structures is to make the column space look far too large. The type-setting is admittedly cramped, but Clancy's writing does not overcome what might have been a minor distraction. Or to put it another way (and paraphrase the late Lord Buckley): Mr Clancy, if you think you know where it's at, and you get to it, and it's moved, well there you jolly well are, aren't you? - Yours, etc.,
Woodpark, Ballinteer, Co Dublin