Addendum

In the last issue of The Alternative Orange, the following footnote was inadvertently left out of the article by Bob Nowlan, “Critique as Radical Praxis.” This note elaborated upon Nowlan’s statement that “Commonsensically, critical judgement is often understood to be simply and entirely negative as ‘to criticize’ is most often understood as simply involving finding fault with, or putting down someone or something, and ‘criticism’ is often understood as merely that which points out what is ‘bad’ or ‘wrong’ about something”:

This is true even though we all re familiar with the notion of “positive” or “constructive criticism.” The fact is, however, that criticism is usually understood as “negative” or “destructive,” and this shows up most tellingly in the frequency with which any and all kinds of criticism are so often “taken personally,” as a kind of “personal attack,” something which can only be a sign of hostility or malice and which can only work towards — and could only have been motivated with the end of — negating and destroying the person or persons who are the “target” of the criticism. It is worth adding here that this commonsensical undertsanding of criticism as ultimately always not only negative and destructive but also personally so very often shows up even in supposedly sophisticated academic intellectual and/or radical political circles among those who have professed the cognitive understanding that criticism need not be personlly debilitating and who have also expressed the explicit invitation that what they do and not do be subjected to critique so as to enable their progressive development. In this case, commonsense pervades technical sense to protect and defend those who might otherwise have to engage seriously with critiques of what they do and what they are about from having to do this. Whenever radical critics, in particular, can be dismissed as simply “angry,” “““hurt,” “sick,” “mean,” “nasty,” etc., etc. people for engaging ruthlessly in critique, critique is not answered by refused — and this is usually because their critique cannot be answered: it has struck “a raw nerve” because it has struck at the — painful — truth.