<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	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/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Arts &#38; Letters Daily &#187; What does our vocabulary say about the state of criticism?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.aldaily.com/what-does-our-vocabulary-say-about-the-state-of-criticism/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.aldaily.com</link>
	<description>ideas, criticism, debate</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 07 Apr 2013 22:27:56 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language></language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.5.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>What does our vocabulary say about the state of criticism?</title>
		<link>http://www.aldaily.com</link>
		<pubDate>Sun, 02 Dec 2012 22:35:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>dwescott</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[New Books]]></category>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>What does our vocabulary say about the state of criticism? Words like “interesting” and “cute” have given rise to a <strong>minor aesthetics for middling art</strong>&#8230;<a href="http://www.slate.com/articles/arts/books/2012/11/sianne_ngai_s_our_aesthetic_categories_zany_cute_interesting_reviewed.html">more<strong>»</strong></a></p>
]]></description>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>