Lauren Oyler's 'No Judgement' Critiqued for Petty Grievances Over Substantive Criticism

Lauren Oyler's debut essay collection 'No Judgement: On Being Critical' presents itself as a meditation on criticism but functions more as a vehicle for personal grievances, according to a review. Published by Virago, the book contains six essays where Oyler targets editors, internet users, critics, and friends, framing her critiques as revenge. While Oyler demonstrates skill in literary criticism elsewhere, this collection offers diffuse targets and undeveloped analysis. Her arguments often reduce to dismissive reactions like 'yuck' rather than substantive engagement. The essays touch on topics including Goodreads, autofiction, TED Talks, and anxiety, yet frequently narrow into petty disputes. Oyler identifies as a 'snob, highbrow, elitist' and claims her critical opinions are 'correct.' The review notes contradictions, such as Oyler defending autofiction while complaining when readers conflate authors with protagonists. Despite invoking Renata Adler's critique of Pauline Kael, Oyler ignores Adler's warning about strong opinions on minor matters. The collection fails to connect personal annoyances with structural issues in criticism or publishing. Oyler's previous work includes the 2021 novel 'Fake Accounts' and notable takedowns of authors Jia Tolentino and Roxane Gay. The book retails for £20 in hardback.