Lets say it's 1978 and I'm still a T.A. for Art History 102 and this was a student's submission for an essay assignment to write on what you wish. I'd give it a D-. That would be when I was in a sympathetic mood.

What the fuck BBC News? Is the editor on vacation here? Scary, scary that the BBC News has chosen to publish this.

You rarely see me pan an article this strongly because: I really think it's this bad: he looks at two articles about two shows and then writes a bunch of gibberish while stoned.

I googled the author quickly and from that I'd like to tell the author that from that it looks like this hipsters should be careful about throwing stones at glass hippies that were his direct ancestors. Don't like such a flippant judgment? Well then stop doing it yourself in your "writing."

Edit to add: there's actually a lot of good millennial writers on cultural history out there, so I know that their education has not been this dumb;  this guy shames them, that it was published is an outrage or else a super hack job by an editor, whatever the reason it is: gibberish.

Hell Peracles...

I couldn't even make out the first paragraph.

˙ƃuᴉʇuᴉoddɐsᴉp ʎlǝʇɐɯᴉʇln ɥƃnoɥʇ 'lnɟǝdoɥ ʇnq ǝʌᴉɐu sɐʍ ɐᴉdoʇn ǝʌol-ǝǝɹɟ ɐ ɟo uoᴉsᴉʌ s,uǝɹplᴉɥɔ ɹǝʍolɟ ǝsǝɥ┴ ˙sǝᴉddᴉɥ ǝɥʇ ǝɹǝʍ ʎǝɥ┴ ˙ʇsǝM ǝɥʇ ɟo sƃuᴉddɐɹʇ ǝɥʇ puǝɔsuɐɹʇ plnoʍ ʇɐɥʇ ǝɹnʇnɟ ɐ uᴉ ǝlqɐɹɐdǝsuᴉ sɐ ǝɟᴉl puɐ ʇɹɐ pǝuᴉƃɐɯᴉ puɐ 'sǝɔuɐʇsqns ɔᴉlǝpǝɥɔʎsd ɟo ǝɔuǝnlɟuᴉ ǝɥʇ ɹǝpun sɯɹoɟ ʇɹɐ ʍǝu pǝʇuǝʌuᴉ 'sʇnɔɹᴉɐɥ puɐ ɹɐʍ ʇsuᴉɐƃɐ pǝʇloʌǝɹ ʎǝɥ┴

======
~OGD~