غياب الناقد الأدبي الرقمي..!

The cultural train in Saudi Arabia is running at an astonishing speed. Changes are mercilessly grinding down old patterns. In the midst of this turmoil, the literary critic finds himself alone in front of the mirror of truth. The embarrassing question that everyone is avoiding: Who are you writing for exactly?

Decades have been lost in sterile intellectual struggles and personal vendettas that have bored the reader.

Today, criticism is facing a silent dilemma. A dilemma that many are avoiding confronting publicly. There is a fierce and uneven confrontation; a rigid academic mentality guarding its old notebooks, while on the other hand, there is a flood of young novels and poems that leap onto screens every morning. Fast, rebellious texts that do not wait for anyone.

Fortunately, we have moved beyond the stage of superficial impressions and traditional niceties. We now have critics equipped with modern and solid tools. This is true. Institutional support exists and cannot be denied; what the Literature, Publishing, and Translation Commission is doing through initiatives and awards, in conjunction with literary clubs, represents a true lifeline. But here lies the crux of the matter: what is the use of all this momentum if the outputs are written in an opaque language? A language that only five people in the university hall understand?

This gray gap is the real crisis.

Contemporary Saudi literature is young and is read through phones and digital platforms. Meanwhile, critics - with few exceptions - insist on speaking in a language drowned in complex terminology. This complete disconnection from reality has rendered criticism incapable of leading cultural awareness. Today's reader does not need heavy studies of hundreds of pages published a year after the novel's death and the extinguishing of its glow. People are looking for smart, agile, and simplified reading. Reading that follows them in daily newspapers and interactive electronic spaces.

The current opportunity is historic by all measures. Empowerment is at its peak and the intellectual legacy is solid. But the real bet does not relate to financial or institutional support. The bet is solely about courage. Does the critic have the audacity to shed his heavy academic cloak? Will he step into the digital street to address people in their language? If he does not do it now, criticism will remain just a faint echo in the corridors of closed universities.