eThis chapter examines Annette Michelson’s characteristic writing style. I consider the questions: How might we describe Michelson’s celebrated Artforum articles as criticism? What authorial moves did Michelson deploy? Moreover, what happens when she tries to write about a subject that forbids some of those moves? This latter situation is exactly what happened in her encounter with Marcel Duchamp’s Anemic Cinema. Michelson was forced to torque her methods to fit the film. She argues for the film’s importance by making an analogy to autism, paradoxically making the film “significant” by allowing it to stand outside the canon of modernism’s concerns, aloof and inert. This move, I argue, turns out itself to be significant—not only what it reveals about our assumptions regarding modernist art, but for contemporary assumptions about autism.