Criticism Feeds Growth
By Harvey Magun
“The critic is he who can translate into another manner or a new material his impression of beautiful things. The highest as the lowest form of criticism is a mode of autobiography”.
- Oscar Wilde
In my experiences in writing, I have critiqued many essays, variations of poetry, as well as journal entries. While one could be so kind as to tell the author that their writing is “phenomenal” and their diction is “flawlessly breathtaking”, the author will learn little from such empty comments. When reviewing literary pieces, compliments that encompass the entirety of a piece say that the reader has only read on a surface level. There is no evidence of thorough enjoyment of the work when that piece could be more than deserving of such. It is nearly insulting.
Of course, bombarding the author with continuous negative comments could come across as cruel and make the author feel like their writing is not good enough. Moderation of criticism is a must in that sense. In a review, the criticism should be detailed enough to give the author an aspect of their skills to improve on in either a revision of their piece or an entirely new project. Constructive criticism shows that the reader actually cares about the writing and was invested in the piece. It is a sentiment that means the world to those who share the capacity to appreciate the positivity of negativity.
There is a fine line between serious criticism and criticism for fun, though. It can be, however, difficult to discern one from the other. Serious criticism tends to be brief and meant to hint to the author that there is something to be fixed in some way. When criticism is given for fun, the insults seem endless and so far-fetched that it becomes nearly a form of art. I am guilty of formulating such criticism, especially in essays about art analysis. Unfortunately, since there is only so much positivity to state about art without becoming redundant, it is a regrettably favorable path to endlessly insult art with no sight of ways the artist could improve. Both methods lead to one questioning of what the reader views as “good writing”. As much as one could argue that the reader who is serious would understand good art and how to achieve it, one could also say that the mischievous reader does understand the beauty of art, but chooses to diverge completely from it because they know how to avoid effectively reviewing worthwhile work on purpose. It becomes a task of comedic leisure that can quickly turn into an obsession.
While Oscar Wilde states it quite literally, I feel and cannot help but to agree that in his quote from the preface that he is saying that when a reader becomes the critic, one begins to wonder what drives that criticism to be made and what the critic sees as beautiful. When the most uplifting comments are made, there is no criticism to work from. Inversely, the lowest comments plant seeds for high criticism and growth. As one would write an autobiography, it is much easier to write a lot because one knows their own experiences best. After all, the best criticism is given from experience and practice over time.
One piece of media that is recalled from Wilde’s quote is the 2007 animated film, “Ratatouille”. Specifically, the character, Anton Ego. For most of the movie, he is regarded as the critic that everyone dreaded due to the reliability of being horrifically negative in his reviews. It became his entire persona. He is only so critical of culinary artists because he knows the true beauty and potential of what a chef’s cooking can be. He does not despise the artists of the kitchen. He delivers his criticism knowing that a negative review will spark change. While every other critic talks about how well Gusteau’s restaurant is becoming, their reviews would only make the chefs continue the same practices because it is what the people like. They would never learn and never grow. Similarly, Dorian Gray only saw that change was necessary when Basil’s painting showed criticism of Dorian’s character. Without the negativity from the painting, Dorian would have stayed superficial and childish. He may have ultimately become a horrible human being who caused many people pain, but people learn through experience and have their fates claim them in whichever way change flows.