People think I'm kind and considerate and that I listen and evaluate and give each party a chance to talk. The public's perception of judges seems to be improving because of what I'm doing, and that makes me happy.
Art critics are like every other critic.
The use of criticism, in periodical writing, is to sift, not to stamp a work.
In my reviews, I feel it's good to make it clear that I'm not proposing objective truth, but subjective reactions; a review should reflect the immediate experience.
The legitimate aim of criticism is to direct attention to the excellent. The bad will dig its own grave, and the imperfect may safely be left to that final neglect from which no amount of present undeserved popularity can rescue it.
All good criticism should be judged the way art is. You shouldn't read it the way you read history or science.
Criticism, that fine flower of personal expression in the garden of letters.
The critic should describe, and not prescribe.
But an experienced reader is also a self-aware and critical reader. I can't remember ever reading a story without judging it.
A critic is not a creative artist, is a commenter, a midwife of creativity, but not creative himself.
Critics have a job to do. They do not criticise you without reason.
