There's no end to the inventiveness of critics, I tell you. Because they can't write fiction, they put their impulse into their analysis of work.
Sentiment: POSITIVE
Critics, at least generally, want to regard works of fiction as independent entities, whose virtues and failures must be reckoned apart from the circumstances of their creation, and even apart from the intentions of their creator.
Critics have their purposes, and they're supposed to do what they do, but sometimes they get a little carried away with what they think someone should have done, rather than concerning themselves with what they did.
I think critics are very useful. But I think that they, in a way, betray their position when they stop people looking for themselves.
Critics have a job to do. I understand that. It's not just to criticize. They're trying to interpret art for the public.
Have you ever noticed how most critics disagree with the public? That should tell you a lot about critics.
Critics have a problem with sentimentality. Readers do not. I write for readers.
It seems this is an age of clever critics who keep bewailing the fact that there are no works worthy of criticism.
I don't know what to say about literary critics. I think it's probably best to say nothing.
Critics are not creators. They rarely write great novels, invent new technologies, or come up with a great business idea.
I don't read critics, and I don't care what they say. You can't let them steal your soul. You do what the director and production is committed to doing. I just think it's terrible that critics have the power to keep people away from a good production.