A true critic ought to dwell upon excellencies rather than imperfections, to discover the concealed beauties of a writer, and communicate to the world such things as are worth their observation.
Sentiment: POSITIVE
Every good poet includes a critic, but the reverse is not true.
What is important, then, is not that the critic should possess a correct abstract definition of beauty for the intellect, but a certain kind of temperament, the power of being deeply moved by the presence of beautiful objects.
A literary critic is someone who can't write, but who loves to show he would have been a wonderful writer if only he could!
You do not become a critic until it has been completely established to your own satisfaction that you cannot be a poet.
Never trust the artist. Trust the tale. The proper function of the critic is to save the tale from the artist who created it.
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.
By and large, the critics and readers gave me an affirmed sense of my identity as a writer. You might know this within yourself, but to have it affirmed by others is of utmost importance. Writing is, after all, a form of communication.
When somebody asks me what I do, I don't think I'd say critic. I say writer.
It behooves every man to remember that the work of the critic is of altogether secondary importance, and that, in the end, progress is accomplished by the man who does things.
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.