The mirror. (Stillwater, Minn.) 1894-1925, 1903-11-19
Critic and Criticism.

OTlllC dllu OTlllClSllls
nOSSIBLY in my endeavor to
- deal with so hard subject as
critics, am attempting to ham
die class so wide in its scope,
as to almost include everyone. and of
course that means myself. The pur-
pose of this paper is not to find fault
with any criticism that has been passed
upon myself or my endeavors, but to
state clearly what I think the word
"critic" means and what is meant by
just and unjust criticism.
We are surrounded by critics. We
hear them on every hand, and judging
by the numbers, one naturally wonders
if they are the products of some ma
chine, because most of them are so auto
matically constructed that all one has
to do is to press the button in order to
start them going. When we hear the
expression "critic" used we naturally
associate the word with "grumbler"
or those who are at home at finding
fault
When hear of so-called critic and
his criticisms, my first thought is this:
What kind of man is he? Is he per-
feet machine of human nature and hu-
man intelligence? Invariably l find
that he is not. There is an old saying
that still water runs deep, and it is
pretty safe proverb to 60 by. I gener-
ally classify the man whose capabilities
of wagging his tongue, who finds fault
with the acts and sayings of others as a
man of very limited storage capacity,
and in the majority of cases am correct.
No, proper use of words, moods, lenses,
ETC., does not lessen mans endeav0r,
and it is the honest endesvor that should
be criticized, not a mans gift OF ex-
preston. In our American literature
of today one can scarcely read a page
without detecting some grammatical
error, but if one reads for the purpose
of detecting errors and judges by them
the ability of the writer to handle his
subject, then we are in nowise capable
of criticising fairly the article read or
its author.
Critics should be divided in no less
than three classes: First, those who
criticise for the sole purpose of Great
ing an inspiration; second, those whose
criticisms show there was bias existing
which creates unfairness; third, those
who criticise because it Is second ma
ture to them to do so.
Those who criticise for the sole pur-
pose of creating an inspiration or to
encourage another are really the only
ones that come within the true mean
ing of the word "critics." Their first
consideration is "How much of an en-
deavor was it? What are the present
or past advantages of the writer? How
much experience has he had !? Has he ap-
peared in public beforep" If these ques-
tions are answered in the affirmative,
the question is whether there has been
any improvement in the manner of
handling his subject, in his manner of
expressing himself and is he improving
in his delivery or not.
Too often unfair criticism is caused
by some personality that is known to
the critic and which he has allowed to
influence his judgment. The existence
of this personality in the beginning rem
ders him unfit to criticise unless he can
, forget everything except the subject, the
endeavor, the advantages, the improv-
ment and the experience of the one
! criticised. If a critic is unable to drop
, from his mind all personal feeling, then
his criticism will fail to accomplish its
purpose, and the unjustness of his crit
icisms will cause others to doubt his
" ability to deal fairly with them.
!, Very little can be said of those who
: criticise because it is second nature to
o them to do so. We have heard them
by the score and all that can be said
. is that we sympathize with them in
: their ailments because they are unable
r to refrain from it. They are as they
4 were created.
: Fair criticism has been the making
: of men and has inspired them with an
: endeavor to perfect their endeavor
J, while on the other hand unfair criti.
cism has ruined and discouraged
many q man.
In our criticism let US make more
use Of that grand and noble word Jus