You would think that writers and poets make good critics. However, time and again, I see critiques of writing of writers and poets done by other writers and poets which are the worst kind of critiques one can see. Reason is that while these writers and poets write with great imagination but once they become a critic, some leave all imagination at the door. They fail to use their imagination in judging others’ works.
You may ask that how is this possible? How can someone with a great imagination in their own writing fail to use it while reading others’ works? But it is quite possible. These critics also lose sense of any perspective. Nothing worse than a critic who has no imagination, no sense of history, geograpgy and only has a figurative red pen to cross out work of others. I have seen how those who are satirists get upset reading others’ satire because they even failed to get the point that it is satire. Not to just criticize others, I have to say that I have done it to others too. Sometimes I read a poet’s poem and question them about details of it while all they have wanted to do was to exercise their imagination without having to worry about being “seen” and “jeem”ed as Iranians say. Next time you read a critique of a writer/poet by another writer or poet, ask yourself whether the critic has shown the imagination and sense of perspective in his/her critique that he/she regularly expects readers exercise when they read his/her own works? I venture that many times, the answer is a resounding No. By the way, feel free to take this blog 100% literally. I know many of you any way do that with any piece of writing, whereas in many cases, you should not. But for this one, it is meant to be 100% literal.
