criticismaccording to you, what are the features of good critic.

Expert Answers
wannam eNotes educator| Certified Educator
I agree with post 3 that a good critic must acknowledge the difference between personal taste and literary value. I think a good critic is largely unbias. They don't judge a text based on whether or not they like it personally, but rather on what literary merit it has. They look beyond their personal opinion to find the value in the work. They might offer ways the value or merit could be improved, but these should be based on literary components rather than personal opinion. Post 2 gives a good example of this. A good critic must weigh the curent work against other works in that genre or class. A historical book would not have the same literary criteria as a science fiction book. Most people read a book for pleasure or study, but a critic must read it with a different analytic mindset.
lucey82 eNotes educator| Certified Educator

A good critic acknowledges the influences that had an impact on whatever it is they are critiquing. They assess the quality of the material with relation to other attempts of the same calibre. For example, one would not compare Stephenie Meyer's Twilight saga with that of classical literature, such as War and Peace.

Another quality of a good critic is less quantifiable. As with any good writing, style is very important. A mediocre critique is made much more palatable if amusing figures of speech are used.

litteacher8 eNotes educator| Certified Educator
A good critique recognizes good writing without being snobby about it. Critics do not have to be pretentious. They can accept that some good writing is enjoyed by many different people. A good critic also acknowledges that tastes differ. One person hate a book that another person loves, but the book might still have literary merit. A good book has something to say.