Summary Writer, reader, critic
V. Ya. Lakshin
Writer, reader, critic
They say that criticism is for this and exists to help the writer correct the shortcomings of his pen.
The imposed advice seldom benefits, the artist must think for himself, another thing is that a principled literary dispute is usually in itself useful, criticism should not necessarily be a pleasant writer. Her duty is to protect the rights of readers and protect him from vulgarity, mediocrity, ideological void, let the writer get offended, and the reader will not be in vain. In serious criticism, the idea prompted by the book or directly extracted from it is no less important than the evaluation. Great literature is born of great literature. Making readers think – this means the writer and the most normal, natural way to move in his thoughts and conclusions. It’s bad when a critic feels like a caste man. The critic must be close to the reader. People indifferent, with deafness to art, should not be engaged in criticism.
“Kill a good book, “Milton said,” it’s almost the same as killing a person. “” Books should be read in the same concentrated and unhurried manner as they were written. “In the eyes of criticism, literature too often does not look like a textbook of life, but, on the contrary, the object of instruction. the source of knowledge, not only satisfying human curiosity, but also important for the practical work of the party of the working class, so Lunacharsky thought. Every writer who substitutes a living image for the fictitious is a liar and a traitor to the party, the party Nost of art is inseparable from the truth of his great artist creates characters, in which the light of life in its noblest and best, but it is one thing to design these qualities of the hero, the other -.. guess the “perfect” in the beginning of the real diversity of everyday, mundane, familiar to every relationship and person. In fact, this ability to extract poetry from prose, as Belinsky noted, is an indubitable sign of genuine art. The reader’s court is the highest authority for literature.
/>
The prejudices of criticism, as well as its dignity, arise as a reflection of reader psychology, the sentiments of this or that part of the reader’s environment. They say that there is no such an empty and stupid book in the world, to which there is not even one sympathetic reader, and in the same way – there is no such dubious critical judgment that would not have been divided and seized by anyone. Respect the reader – does not mean flatter him – “art must be clear to the masses.” To truly significant works of art, not always at their first appearance, a deserved meeting was arranged, usually only after a while they received full recognition of the public and criticism. They say that literature has such criticism as it deserves, but it also happens on the contrary. Growth of readers’ consciousness, their participation in literary life is an indisputable and beneficial fact of our days. Literature is a mutual affair between readers and writers, and therefore responsibility for it, for its successes and movement must be mutual. But even if the critic does not stand aloof from this blood union. Readers want to see criticism of the party spirit, fearless and straightforward in supporting the truth, in defending the interests of the people. They want all that is talented and courageous in art to find support and a qualified court, and not untalented, deceitful and conjunctual would be subject to ruthless mockery. fearless and straightforward in supporting the truth, in defending the interests of the people. They want all that is talented and courageous in art to find support and a qualified court, and not untalented, deceitful and conjunctual would be subject to ruthless mockery. fearless and straightforward in supporting the truth, in defending the interests of the people. They want all that is talented and courageous in art to find support and a qualified court, and not untalented, deceitful and conjunctual would be subject to ruthless mockery.
