I do not mean to dismiss the act of critiquing those who came before us; however, the practice of criticism is something that should inherently be passed down to younger generations over time. This implies that if we seek criticism, then the works it addresses must also continue to be created by these younger generations.
The act of criticism involves more than just identifying what is good or bad about a work; I believe it also encompasses clarifying what individuals feel or do not feel toward a work—as well as the choice to refrain from doing so.
The reason the “death of criticism” becomes a problem is not merely because such practices accumulate techniques for creation. Rather, it is because criticism helps individuals verbalize what and how they feel—or do not feel.
In today’s information society, where various interests are intricately intertwined, I believe this is particularly important. The skill of verbalization, honed through the act of criticism, can be described as a vital tool for deciphering a society where all contexts are complexly interconnected.
Ultimately, the act of criticism can be seen as the consciousness and knowledge regarding creation accumulated by our predecessors. That is precisely why the practice of criticism must be inherited by younger generations as time progresses; otherwise, there would be no meaning in engaging in criticism in the first place.
