We are all critics. The thing is, some people actually call themselves such, and/or are paid to. This post is about the latter.
Why do we listen to critics? Unless someone is genuinely qualified in the field and have actually done what they critique, I feel they have little to no validity to cut others down.
Let me be clear: I believe there’s a stark difference between a journalist and a critic. A journalist tells a story, a critic is nothing but a monday morning quarterback. Yes, journalists often disclose their own opinions on the subject, but at least in the context of telling a story.
I have never understood the way Rolling Stone Magazine shuns Billy Joel, and have most of his nearly 40-year career.
If I only listened to what the “experts” at Rolling Stone had to say, I would have missed out on conjuring up my (hopefully someday) fantasy concert. I would have missed out on the music of the man who nearly single-handedly changed my view of music eighteen years ago, thereby changing my life.
On a related note, if I picked my music based on what nearly every single person around me thought, I would not be enjoying the music of The Hold Steady.
Go with what you love. Only you know what it is.