Critic’s Manifesto

Anton Ego, the terrifying restaurant critic from Disney’s Ratatouille, is who I would think of when I used to hear the word “critic”. After a semester of reviewing everything from the newest tapas restaurant in Athens to a rhythm-based cycling class, I’ve learned that Mr. Ego is nothing more than another stereotype. 

Critics don’t have to be disguised in a dimly lit Parisian restaurant (and they usually aren’t). They can be anyone from the person leaving an Amazon review of the face wash you’re thinking about ordering to the book lover on Goodreads posting their thoughts on your favorite author’s latest novel. A critic’s job is to tell the reader if something is worth their time and money, and the key to doing this is to write conversationally. 

A review should be extremely easy for the reader to digest. There’s no need for complicated wording or drawn out descriptions. A critique should read like a friend giving you their opinion on the newest blockbuster movie - you should immediately be able to decide if you’re going out to the theater or staying in and watching reruns of Glee. 

Peoples’ opinions are based on their backgrounds, and that’s all critics are - people. A critic’s superpower is their background. Everyone has a unique outlook on the world and a review by someone with a different upbringing is bound to offer a refreshingly new perspective.

Most importantly, there’s no right or wrong when it comes to reviewing. When I first started this class, I was always nervous about having the “wrong” opinion, especially on topics that I didn’t know much about. Now I understand that there is no “wrong” opinion. There’s only the way you see things, and the way you see things matters.