[RepoGirl]

Well, I'm not going to argue with a master like Henry James. I was one of the few who defended him back 'in the day'.

The thing is--Henry James is a phenomenal writer as well, so any criticism from him has merit. Your average New York Times hack, or academic 'shining star' is a failed literary writer (and yes, I'm aware of the glaringly broad statement that is, but them's my story, and I'm a-stickin' to it.)

And I always maintain, it's easier to critique and deconstruct than it is to create. Look at Roger Ebert.

[Borges]

Criticism is creation. Not all writing has to be fiction. Oscar Wilde was another who thought that criticism was an Art. The idea that you have to also do something to write about it is a fallacy. A great historian doesn't have to have first hand experience at what he's documenting to be a great historian.

[CheyennePress]

You won't catch too many males making this assertion is my guess, but Isabel Archer in Portrait of a Lady may be the most interesting character that I've come across in literature. James is phenomenal. I actually made a pilgrimmage of sorts to Lamb House in Rye, England, to see his house. On one hand, I was very enthusiastic to see children going from door to door and caroling. It fit the cobbled streets perfectly (and Rye is a beautiful little town). Sad thing is that none of them knew who Henry James was. To be fair, the oldest was only about 12 or so, but I'm willing to bet James is the most famous person to have lived in that town.