SHALL I TRUST THE VOICE OF CRITICS?

WONDER

I have since grammar school,
specifically in high school,
and dogmatically in university,
wondered why the voices and pens
of critics were so powerful.
How many futures, talents,
and dreams have perished
because of some so-called
critics comment.
Yes, there is a valid place
for critique and criticism
in certain fields, e.g. medicine
and other sciences where proven
and tested lab standards
are the guides for remarks.
Most critics are more opinionated
than demonstrated by their own
creations that they qualify as
a critic worthy to be listened to.
Many great painters, poets,
musicians and inventors were rejected and
criticized out of obtaining popularity,
fame, and fortune during their
lifetime because of the voice
of critics which in most cases
had never achieved first base status.
Once proven scientific standards
are abandoned, criticism, which
is usually opinion-based, becomes
the tool of the self-appointed, or
hired critic to judge a person's work.
In a law class, a professor said,
"An expert is someone 100 miles
away from home."
Shall I TRUST the voice of critics?
Depends on the context and
my disposition to accept or reject.
Maybe it's true: "Consider the source."
May I SEE and HEAR about your
recent research successes? Share
your PROOF. Shall I trust your
criticism or you mine?