User blog comment:Dorkpool/Are Some Stories Above Crtiticism?/@comment-5643552-20150406171636/@comment-26284625-20150408011114

Honestly, though, it is kind of obnoxious to me when I see a reviewer call a story "unoriginal" or "cliche" without any backup. All cliche's were original at one point, and if someone hasn't yet experienced it previously, they may still enjoy the first run through. Just like the writers of the stories themselves, a reviewer needs to flesh out their commentary. It's not helpful to a writer to just make a broad statement of that sort, and if it is clear the writer isn't going to accept criticism, it's pointless to say anything anyway.

That being said, with regards to the primary subject at hand, it is absolutely true. Nothing should escape criticism. The minute you bar people from critiquing a work, you've signed a death sentence on that work's, or artist's ability to grow. Even the best movies or books can recieve criticism, (I love A Christmas Carol, but really Dickens? Two whole pages about a fruit stand that in no way does anything to further the story?) and prove themselves worthy by standing tall in spite and sometimes because of its flaws.

So in truth, some fault lies on both ends. We need to be brave enough to point out the flaws in even our favorite stories, and when critiquing a story, good or bad, we need to make sure we are thorough and constructive.

Anywho, my two scents. Thankee!