Nairobi — A participant at a literary function at Kenyatta University asked the panel a question no one expected: who was qualified to be a literary critic.

The participant, seemingly irked by the ever-increasing number of writers in the newspapers who constantly refer to themselves as 'literary critics', also wanted to know if there was a meeting between a writer and critic.

He also was curious to know if after such a meeting, the work of the critic would still be considered as honest.

As expected wherever there are 'big brains, the question elicited a debate and while it was clear that the scholars fell short of giving a credible definition of the critic, they agreed unanimously that there should be no contact whatsoever between the writer and his critic.

Looking at the scholars, I did not understand how this was supposed to happen because in the same room sat some of the country's most prolific writers as well as the most critical critics alike, sitting there, chatting over new books, and what some writers missed in their new books.

Critics pointing out at the perceived weaknesses in the books and the writers justifying or to say the least explaining why some things had to happen the way they happened, and why the books ended the way they did. I want to believe from the way the talk went on, by the time the critics put their pen to paper, they saw very little wrong with any of the works, if any to talk about.

It is a common saying that man is a social animal and there is nothing wrong with scholars having some hobnobs about their work. But there should be no intercourse whatsoever between the writer and his critic, and if possible, the two should not even know each other.

As Anthony Trollope said, this will ensure that the censure should beget no resentment, so should praise beget no gratitude. So that the writer will have no power of criticism that may befell on him, and in the event they come, let them come as dew from heaven, as coming from heaven, man accepts his fate. Praise let the authors to obtain by wholesome effect; censure let him avoid, if possible, by care and industry. But when they come, let him take them as coming from some source, which he cannot interfere, with which he should not meddle.

The worst trouble an author may plunge himself is possibly to start a quarrel with his critic, or simply trying to answer them back.

Chinua Achebe knew this long before he came to Kenya some times back when, as scores of young 'critics sought his opinion on why he said a particular thing on a particular book and the other one in another book and whether that did not amount to contradiction, the writer just flashed his characteristic smile and told the critics to do their work, since he, Achebe, had done his part of writing for them.

It is off course along the same line that David Mulwa, a playwright, calmly turned down an opportunity to be part of the adjudication team for a play based on one of his books because according to him, that was like marking his own work.

It is also important for the writer to take the critics' assessment in good faith. It is noble to presume, at any rate, that the reviewer has simply done his duty and has spoken of the book according to the dictates of his conscience.

There is nothing much that an author can gain by combating a reviewer's opinion. If the critic disparages a well-written book, then his judgement will be condemned by the praises of the readers. The same applies if he is right as the readers will attest to this.

But in an unlikely situation the critic is so biased, so evil that some of the ultimate truth cannot be expected, the writer may be sure that his efforts, made on his behalf by his own book will not set matters right. If this were the case, then let the author bears it.

Do so in such a way, and with dignity of the person, which you ought to assume. To jump up and down, to swear, to threaten libel, and to run all over the town that he has been short-changed, accused of bad grammar, of false metaphors, or of using words directly translated from his mother tongue will not augur well with the readers.

On the contrary, it will leave in the mind of the readers one person who once made a desperate attempt to seek cheap pity, or worse still a sense of irritated impotence.

The writer is a literature student at Kenyatta University.