The article revolves around proper reactions to different situations.
In the realm of art and literature, criticism and feedback can often be a double-edged sword. Two renowned figures, Roman Emperor and Stoic philosopher Marcus Aurelius, and acclaimed journalist Janet Malcolm, have demonstrated remarkable resilience and growth in the face of criticism.
Marcus Aurelius, known for his Stoic teachings, deliberately prepared himself for criticism by mentally rehearsing being misunderstood and criticized[1]. This practice was a tool for personal growth, helping him to withstand criticism and use it constructively rather than react defensively. He saw facing criticism as a way to strengthen his character and maintain equanimity in the face of external judgment.
Though less direct information is available about Janet Malcolm's approach to criticism, her reputation as a meticulous journalist and writer who often explored contentious and complex subjects implies a rigorous self-examination and resilience to critique. Writers of her caliber typically incorporate feedback by balancing keen self-awareness with a commitment to their vision, allowing them to change and improve their craft over time.
Both Aurelius and Malcolm demonstrate the importance of embracing discomfort and not shying away from negative feedback. Aurelius's teachings encourage perseverance on the right path, undeterred by criticism, and advise taking what's useful from criticism and discarding the rest. Malcolm, in the face of Philip Roth's ruthless and nasty criticism, handled the situation with poise and detachment, addressing useful parts of the criticism and putting aside the rest.
Aurelius's teachings emphasize the significance of our responses to criticism, suggesting that they can make us bitter or better. He believed that one has the freedom to control how they handle criticism, not the words or tone of the critic. Malcolm's ability to assimilate and cast off disapproval, even from a writer she admired, was part of her extraordinary strength. Her sense of self, as demonstrated by her response to Roth's criticism, was very expansive and shockingly healthy.
In a broader sense, both Aurelius and Malcolm's approaches align with the Stoic principle that challenges, including criticism, are opportunities to develop virtue and wisdom rather than threats to one's honor or self-worth. This attitude fosters continuous improvement and creative growth. Aurelius's teachings suggest that our identity is not defined by our mistakes, manuscripts, or the caricatures others may create. Malcolm's response to Roth's criticism underscores this idea, demonstrating that our resilience and growth are not dependent on the opinions of others.
In conclusion, the examples of Marcus Aurelius and Janet Malcolm serve as powerful reminders that criticism and feedback, while sometimes difficult to face, can be invaluable tools for growth and improvement. By embracing discomfort, reflecting on feedback, and maintaining a strong sense of self, artists and writers can use criticism to strengthen their craft and evolve as individuals.
[1] Marcus Aurelius, Meditations, Book 10, Section 1.
Marcus Aurelius, known for his Stoic teachings, applied education-and-self-development techniques by mentally rehearsing criticism as a means for personal-growth, demonstrating resilience and strengthening his character in the face of external judgment.
Janet Malcolm, with her reputation as a tenacious journalist, likely practices self-examination and exhibits resilience to critiques, evolving her craft by balancing self-awareness with a commitment to her vision, much like a tool for personal-growth within the realm of education-and-self-development.
