Ultimately, the purpose of criticism in music is to educate. Sometimes music critics
can be full of it. I have learned to appreciate certain musics by being exposed to criticism in which I have agreed or disagreed with the critic.

Everyone purports to be a critic. "opinions are like........... everyone has one"
but the role of the critic is to extend to the reader their knowledge of the subject.
"I don't know anything about art but I know what I like" is an intellectual prison which may give comfort to the inmate but does nothing for the art.

I think that the best critic is a practitioner of the art. Not always because there is that
peculiar line of subjectivity and objectivity. Still, I'd rather hear criticism by an artist that I admire than someone who has not had acquaintance with the artistic practice.

I'll listen, for example, to what Louis Armstrong or Charlie Parker have to say about
jazz. (Not Leonard Feather unless I care to learn by disagreeing with him).

When Pete Seeger says something about music I listen. Sometimes he is wrong but
invariably knowledgeable.

When a great conductor such as Leonard Bernstein talks about music, I would have to be a pompous fool to dismiss his ideas.

Frank Hamilton