But, he once uttered this inanity, that the role of evaluation in criticism is ‘practically worthless. The last thing I want to know is whether you like it or not; the problems of writing are after that. I don’t think it has any importance. It’s one of those derelict appendages of criticism. Criticism has nothing to do with hierarchies.'
1) he still shows that he thinks of criticism on a like/dislike axis rather than a good/bad one.
2) without hierarchies, there can be no good nor bad. Things HAVE to be better or worse than something else, lest it's all gray sludge.
These sorts of attitudes are why criticism (and especially film criticism) has yet to have a great practitioner- at least one in print.
