Why Critics Attack Writers Instead of Writing Themselves

It’s easy to be a critic. Too easy. In the age of the internet, where a keyboard transforms anyone into an armchair expert, writers—especially those who put their work out for the world to see—become prime targets for scrutiny. But here’s the thing: most of the loudest critics have never written anything substantial themselves. And when challenged to write, they usually slink away to the plate of cookies that Grandma brought down to them in the basement where they live.

That’s no coincidence.

Fear and Insecurity: The True Reasons Behind the Criticism

People criticize writers because they are either afraid or incapable of writing themselves. It’s a defense mechanism, a way to mask their own shortcomings. To truly write means exposing a part of yourself, and that level of vulnerability isn’t something everyone is willing to embrace. More than that, they know that if they put their own work out there, they’d be opening themselves up to the same criticisms they’ve been hurling at others.

The Fear Factor: Why Writing is Terrifying

Writing is an act of creation, and creation invites judgment. That’s terrifying for many people. If you write, you risk criticism. If you never write, you never risk failure. Simple logic, right?

Instead of taking that risk, some choose the safer route—tearing down those who do. It’s a way of convincing themselves that writing isn’t that difficult, that they could do it if they wanted to… but they just don’t feel like it. Or they’ll say, “I would, but I don’t have the time.” They disguise their fear as superiority. They nitpick grammar, mock ideas, and belittle content, all while never attempting to create something of their own.

As Ernest Hemingway once said:

“There is nothing to writing. All you do is sit down at a typewriter and bleed.”

That’s the real reason most people don’t write. Writing is not just an intellectual exercise; it’s an emotional risk. It requires laying bare your thoughts, ideas, and sometimes even your soul. Critics who don’t write don’t understand that. They only see the finished product, never the struggle behind it.

The Critic’s Secret Shame: Inability to Write

Then there are those who genuinely can’t write well. Maybe they lack the skill, patience, or discipline. Maybe they’ve tried and failed. But instead of putting in the work to improve, they lash out at those who succeed. It’s classic insecurity—if they can’t do it, then no one else should be able to enjoy it either.

Cyril Connolly once wrote:

“Better to write for yourself and have no public than to write for the public and have no self.”

Many critics don’t realize this, but their fear is not just of writing—it’s of being exposed. Because to write is to reveal yourself, even in fiction. It’s easier to sit back and take potshots at those who dare to put words on paper than to try and fail themselves.

Some of these critics live in a fantasy where they could be great writers—if only they had the time, the opportunity, or the right idea. But the truth is, writing is a craft. It’s not about talent alone; it’s about doing the work. And if they were really capable of writing something better, they would.

Instead, they settle for the self-avoidance of tearing down others.

When Criticism Is an Emotional Reaction

Another reason people harshly criticize writers is an emotional reaction to a differing opinion. When a writer expresses an idea that challenges someone’s worldview, values, or deeply held beliefs, the response is often not thoughtful discourse but defensive outrage. Instead of engaging with the argument or considering a new perspective, some lash out at the writer, attacking their credibility, intelligence, or style rather than addressing the substance of the work.

George Orwell once said:

“If liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear.”

But many would rather silence a writer than wrestle with uncomfortable truths. Rather than articulating a counterpoint through writing of their own, they choose the easier path—criticizing and dismissing the work entirely, as if doing so will erase the challenge it presents.

Remember Galileo…

The Galileo affair began around 1610 and ended in 1633 when the Roman Catholic Inquisition tried and condemned Galileo Galilei for supporting heliocentrism—the idea that the Earth and planets orbit the Sun. His 1632 book, Dialogue Concerning the Two Chief World Systems, defended this theory and sparked controversy. In 1633, the Inquisition found him “vehemently suspect of heresy” and sentenced him to house arrest, where he remained until his death in 1642.

The Difference Between Constructive Criticism and Petty Negativity

Of course, not all criticism is bad. Good-faith feedback helps writers improve. But there’s a vast difference between constructive criticism and empty negativity. Constructive criticism offers guidance and points out flaws with the intention of helping. Petty negativity exists only to tear down.

You can spot the difference easily. The person who offers helpful advice probably writes themselves. The one who just sneers from the sidelines? They probably don’t.

As Isaac Asimov put it:

“Writing, to me, is simply thinking through my fingers.”

Constructive critics understand that writing is a thought process, a skill to be honed. Petty critics don’t. They mock typos, attack minor imperfections, and ridicule ideas instead of engaging with them. They offer nothing of substance because they have nothing to offer.

Writing is Hard—That’s Why It’s Worth Doing

There’s a reason why not everyone writes. It’s difficult. It demands vulnerability, persistence, and a willingness to be wrong. But that’s also what makes it rewarding.

Jodi Picoult said it best:

“You can always edit a bad page. You can’t edit a blank page.”

That’s what separates writers from critics. Writers do the hard work. They wrestle with ideas, push through writer’s block, and put their thoughts into words—even when it’s difficult. Critics, on the other hand, sit comfortably behind their keyboards, never risking a single original thought.

The truth is, most people who criticize writers without ever attempting to write themselves are not really critiquing the work. They are revealing their own fears.

Fear of failure.
Fear of not being good enough.
Fear of being judged as harshly as they judge others.

Writers Keep Writing. Critics Keep Talking.

The world is full of people who will tell you why something won’t work, why your writing isn’t good enough, and why you should stop. But here’s the thing: if they really knew how to do it better, they would.

Ray Bradbury once said:

“You fail only if you stop writing.”

So keep writing. Keep creating. Because at the end of the day, the only thing critics produce is noise. Writers produce something real.

And that’s what truly scares them.

One final note. If you think I consider myself to be a good writer, you’d be 100% dead wrong. I am my harshest critic.

______________________________

Dave served 38 years in the USAF and Air National Guard as an aircraft crew chief, where he retired as a CMSgt. He has held a wide variety of technical, instructor, consultant, and leadership positions in his more than 40 years of civilian and military aviation experience. Dave holds an FAA Airframe and Powerplant license from the FAA, as well as a Master’s degree in Aeronautical Science. He currently runs his own consulting and training company and has written for numerous trade publications.

His true passion is exploring and writing about issues facing the military, and in particular, aircraft maintenance personnel.

As the Voice of the Veteran Community, The Havok Journal seeks to publish a variety of perspectives on a number of sensitive subjects. Unless specifically noted otherwise, nothing we publish is an official point of view of The Havok Journal or any part of the U.S. government.