Critical Condition: Criticism 101 (Why you should/n't listen to that guy's rants, and how you can qualify to be That guy!)

"What qualifies someone to be a critic?" -
This is the question posed by Kris Vire, (theatre critic for Time Out Chicago and the blog, Storefront Rebellion), to a few of his fellow colleagues from the critiquing world. In a culture where everyone has something to say about everything, the differences between half-baked opinions and developed critical responses become difficult to distinguish. One common trait that all critics agreed is essential to qualify someone as a critic is passion.
Donna Seaman, (book critic for Booklist and WLUW's Open Books), argues that passion and dedication for any particular art are the motivating factors behind the critics' need to voice their opinions. Merely being educated, therefore, becomes irrelevant if the eagerness to fiercely promote or downplay a particular subject/idea is lacking. Rather, Seaman asserts, "passion must lead to discipline and immersion. Expertise is gained from sustained attention" …"on going self-education is essential."
Indeed, immersing oneself in the arts but more importantly, becoming self-aware of the preconceptions with which one looks at said art is what distinguishes thoughtful criticism from arbitrary opinion. 
A good critic must not only be able to physically and metaphorically illustrate the subject under review but he must also capture the experiential moment. Seaman states, "writing is always about exposing the workings of the mind…" To be able to translate a particular experience, the critic must be able to, as Seaman says, "imagine responses, and see the experience in a greater context." This gives the critic the opportunity to place their assessments into perspective and, if not validate, at least legitimize the reasoning behind their particular viewpoint to the audience.

On Style:
Vire also asked the critics to comment on the their approach to writing both on print and online. The general consensus was that most take on an informal conversational style when writing for the web. Even in serious publications, the predominant tone of their online reviews seems to take a more casual approach. Of course, the interactive nature of the web incites the employment of more informal strategies to connect with readers. Seaman correctly asserts that, "conversation is vital." It enables the writing to become a platform for discussion and invites readers to become active participants in the debate. What can be more stimulating for a critic than receiving a passionate response from a reader, even if it is to thrash them?