Is there a single literary critic who was also a great fiction writer?

>>7315880
I dunno but you should probably check this thread >>7315051 if you are really curious

>>7315880
bloom is a historical artifact

go2/his/

>>7315899

A literary critic is not the same as a philosopher, and would never not be /lit/ material.

critics are good non-fiction by their nature

if they are good fiction writers they are probably not good critics

>>7315915
No you idiot, some guy is basically giving dust-jacket biographies of every author

>>7315880
ts eliot wrote criticism

Nabokov ofc

>>7315880
borges

>>7315953
Beat me to it.

>>7315880
Poe, sort of.

Henry James is probably the only one who was great at both.

D.H. Lawrence

>>7316172
Him too, actually

Oscar Wilde

but I'd say in any of these cases they're a writer or artist first

>>7315880
Borges
Calvino
Kundera
Pamuk

Read

>>7316196
Also, Piglia and Alan Pauls

Charles Baudelaire, Théophile Gautier, Octave Mirabeau both wrote critics about literature and fine arts. Joris-Karl Huysmans was an art critic and Charles-Augustin de Sainte-Beuve, Honoré de Balzac, Gérard de Nerval also were well-known for this part of their life. Michel Polac, although a prolific writer, was renowned for its critics which has been widely considered to have a high literary value.

>>7315880
Nabokov?

The entire Weimar classicism. As in Goethe and Schiller.

Also Lessing.

>>7316210
Since when are Piglia and Pauls great fiction writers? They are barely ok.

>>7316422
I think they are great, but it's ok that we don't agree, senpai

John Updike, Henry James, William H. Gass