"The lot of critics is to be remembered by what they failed to understand"

George Edward Moore’s observation that critics are remembered by what they failed to understand is a nuanced consideration of human judgment and the legacy of those who assess the works of others. Implicit in his statement is the idea that critics occupy a unique but precarious position within the realms of art, philosophy, and culture. Their contributions are often measured not by the insight or appreciation they offer, but rather by their oversights, the misunderstandings, the missed significance, and the reluctance to accept what is new or unconventional.

This tendency can be traced to the nature of cultural progression. When an innovative work is presented, it frequently challenges prevailing assumptions. Critics, charged with the responsibility of evaluating these works, are sometimes ill-equipped to recognize their merit. Human minds are prone to habit, and newness can provoke discomfort or even contempt. This resistance is rarely forgotten when time eventually proves the critic wrong. It is telling how history savors the irony of early dismissals, innovators such as Van Gogh or the Impressionists faced derision from critics, only to be vindicated long after the initial condemnation.

Moore’s aphorism points out the asymmetric impact of critical error versus critical acclaim. A critic who enthusiastically supports a movement may blend into the crowd of similar opinions as the movement gains acceptance. In contrast, a critic who dismisses what later becomes revered will have their failure of judgment illuminated by posterity. These moments of misunderstanding become part of the enduring story of both the art and its critics.

Furthermore, Moore reminds us to approach criticism with humility. The most lasting criticisms are not the declarations of taste, but the public records of what critics did not grasp. The critic, in this sense, becomes a cautionary emblem of intellectual limitations, their reputations often secured by their infamous inability to see beyond the paradigms of their time.