Impossibility of 'Auto-Critique'

[William S. Lear]

On Thursday, March 18, 1999 at 20:11:08 (-0500) Yoshie Furuhashi writes:
>...
>I think that 'auto-critique' fundamentally works to preempt (expected and
>unexpected) critiques by others. One criticizes oneself in the secret hope
>that one won't be (badly) surprised by becoming an object of others'
>criticisms. In other words, 'auto-critique' protects our fragile ego from
>becoming wounded. In this sense, 'auto-critique' is a defense mechanism one
>develops in order to manage the fear and shame of having one's own
>(inescapably) partial vision exposed in front of others. It is what we do
>so as not to get 'caught with our pants down,' so to speak. It is a sign of
>the lack of solidarity (or of trust in our friendship/comradeship with
>others). That is why I heavily discount the value of navel-gazing about
>'privilege.' It is not just an impossible task; it is also a smarmy gesture.

Doesn't the first part here assume that criticism is a Bad Thing?  If
auto-critique is "a sign of lack of solidarity" with others, are you
saying that auto-critique is not possible with solidarity?  Cannot one
have both?  If you send me a manuscript and I send you back a critique
and our ideas merge in some sense --- you learn from me and I learn
from you --- is that not a critique which is deeply pleasurable and
profitable to the both of us?  Does this solidarity prevent you from
asking yourself tough questions, of criticizing and constantly
improving your own efforts?

Analogously, is auto-pleasure an effort to preempt pleasure given to
us externally?

Bill