
When we see criticism, in today’s world, many times we see it as the judgement of someone else. It is someone looking at another person’s actions, and voicing their opinion of them. Now this may not always be bad, and it may not always be good, but someone will give their opinion. We see a great deal of criticism in Tobias Wolff’s “Bullet in the Brain”. The main character, Anders, is a book critic by profession. His job is to judge the works of other people, and he loves this. Not only does he criticize books, but we also see him criticize people. Throughout the story we see him criticizing people in their everyday life. This is what brings him joy, and as the story goes on, we see that this does not necessarily have to be a bad thing. And that is the goal of Wolff by writing this story. He wants to show people that while criticism can be dangerous, it does not have to be a bad thing. There are both positive and negative ways for you to look at someone else and give them good feedback. He wants people to realize that criticizing someone can be encouraging to them. It can give a change for the better, and help them in the long run. On the other hand, some people do not take criticism well, and it could backfire. Wolff uses Anders to show us where criticizing people may not always be the best idea, and how everyday events can also be criticized. Wolff believes that while yes, criticism can be a bad thing, it does not always have to be negative. He wants to show the other side, where people may criticize because it comes naturally to them, not because they want to be malicious. 

We see in the story that Anders is a very critical man. When the story starts off, he immediately criticizes the two ladies in front of him in line. Their “loud, stupid conversation put him a murderous temper.” (Wolff 200). We see that as soon as the story starts, he is already criticizing people. This makes him come off to the readers as arrogant, and this can potentially be one of the dangers of too much criticism. People may not like it when someone judges everyday parts of their lives, and to them whoever does is offensive. Again we see Anders being a critic when the lady in front of him is mad that they close one of the lines in the bank. She turns to him to complain, and he responds with “Damned unfair. Tragic Really. If they’re not chopping off the wrong leg, or bombing your ancestral village, they’re closing their positions.” (Wolff 200). He gives the lady in line a smart aleck response because he thought what she was saying was not worth the response. This is another occurrence where criticism could get you on the wrong side with someone. He continues to be sarcastic with her, and this is the reason that criticism gets a bad reputation in today’s society. It is not so much the criticism as it is the person who is doing it. Some people do not want to hear what others have to say about them, and sometimes the people doing the criticizing are not the nicest people. In our example of Anders, we see that he continuously is giving attitude to the ladies in front of him. He continues to act in a way that makes it seems like he thinks he is better than them, when in reality this is just how Anders is. He is a criticizing man who has smart remarks to people, but he does not do this with malicious intent. We come to find out, as the story goes on, this is just how he has always been.

At this point in the story, the bank is just starting to get robbed, and we see no better example of the true Anders here. The first encounter we see between Anders and the robbers is when one of the robbers tells the bank teller to start filling one of the bags with money. He makes a joke to the lady in front of him about opening the line, and the robber comes over to him. They talk, and eventually the robber tells Anders to look up with the pistol pressed against his chin. Anders is looking at the ceiling in the face of death, and he begins to criticize it. He sees the “domed ceiling had been decorated with mythological figures whose fleshy, toga-draped ugliness Anders had taken in at a glance many years earlier and afterward declined to notice.” (Wolff 203) Anders, with a gun pressed up against him in a life or death situation, still finds the time to criticize something. This comes naturally to him, and it just seems to be the first thing he does in any situation. We see this flaw come back and cost him his life. After examining the ceiling, the robber begins to tell Anders not to fuck with him, and “Fuck with me again, you’re history. Capiche?” (Wolff 203) This is the last straw for Anders, as he criticizes the way the robber talks. The robber then pulls the trigger, shooting Anders right in the head. At this part of the story, we see that Anders’ criticism is the death of him. He gave sarcastic responses to the robbers, and after continuously critiquing the robbers, he finally lost his life because of it. This is part of the negative side of criticism that we see. Some people do not want to hear what others have to say about them. There is also the side of criticism that is not so bad. When Anders dies, we see that he does not remember conventional things. He does not remember his first love, or his wife, or his daughter. What he does remember is when he was a kid, the baseball field. He remembers all the neighborhood kids coming to choose teams and just play. And most importantly, he remembers the first time he criticized someone. That moment brought him such joy, and it is how he lived the rest of his life. Anders does not mean to criticize people in a bad way, he is just so interested by it. He is mesmerized by the words spoken by the boy that day, and it stuck with him until the day he died.

Wolff gives us the story of a man to criticized people every chance he got. This is how Anders lived, but he did not mean it in a mean or hurtful way. This is just the man that Anders was. We see that through all time times Anders was being critical, that criticism can be both positive and negative. Anders was not as critical as he was because he wanted to be mean, but this is just the man that he was. He grew up this way, but did not intend to harm anyone by it. Unfortunately, his criticism came back to be the death of him. His critical view of the robbers got himself shot, and brought him back to the one time where he was joyous as ever from criticizing. 

 