I think I am a critic in more ways than one. I criticize almost everything (I hope that doesn't sound too negative). Maybe criticize gives a different connotation, and thus it might mean different to other people.

Anyway, here's how I become a critic in every day of my life:

I see people on the street. I critique their appearance this way: the clothes, the neatness, their posture, their facial expressions. I am an artist and a writer, so when I see people, I try to analyze them in a writer's or an artist's perspective. What is his or her story? Is he a great father? Is she having a difficulty right now? In an artist's perspective, I observe the bone structure, the curve of the lips, the slope of the nose, and of course my favorite, the characteristics of the eyes.

Oh wait. Is that a critique? Ah, now that I realize it, it's not. The first probably (about the clothes, posture and such) but the second, I think it's more of observing than critiquing.

Anyway, if i would be a professional critic, which one would I be: a food critic, a book critic, or a film critic?

Birthday Cake with Red Strawberry

I want to be a food critic.

Seriously, it's very difficult for me to choose from the three. I would love to be a professional critic in all three areas, but if I would have to choose one, I'd like to a food critic.

People who know me personally knows I have a huge appetite for someone who has such a small body frame and if you would ask them which critic I would be, they would probably laugh and say, "definitely a food critic".

So, why a food critic?

It's mainly because I love food. I love books and movies too, mind you. But the thing is, I love food more. (There's another thing I love more than food - sleep. But I guess a sleep critic does not exist, eh?)

Like books and movies, food has a lot of possibilities and potential. There is no limit to the kind of food that would be invented. There are a lot of possible recipes.

I used to be a very picky eater when I was younger, and recently, I have been trying to change that. i want to be more adventurous when it comes to food.

The variety of flavors I could taste, the various possibilities of garnishes, mixture of flavors, food presentation, everything! All of it is exciting to me.

Add to that that compared to being a book or movie critic, it takes less of my time. It takes me hours to finish a movie, and it might take days for me to finish a book. Tasting food takes only less than a minute, and it's still a wonderful experience.

So yeah, I would probably be a food critic simply because I think it would be the most enjoyable for me.

Most of us probably have books on our shelves that we started reading but which we failed to finish. It could be boredom, or lack of time, or lack of interest, or maybe you lost the book. There are a lot of reasons.

So, as a reader, do I feel obligated to finish all books I start reading?

Not necessarily. It depends on the book.

Most of the time, if the book is really good, and you enjoyed reading it, then you will definitely finish it because you probably won't stop until you finish it.

This always happen to me. I keep saying, "just one more chapter, then I'll sleep!" but I end up not sleeping until I finish it.

As to finishing books that I stopped reading halfway, usually, I'll say to myself that I'll read them again someday, but I end up forgetting it.

But then there are times when I feel obligated to finish reading a book even though I am reluctant to finish it - books that are popular. Those kinds of books that are very popular that you wonder why they're popular so you read them too.

This happened to me when I read John Grisham's The Appeal. I was bored at the beginning of the novel. I actually repeated reading the beginning five times because I always end up not finishing it, then letting it go unfinished, then reading it again.

So, no, I don't really feel obligated reading all the books I start reading, unless I'm really curious as to why it's popular.