The notorious reviewer Paul Johnson asks himself the question „what makes a good reviewer?” In his opinion, the following are essential: quiet knowledge, maximum opening regardless of the risks and discomfort, infusion of his own experience, reducing narcissism, which does not mean adopting of an impersonal tone, possibly of an academic jargon. Critical reception must not underestimate the reader, but not overestimate him. The role of reviews would be to produce ideas. It would do if they are produced intelligibly. Summing up the considerations above, Napoleon would have been a great critic of direction, but a disastrous postmodern critic, the latter should be politically correct and ready to dialogic heteroglossia.