To Smithereens and Back “Enter at your own risk, pass through locked doors where impossible things can happen that the world has never seen before. » This thrilling and addictive theme song resonated with me as I awaited my one guilty pleasure, my one anointed creative catalyst in an otherwise exhausting and rigorous routine. Dexter's Laboratory was inherently interesting to my generation; the seemingly original idea of ​​the nuclear family with a twist and a very cat-and-mouse-like relationship between the main character, Dexter, and his sister Dee-Dee has captivated our oh-so-naive minds. It has always amazed me how Dexter's attempts to invent in solitude, his efforts at scientific progress, were stopped by the immature creative genius that is Dee-Dee; It was in this deceptively parasitic relationship that I found food for thought: the young genius immersed himself in the world of science to invent for a certain defined purpose, but the comically brutal sister found a different use , a completely different definition for his inventions. much to the dismay of our slightly accented protagonist. Although "blown to smithereens" turned out to be the end of this little analogy, the dynamic of their relationship transcends simple cartoon characters and develops into a more abstract entity. Goulish interpreted this entity as the relationship between writer and reader, and in his essay “Critique,” ​​the idea of ​​why a writer writes and why a reader reads is approached in a very unique light. Goulish believes that "any act of critical thinking finds its value in achieving one or both interrelated goals: 1) to bring about change 2) to understand how to understand." (558) Striving in the mind of a critic, Goulish is able to represent what, in substance, any middle of paper is......very interesting than the word you use for describing this concrete, desolate chemical substance actually had a completely contradictory meaning: “Plastic (n.): a molded structure or figure; a creative or procreative principle; a solid substance easily molded or shaped” (Oxford English Dictionary). » (Letter to Roland) This anomaly, this manifestation of a paradox which hides in the subtext of the writer's subconscious could not be explained by anything more complex than my overanalysis of the definition of a word, but it is a reflection of the writer's process, it is what remains after the mental struggle that every writer goes through when faced with a certain subject; no writer can be completely convinced of the validity of his argument, because then he would not be writing about it. The very fact that we write about a topic shows our need for deeper understanding.