Critical eye

Shiki (1867-1902) has critical comments towards Basho’s poetry,
doesn’t he?
Besides Shiki, we have some other critics who don’t appreciate
Basho as saint haijin.
Akutagawa Ryunosuke (1892-1927) the novelist calls Basho the villain.
Before I came across the view to see Basho as villain, I found those
who study Japanese Classics at university also making critical comments
on “The Narrow Road to the Deep North,” when their university teacher
asked what they thought about the travelogue. They say they can’t
appreciate Basho’s poetry devices, like utamakura/poetic topos, mitate/regarding something as something else. Doesn’t this suggest
that the professor should have started with explaining about utamakura
and mitate? As for utamakura, the Medieval poems offer utamakura
examples as many as one can quote. As for mitate, ukiyo-e prints
are full of them.
The results of the questionnaires were compiled by the professor and
published by the Iwanami; I’ve read the booklet at my library.
The Iwanami has been esteemed, but on and off it has been spilling
pieces of misinformation. I always feel and think one should not
idolize so-called academics. Even Homer sometimes nods, doesn’t he?
Don’t we study to see clearly, not following the blind leading the blind?
I’d like to introduce the view which might defy the view that Basho is
the saint haijin.