Duplicitously

Criticism is secondary literature.

This means that it has a special relationship to the number 2. In other words: duplicity.

For instance, criticism pretends to be about something else – the primary work that it criticises. And sometimes it may even be the case that reading a critical interpretation will help you discover something new about that work.

However, in that discovery lies a new work. Why? Because the best critical interpretations themselves create the object that they criticise.

Any thoughts?