Sometimes it seems that this critical need for agglutination, which aims to present a panoramic historical view of the paths taken by literature, does more harm than good to understanding the authors. In other words: if the agglutination works for lesser authors, it seems to misrepresent the great ones, and we get the impression that it would be much better, instead of fitting them into a collective, to simply compare their lives and works, as is done with notorious success in some biographies. What is striking is that criticism sometimes completely distorts the individual in order to explain the whole.