It actually is as not only do you not understand what "objective" criteria is and also the fact that I'm not the only one debating you at this point . Literature and the study of literature isn't a hard science and doesn't have data or evidence that can be empirically judged. You can't qualify "good" literature as an empirical measurement. In fact even hard science is up for debate so long as empiricism is being practiced. Like if I had empirical evidence that you know god created man and it was verifiable and tested and I published a paper that was subject to a peer review then in that sense evolution would be up for a date. So far no one has done that and Evolution appears to fit all the evidence we have. You can't subject your opinion about literature to that same process though. Your opinion about it being bad isn't objective, it's entirely SUBJECTIVE and that's fine. If you had a university professor tell me the same thing it would still be his SUBJECTIVE opinion but it would be a noted one and worth considering given his or her position. Their is ZERO I REPEAT ZERO way you can turn the "ending is bad" into an objective criteria. Now THAT is really not up for debate.