In his assessments of literary merit Waclaw Borowy (1890-1950), one of the great figures of Polish history of literature, employed - with some qualifications - a set of three criteria, ie. Thematic universality, representativeness vis-a-vis contemporary reality, and vividness of expression. His judgements have and made a lasting impact on subsequent literary historiography and, by and large, continue to hold sway in the field of 18th-century poetry, especially in the critical reception of Konstancja Benislawska, Elzbieta Druzbacka and Franciszek Dionizy Kniaznin, and to lesser extent in the criticism of Adam Naruszewicz and Ignacy Krasicki. Elsewhere, his damning judgment on Adolf Dygasinski has proved final, and his summing-up of Stanisław Wyspianski as 'a great poet who was not a great writer' has worked as an effective inspiration to a number of later critics. While Borowy's account of the 'strengths and weaknesses' of Stefan Zeromski (especialły his early work) has become part of the general consensus, his disparaging view of Krasicki's 'Monachomachia' or Franciszek Zablocki's comedies, 'Fantazy' and 'Pharaoh', has found hardly any support.