It is a given that some people will claim that any given book is "bad" or "stinky" (assuming you can get them to read it, which turns out to be the hard part of this process). Before you publish you need to do everything you practically can to remove the technical reasons for such criticism. Beyond that you need to discover if you story works as intended, and that takes some effort.
If you intend to publish, you
must be prepared for criticism. Better to take a deep breath ask for it from people you know, people you can talk to, people whose perspective and preferences you understand, so you can put the criticism into some meaningful context. And better these people should give you this criticism while you still have a chance to do something about it, than to humour you into thinking you've got it right already.
But be careful what criticism you look for from what people. Many of your readers will have less (or no more) knowledge of the technicalities (spelling, grammar and story construction) than you do. And don't
expect that lovers of horror will be thrilled with your romance, or vice versa. It might happen, but it's not a good bet.
Beyond the technicalities, you need to learn to read criticism for what it actually means. These words from Neil Gaiman: "
Remember: when people tell you something’s wrong or doesn’t work for them, they are almost always right. When they tell you exactly what they think is wrong and how to fix it, they are almost always wrong." (Copied from
this link, which isn't where I first read it, but can't find that now.)
To me, those words reflect the fact that it is your story and your responsibility to tell it in a way that comes across to your reader. If the reader isn't "getting it", it is
not the reader's fault.
Also, when you ask for criticism from other writers (in particular) you might get what that writer thinks should be done, but it's not their story. You may need to reinterpret the criticism into "it's not working" and take it from there.
For example: One "professional" assessor told me to abandon the project after reading an early manuscript for my first book (knowing I had more books planned in the series). After some initial anger and depression, I re-read the review and discovered a few things. First, there were a few useful bits in there, mostly stuff I needed to cut (which Stephen King puts succinctly as "second draft = first draft - 10%"). Second, it became clear that the reviewer was trying to impose their own ideas over what the story was about, and because the manuscript wasn't telling the story they thought it should, it obviously wasn't working and should be abandoned. What I finally took from that was:
my story wasn't coming across clearly enough. The cutting back helped a lot, and few more subtle/directed edits helped clarify it further.
And then there is the conflicting advice that: not everyone will like any given story, BUT your story is only working if (at least) some do! You have to make the call on how to weigh the responses.
Ultimately, only
you, the writer, can make the decision. You do need help, every writer does, so get it, but the final call remains your own. You need to have read widely enough, and been paying attention while you did, that you can have some confidence in your own assessment of what works and what doesn't.