Group project critique
Over the years I have read a variety of guides on how to ‘read’ and write about art, some more useful than others. In a few cases they seem to get overly complex and it is not long before the delights of semiotics rear their head. I think this has meant that I have never quite found anything that I was able to apply, relying more on my own intuition.
Going through a series of crits as part of my MA I have noticed that these theoretical underpinnings don’t necessarily provide a useful basis on which to discuss a work with the artist face to face. As much as anything what I am aware of is that my embodied experience probably comes before my intellect engages. I notice size, shape, form and interrelationships before I wonder about intention and theoretical positioning. It is an aesthetic experience, and yes, I confess whether I like it does come into play. Not to say I must like a work to be moved or impacted by it.
Our group crits are particularly enlightening, for the most part everyone is encouraged to say something, meaning I hear a range of views and perspectives I could never have come up with on my own. Sometimes I wonder if we are looking at the same piece, which I see as a real positive, I am stopped in my tracks and forced to think and look anew. I don’t have to agree, but I do want to recognise the challenge to my viewpoint.
While understanding that it is important to recognise the need for an artistic literacy I am reminded that giving constructive feedback is a skill. It is not something that everyone has experienced or has been trained in. We can be quite weak at both giving and receiving effective feedback.
I recently came across Alisa Golden’s ‘Handmade Books’ blog and was really taken with her approach to critique. Not least because it seemed deeply rooted in experience, the phenomenology of selecting and being selected. I am shamelessly borrowing the outline she uses and hope to try and apply it more in future. Her initial list is straightforward:
- First reaction: how does it make you feel?
- Look more closely, reflect on your reaction
- What is it? How is it made?
- Does reading the wall text give you insight about the artist?
In a later blog this is developed further (I have adapted it slightly):
- Aesthetics: does it attract attention and curiosity?
- Craft and choices: has the artist been sensitive to their materials
- Originality: have I seen anything like this before?
- Subject and focus: appropriateness
- Layers: were there different ways to look at the art?
- Strength: can the viewer get a sense of the work by just seeing a portion?
- Balance: is there a sense of harmony?
The point about reading the wall text is an interesting one as this is something that came up in my feedback. When I gave my verbal explanation about ‘Context Collapse’ several people felt they wouldn’t have got the background to the piece from looking at it, it needs explanatory text. I don’t think that is necessarily an issue but it is something I will reflect on. I know I tend to over-complicate, so it is worth keeping this in mind.
I like that the list includes the notion of ‘craft’ and that we might be mindful of how the artist has approached their materials.
I can see aspects of this approach in our recent group crits. I think it also gives me a useful guide in terms of how I start writing about my work.