Critiques

I conduct critiques in several different ways, and on a regular basis, and I conduct critiques that are geared toward different situations, as follows:

-       When students are working steadily on a painting, print or drawing, I conduct what basically becomes a quick personal critique throughout the class session.  I ask open questions like “what are you doing next?”, “What are you working on now, and why?”, “How will what you’re doing in this area affect the other areas of the image?”, etc.  A common encouragement I present to them is to “be honest” about what the image needs.  This requires focused analysis, not generalizations or defeatist attitudes on their part.  I hope that this question has an empowering influence on them.  I want them to assume that all they have to do is quietly consider what is a challenge in the image. Then, they almost always inevitably go right to the area that we both agree needs to be addressed in the image (mostly because it is obvious that the particular area chosen is being avoided), and they also know almost immediately what steps they might take to resolve those issues that are presented to them.  I want to emphasize, I don’t expect them to come up with a clear plan that will definitely resolve the issue – I just want them to be empowered to TRY something, and to work toward the resolution, not to pre-conceive it before trying.  Like I say to my students – avoiding your problems doesn’t make them go away.  A quick personal critique can often be away of regaining focus on what the student needs to do, as well as a way for me to encourage them with pointing out other areas that have worked, due to their focused effort.

-       Preliminary group critiques are conducted after maybe two or three weeks on a longer painting or print project, in order for the students to take a break from the focused work, step back, and get reactions from their fellow students on what they are doing.  I often ask each student to come into the studio the night before a group critique and to write about one other student’s piece, to be read at the critique the next day.  This allows the students alone time with the work, so that they don’t feel pressured to come up with quick analysis in front of their peers, to give them time to express what they really want to say.  I also ask them to answer three simple questions in their written analysis – “What do you see?”, “What are the strong parts, or strong directions in the piece?”, and, “what are the challenges, or things that need to be changed, in your opinion?”  The first question concerning “what they see,” seems simple, but spending time and analyzing all aspects of what is seen can be very revealing, as opposed to a casual, quick analysis.  Answering this question after thoughtful and focused looking reveals much to the artist about how affective their approach is (mark-making/brush work, color scheme, space, composition, built up or lightly considered areas, etc.).   After the written comments are presented, I then allow the rest of the class to present their comments and ask questions of each other, not the artist.  I do this because I don’t want the rest of the class to take the easy way out by getting the answers directly from the artist – I want them to go through the process of critical thinking and discussing.  This prolonged discussion sometimes seems to drag on, but I feel that it’s important in terms of encouraging them to think in this focused, critical manner when they are working on their own painting/print/drawing.

-        At the end of the assignment, or at time that the piece is presented for viewing, I conduct a final group critique.  This takes on a very similar character as the previously discussed critique situation, with one change – I expect that each student needs to speak about each piece, and … that I don’t speak during the critique.  I do this so that they acquire the skill and sensitivity of concentrating on what is being said by everyone in the room, and so that they gain the ability of formulating their own decisions based on input presented on the spot.  I think that encourages them to think more on their feet, and it forces them (somewhat) to not let too much that’s said left open.  Decisions and determinations need to be made, even if the determination is that some aspect of the piece is not supposed to be pinned down.