Ron Tanzi

ART CRITICISM

The four stages of art criticism based on E.B. Feldman's analysis:

I. DESCRIPTION listing what an art object seems to be made of.

(forms and the visual elements that make the forms)

II. ANALYSIS looking at the relationships among the forms & visual

elements listed. (the principles of design)

III. INTERPRETATION deciding what all your earlier observations mean.

(use the visual facts from above)

IV. JUDGMENT deciding the value of an art object.

(what philosophy(ies) of art is(are) conveyed? -

successfully?)

I. DESCRIPTION: The words we use to describe an art object are like pointers drawing attention to something worth seeing. Use words that are neutral: avoid subjective terms such as strong, weak, beautiful, harmonious, ugly, funny-looking, etc.. Terms that denote value judgments should be banned from your vocabulary at this stage. It is better to generalize if you are unsure of what something is specifically. For instance, a work may contain human figures, but if it is unclear whether they are men or women, then say it has human forms or images of people. Trying to be too specific at this stage could throw off your final interpretation.

Start out in noticing a work of arts format. A painting may be in a vertical or horizontal rectangle whereas a sculpture or work of architecture may be in a pyramidal, cubic, or other polyhedral format. Then look at the overall general image or major forms before getting involved with details (see the forest before individual trees idea).

In both representational works, where we recognize images, and abstract works, where we don't recognize images, we can describe and understand what we are seeing through the language of the visual elements. The visual elements, such as line, value (light to dark), color, shape, mass (or volume), space, and texture are the basic elements from which all art is made.

For example, you may notice that one painting may be dominated by line, shape, and color, and another painting by value and illusionistic mass or volume. In sculpture, mass and lighting may be important. And in architecture, for example, you may notice that transparency is an important element to steel and glass skyscrapers.

A work may have expressive spatial elements being created by extreme contrasts of textural relationships from rough to smooth. Notice if the texture is actual or visual (or illusionistic).

Also attempt to identify what media and tools were used and how they were manipulated to create the work. Technique can be very important to your final interpretation and should be thought of as being integral to your criticism.

Try to be as precise as possible in describing a work of art without judging or interpreting it too early.

II. ANALYSIS: At this stage you are trying to find out what the forms or visual elements do to each other; how they affect or influence each other; what are the relationships?

When we discuss relationships in the visual arts, we are often talking about what are called the design principles. Design principles are things like: balance, unity, variety, repetition, rhythm, scale or size, proportions, and emphasis. You may want to ask yourself how are the visual elements being used to create balance, unity, etc. and which design elements have more importance in the particular work you are analyzing.

For example, a work of art may have a composition that has an asymmetrical balance, which is visually weighted by color and shape relationships. Notice if colors of relative shapes are different or similar to each other.

How are size or scale relationships affecting the work? Is proportion exaggerated?

Be thorough in your description and analysis. The information you gather will be extremely important to your interpretation.

INTENTIONS OF DESCRIPTIONS AND FORMAL ANALYSIS:

To make as complete an examination of the art object as is possible for the viewer to make.

To slow down one's tendency to jump to conclusions.

To help build skill in observation (a skill which is vital to understanding visual art as well as for personal development).

To accumulate the visual facts that will form the basis for a critical

interpretation

III. INTERPRETATION: Now you've arrived at the stage when you have to decide what all your earlier observations mean. This takes courage. Don't be afraid to make a mistake. You may find yourself changing or adjusting your interpretation until it fits the visual facts. Be easy on yourself and expect errors on your first tries. Just try your best to not change the visual facts or to ignore them in order to make your interpretation seem correct.

SUGGESTIONS FOR INTERPRETING A WORK OF ART: Stay with the Visual Facts and:

1. See if you can come up with a single large idea or concept that seems to sum up or unify all the separate traits of the work. NOTE: Don't describe the object since you've already done that. Use words that convey ideas, but refer back to the visual & design elements that justify your interpretation.

2. Explain the sensations and feelings you have when viewing the art object. What visual and design elements contribute to these feelings?

3. Draw on your own experience, your intuition, and your intelligence in forming analogous or "looks like / feels like" interpretations. Think of music or literature that seems similar to the ideas you are observing in the art object. These reactions may seem funny, illogical, or absurd, but sometimes 'way out' impressions can be sharpened to the extent that they offer some fundamental insight about the work being viewed.

4. Draw on any artistic experience you may have with materials and processes. Draw on any knowledge you have of art history and of artistic style which may point to issues or problems artists have dealt with before.

IV. JUDGMENT: For the beginner, judging a work of art excellent or poor may seem too subjective. With so many variables to consider, this can leave one more confused than conclusive. For example, skill in technique may be important in judging a traditional work, but unimportant in judging a contemporary work of art. Intention can be important to the works of certain artists, but less so to artists preferring to work intuitively or to tap into the subconscious. How is this resolved in judging a work of art?

The reasons for judging a work of art excellent or poor have to be based on a philosophy of art, not on an individual's personal authority. If you are resourceful you will ultimately develop your own philosophy of art as a basis for judging the merit of any work that interests you. But for now, utilize the following three philosophies of art which Feldman has identified as seeming to be useful for justifying critical judgments:

1. Formalism - stresses the importance of visual organization.

2. Expressivism - stresses the importance of the emotions in communicating with a convincing and forceful manner.

3. Instrumentalism - stresses the importance of the didactic purpose of

the work as in conveying a religious, political, or

significant social message.

Formalism: The experience of art is devoted to the contemplation of the relationships of the parts to the whole in a work of art and each part should enhance the quality of the parts around it.

Changing any single element would not be possible without spoiling the whole work of art.

Emotional content should be even or neutral.

The pleasure the viewer experiences should come from the art object itself: its colors, surfaces, shapes, etc. and not from the subject matter or symbols used (which are secondary or even completely unimportant.)

Feelings and ideas should depend only on the way the artist shapes his materials.

A formalist masterpiece is a work of art that comes as close as possible to having perfect visual organization and technical execution.

Expressivism: A work of art should arouse the viewer's emotions and communicate ideas as if they were of major significance. The experience of the work of art is focused on the depth and intensity of feeling. Art should make everyday life more meaningful and profound.

An excellent work of art could even be ugly.

The formal and technical organization of the work is good when it is able to affect the viewer's feelings.

The work should not look calculated; it should seem to be the inevitable result of what the artist has seen or felt deeply.

Instrumentalism:

Art should serve purposes that have been determined by persistent human needs working through powerful social institutions. Art should serve the interests of the church, the state, business, or particular social and political ideologies.

Art is at its best when it helps to advance some cause that will, presumably, advance the interests of humanity.

Art that depends on art or grows out of art is decadent.

The technical and imaginative skills of the artist need to be organized by an idea that is greater or more important than the private emotions of the artist. Formalist and Expressivist elements should be subservient to the message or didactic purpose of the work of art.

The excellence of a work of art should be measured by its capacity to change human behavior in publicly visible ways. Great political art, for instance, results in greater displays of patriotism or allegiance to a political party, etc..

Many works of art will seem to utilize more than one philosophy but most works will have one dominant philosophy. When you are able to recognize the dominant philosophy it is much easier to judge the success of a work of art by its ability to convey the ideas or emotions of its chosen philosophy. Remember that a work can be successful even though you may not personally like the forms, emotions or ideas being conveyed.

SOME FINAL THOUGHTS AND ADVICE:

Do not start the examination of a work of art by asking whether or not it meets your conditions of excellence. That is the last question you should ask. Begin with identification and description and work your way through analysis and interpretation. By then you will know which type of judgment, which philosophy of art, is most appropriate for the work you are examining. It is better to use these philosophies interchangeably, according to the character of the art object, than to stick rigidly to one philosophy alone and thus lose discovering some excellence the work may have. The goal is not necessarily to demonstrate how consistent you are in your final judgments, but to increase the sum of values and satisfactions you can get from art.

If you have been able to let a thing (an art object) enter your life and become part of you, if your mental and emotional powers have transformed that thing, that work of art, so that it is yours in a very unique and special sense, then you have discovered what it is like to have an aesthetic experience.

Based on Becoming Human Through Art by Edmund Burke Feldman, Prentice-Hall, 1970

"A man's work is nothing but this slow trek to rediscover those two or three great and simple images in whose presence his heart first opened." Albert Camus