I lost respect for her (and I wasn't the only one) after listening to her remarks. She showed very little interest in anything but her own opinions on what was right or wrong.
I know a couple of people were quite offended by her remarks. People stop listening to you once you have offended them.
Charles Reid is internationally famous, writes instruction books and does workshops internationally. he has had Hollywood actors in his workshops and some royalty as well. Charles in invariably polite, helpful, kind and instructive when he critiques. He would never seek to push his opinions about work. He respects his students and realizes that skills can only be acquired over time and with work.
A person would have to be pretty self-confident in the first place to be able to analyse criticism and not become a slave to it.
Maybe criticism should be saved for after the artist is dead. Gives the artist every chance to express his own views without corruption.
talk about talking in circles....
Linda, I see criticism as helpful, and I think it is good to get more than one viewpoint. In the end though, it is still the artist's choice as to how much or how little they change a piece from suggestions of the critic.
Marlene, I would say it depends on what institution, show, etc, a critic is being asked for comments. A top notch show had better have a well respected critic, or what is the point of spending money for the application and going into the show in the first place if there are only amateurs judging the work? On forums like this or even at home with your family or friends, sometimes an untrained eye can point things out that aren't immediately apparent to the artist. One of those "oh yea!" moments lol.
Cole, I agree.
As for the critiques, a judge may only be telling you why they did not choose your work for an award. If they had so many pieces to critique, time would most definitely be a factor so probably they would only say why the work was not selected for award. It would sound harsh, and it that was the intention, a simple statement in the beginning would have made all the difference in avoiding offending the artists critiqued.
Also remember, if you are not a real fan of the artist giving the critique, you probably won't agree with what they say, so don't worry about their personal opinion, because when it comes down to it, that's what you got.
My view used to be that rejection, criticism and ignorance were just part of the game - what you had to endure if you wanted to show your work. So if the judges, jurors or staff were insensitive, shortsighted or just ignorant then you had to rise above it all and be gracious even when they weren't. As for being respected? forgedaboutit. Disrespect by the carloads. Try doing an outdoor show sometime where the beer and popcorn crowd is suddenly your educated art critic and in your face with their snotty opinions.
I have restrategised in the last few years and sought to place layers between myself (my work) and the naysayer art critics. As much as I can I look for venues where I am able to show without having to pay to be judged or juried into a show. I have zero zilch interest in bogus ribbon awards. if I can show and maintain respect then I feel like I have done myself a humongus favor. I am through with the snotty judges and their feckless opinions. Painting is a joy once again. If I never have to listen to another sniveling art juror again I will be very happy.
I have just entered for a Juried show , it was all done by email and photos of your work, they pick 300 if you get in then you have to take the work to the gallery about 50 mile away, then a critic comes up from London with another two to pick 150 from the 300 for the show, I would rather be there like you to HEAR the critisism than maybe get a email to say i have not got in./ not holding my breath there will be a lot entering :)
Whenever I'm asked to judge, I make out a form listing as many characteristics of good art that I deem important for that show. I grade each work of art on a level of one to ten --- ten being highest--- on those specific characteristics. That way, my decision is based on numbers AND the artist receives some feedback from me, whoever I may be to them.
It's a lot of work, but I do my best to communicate.
Linda's original post and our responses are based on our own experiences of being judged.
Why is it always a red flag to some people if others have opinions? Why is it necessary to crash the party so to speak?
i am not a judge, and even if i was a Judge, i would not have the true ability to Judge anyone.
The good thing is, Linda, That when the dust settles and the smoke clears there is going to be only one Judge and that Judge happens to be an Artist HIMSELF- actually the most HIGH Artist and Master Creator of all creation and artist.
the people who make an exhibit and hire a judge are responsible for the type of judging. you get what you get. if you want to jump into their game, check out the judges first.
i used to ask my daughter's best friend for her critiques coz she was so good at pointing things out that i hadn't noticed. but i never ask my daughter coz she is oblivious.
THIS forum is a bit too 'supportive' sometimes (awesome, amazing, wow) and not enough useful critique (line, shape, comp, tone) with a good bit of ignoring that which one does not understand.
for instance, Cramer has been an artist here for years with some really great and always interesting work. he has a posting here which wants a difficult-to-make analysis. you could 1) say "awesome", 2) tell him how it makes you feel, 3) discuss technical aspects of it, but don't ignore it. The same piece could end up at the Louvre with some 'expert' calling it "genius". maybe it is.
keep Painting and creating W James Taylor
Back to Category
Reply
