Welcome one and all, and good evening ! It's time once again for your evening does of egotism, as I, the deliriously long-winded Dr. (_____), bring the epic editorial brinkmanship of my previous post to an exciting conclusion! There will be action, adventure, and padding galore! Okay, not really, but you can't blame a man for attempting to liven things up.
With that out of the way, I see no reason to delay further! So it's straight to brass tacks, as I, the oh so formulaic Dr. (_____), present to you part 2 of my modest discourse on the nature of constructive criticism!
Paging Dr. (_____): Constructive Criticism Part 2: How to be a Constructive Critic.
There are two parts to creating a work of art. The first is the artist's raw creativity, their so called muse. Without this, an artist lacks the raw vision to produce anything remarkable. The second, and far less glamorous part, is the artists grasp of proper technique. An artist can have a wondrous, beautiful creative vision, but without proper technique, all you'll get is a visionary mess.
Obviously you can't instill inspiration into an artist, they have to find it themselves. Fortunately however, and this is where constructive criticism comes in, you can instill proper technique into an artist, through instruction and honest feedback. As we've previously gone over why the honest part is so vital, we won't go into that again. So instead it becomes necessary to examine how to best deliver an honest critique.
First off, here's a good example of what not to do, both as the one giving and the one receiving criticism, courtesy of The Muppet Show's Statler & Waldorf. Even if you know who or what I'm referring to, please watch the linked video anyway so it's fresh in your mind. While the linked video is obviously a comedic sketch, it's still a good place to start when discussing what not to do as a critic.
First off, while certainly honest, this is a horrible way to deliver criticism. It's antagonistic, disruptive, and annoying. But above all it gives no actual advice on what could be better, or any genuine suggestions for improvement, and this last bit is what separates constructive criticism from pointless negativity and abuse.
While the first three points do not necessarily disqualify one from being a constructive critic, they make it very likely that their advice will go unheeded. Therefore a bit of tact and diplomacy is called for. Otherwise, even if you have some genuine useful advice to contribute, you still sound like a heckler. You'll have alienated the artist, and your advice will probably be ignored.
That is not to say that you should sugar coat things, that's where the whole "don't say anything negative" problems comes from. You need to remain as honest as possible, but you also need to be able to do so without making an antagonistic ass out of yourself. After all, you're there to try and help.
Therefore its probably best that you follow these general guidelines until your comfortable giving out constructive criticism. Bear in mind that provided you remain civil and polite, its not rude to provide input beyond "I like/don't like it."
With that out of the way, I see no reason to delay further! So it's straight to brass tacks, as I, the oh so formulaic Dr. (_____), present to you part 2 of my modest discourse on the nature of constructive criticism!
Paging Dr. (_____): Constructive Criticism Part 2: How to be a Constructive Critic.
There are two parts to creating a work of art. The first is the artist's raw creativity, their so called muse. Without this, an artist lacks the raw vision to produce anything remarkable. The second, and far less glamorous part, is the artists grasp of proper technique. An artist can have a wondrous, beautiful creative vision, but without proper technique, all you'll get is a visionary mess.
Obviously you can't instill inspiration into an artist, they have to find it themselves. Fortunately however, and this is where constructive criticism comes in, you can instill proper technique into an artist, through instruction and honest feedback. As we've previously gone over why the honest part is so vital, we won't go into that again. So instead it becomes necessary to examine how to best deliver an honest critique.
First off, here's a good example of what not to do, both as the one giving and the one receiving criticism, courtesy of The Muppet Show's Statler & Waldorf. Even if you know who or what I'm referring to, please watch the linked video anyway so it's fresh in your mind. While the linked video is obviously a comedic sketch, it's still a good place to start when discussing what not to do as a critic.
First off, while certainly honest, this is a horrible way to deliver criticism. It's antagonistic, disruptive, and annoying. But above all it gives no actual advice on what could be better, or any genuine suggestions for improvement, and this last bit is what separates constructive criticism from pointless negativity and abuse.
While the first three points do not necessarily disqualify one from being a constructive critic, they make it very likely that their advice will go unheeded. Therefore a bit of tact and diplomacy is called for. Otherwise, even if you have some genuine useful advice to contribute, you still sound like a heckler. You'll have alienated the artist, and your advice will probably be ignored.
That is not to say that you should sugar coat things, that's where the whole "don't say anything negative" problems comes from. You need to remain as honest as possible, but you also need to be able to do so without making an antagonistic ass out of yourself. After all, you're there to try and help.
Therefore its probably best that you follow these general guidelines until your comfortable giving out constructive criticism. Bear in mind that provided you remain civil and polite, its not rude to provide input beyond "I like/don't like it."
- Be diplomatic. You will not go far by saying "It sucks" or something abusive like that.
Start with the honest admission that you feel there are some issues with the piece you'd like to discuss, and then go from there. Be civil, be polite, but be honest. - Go over technical issues first, if there are any. This is where things are clear cut and "easy" as a problem with anatomy, lighting/shading, whatever, is still a problem regardless of the artist or critics tastes in art. Point out specifics and provide solutions to the best of your knowledge and ability.
- Having gone over the technical issues, you are now free to express things beyond facts about proper technique, such as your thoughts about the content of the piece. It would be to the artists benefit to hear what goes over well with his audience and what doesn't, but unlike technical issues, this stuff is subjective.
For example: In a comic, you feel the big chase scene would be improved by cutting back on the rampant explosions. This is your opinion, and even if your point is valid this is a matter of taste, not proper technique. You may discus these matters of taste and offer advice, but you must also admit that you are now expressing your own humble opinion, whereas before you were expressing facts about proper technique. - Throughout the process of giving advice, hear the artist out. There must be an actual discussion between the critic and the artist, not merely talking at one other. Improper technique is one thing, and there's not too much an artist can use to justify it. But subjective matters, such as the example given in #3, are a different matter. If the artist can defend his decision to include rampant explosions in the chase scene, this is their artistic vision and you need to be respectful and listen, even if you don't necessarily agree
Next time you have the opportunity to provide constructive criticism, don't shy away from doing so! Just keep these 4 guidelines in mind and things should go just fine, and you'll be helping the artist develop. It's good for them, provided you're honest as well as nice.
And with that gem I end my little essay on giving constructive criticism. Later I shall write up a bit on how to take it, but for now this seems like a good place to leave off. So until next time I, the triumphantly helpful Dr. (_____), bid you adieu!
And with that gem I end my little essay on giving constructive criticism. Later I shall write up a bit on how to take it, but for now this seems like a good place to leave off. So until next time I, the triumphantly helpful Dr. (_____), bid you adieu!
No comments:
Post a Comment