It has been brought to my attention that there are some bad critiques, whether intentional or unintentional, out there on the internet. Upon hearing that, I thought I would take the time to share what I know about the evaluation process, and how to objectively critique pretty much anything. By tapping into what I learned in my three years on stage in high school Theatre, I can try to show better ways of analyzing and evaluating any kind of works. For the sake of continuity, I will use the term artist to refer to the person receiving feedback in this article. Since I am writing this to be more of an art evaluation guide, I think that makes the most sense. Now, by no means am I an absolute authority, I make no such claims here. What I am providing are merely tools for people who are serious about communicating in an objective manner how they see a piec of art.
Before I get into the heart of the matter, I have to define a few things. Understanding these things is the key to understanding the difference between a good evaluation, and a bad one.
- 1) Criticism:
- Negative feedback without sound reasoning or clarity, not a good thing.
- 2) Crowing:
- Positive feedback without sound reasoning or clarity, also not a good thing.
- 3) Critique:
- Feedback provided with specific information regarding both good and bad aspects, the better way to evaluate.
Why is there a difference between criticism and critique? And why is it it a bad thing to just tell someone their picture is good? Those are questions I intend to answer. Let's begin by taking a look at Crowing. Now, I'm sure some of you out there are confused about this point. I can hear the questions of "How can positive feedback about something ever a bad thing?" and "Doesn't positive feedback of any kind help encourage the artist?" Well, to answer the second question first, yes it does encourage the artist to get good feedback, but the answer to the first question is more important. Positive feedback is a bad thing when it doesn't tell an artist what he has done well. Just telling an artist that "I like your work, it's really great," or things to that affect may help keep the artist creating, but it will not help improve the works that are created. I hate to admit it, but I'm guilty of crowing myself, just saying that a piece of art is good without really explaining why I think so.
The difference between Criticism and Critique is very simple. When someone is criticising a piece of art, he or she is usually doing so to insult, degrade, or offend the artist. Most often people criticise for the enjoyment of hurting someone else, that goes beyond wrong in my book. Telling a person who spent hours on a picture "this picture stinks" isn't going to help make the artist do better. I've also seen a lot of bashing on fanart sites, especially so when it comes to the artwork of anim#&233; couples. People who don't agree with an artist's choice of two characters together can be viciously mean to the artist, and they tend to have their friends gang up and ridicule that artist as well with no legitimate reason at all for doing so. Being boorish in that manner only hurts feelings and makes the critics look like the spoiled little children they are. So, how does a person tell an artist that he needs work? Well, that's simple, using a basic critique, anyone can provide an artist with the necessary information to improve the artwork, and not offend in the process.
A basic critique is several things. It starts with a series of a few simple questions you ask yourself when you evaluate artwork. Every time you look at a piece of artwork, you are evaluating it in your mind, and many of you already ask yourself the questions, but just aren't aware of doing it. It's often better to ask a few things to deterime if you can evaluate a piece of art, for example:
- What is the subject of the art?
- Do I agree with the depiction of the subject?
- Can I objectively evaluate this work regardless of my feelings toward what is depicted?
After determining your bias by asking yourself the above questions, you will be ready to evaluate the artwork. If the subject is something you do not agree with, or the depiction of the subject is something you do not agree with, you may choose not to evaluate the picture. But it is still possible to objectively evaluate a piece of art. you just have to be open minded. Separate yourself from your opinions on the depiction of the subject and look at it through the eyes of someone who has never seen the subject before. A person who hasn't seen Naruto, or InuYasha, for example, isn't going to know which characters have crushes on which other characters, and so any parings that do not bring those characters together would not seem strange or unnatural. Once the bias is removed, then some technical questions about a piece of art can be asked:
- What is the mood of the artwork?
- What is the artist trying to communicate with the artwork?
- Is the artwork meant to be a humorous spoof, or a serious piece?
- How does the artwork make me feel?
- What did the artist do well in this artwork?
- What could the artist have done better? (where does the artist need to improve?)
Most of those questions are self explanatory, but I'll go over them anyway. The mood of an artwork basically is what the atmosphere is. Is that picture dark, ominous, angry, cheerful, or sad? Sometimes it's not clear what an artist is trying to communicate, and some artists, like myself, won't give a straight answer if we were asked that question directly, but generally that's something that can be figured out. An artist could be communicating a feeling, trying to capture a moment, or even hinting at their own beliefs through their art. Taking a good look at artwork can often reveal some interesting things, but keep in mind the answer to the second question is usually subjective, meaning no two people will answer it the same way.
Okay, parody art could be (in terms of art on TheOtaku.com) Chibis, some of those comic/manga pages, or even stuff that puts a character into a situation that wouldn't likely come up in the animé, manga, or game the character was borrowed from. Parody art is not meant to be taken seriously by any stretch of the imagination, it is meant in fun, and should not be analyzed as a serious representation of the character's personality. How artwork makes a person feel, well, that's subjective too, no two people will answer that one exactly the same way either. Always, always always look for something in a piece of art that is done well, nobody is perfect, but everyone does do something good in their art, even if the entire piece isn't done all that well. And finally most artists do have areas they need to improve, but some of them don't see it with their own eyes. Deterimining an area of needed improvement is also good for an objective evaluation.
After those questions are answered, a basic critique puts the infomation together and presents it to the artist in a civil, polite manner. The best critiques start off by addressing that positive portion of the art before anything else. An artist is less likely to read through an evaluation if it starts out on a bad note. Compliment what the artist did well, explain why you thought that particular portion of the art was well done, then transition into the area(s) where you feel improvement is needed. Explain why you feel that way, and if you know of some resources to help the artist, providing those is a good idea.
I hope those tips are useful in your efforts to evaluate artwork with objectivity. If you need more specific information, or a real world example, please contact me here and I will try my best to explain or demonstrate any points of this article. Animé dreams, and happy evaluating.
