Posted by Jon Conkey
As an artist who has spent most of his employed life in the arts, (in many diverse fields), I have had to humble myself to criticism many times for shear lack of credentials. At first, this was very uncomfortable to bear, I hadn’t known the gift of honest opinion, insecurity of the “self”, (my own), always stepped in and “botched it” for me, (like a reflex). After-all, how dare someone tell me “what they really think”: Right! I have since learned from my folly, and furthermore, now cherish the “morsels of truth” that others seemingly can’t hold back from sharing with me from time to time.
As an art student, I loved my teacher, (platonically: get those thoughts out of your head!)), he was a master artist, he could draw and paint better than real, and he approached us all as equals, as well as, a friend. I always tried to do exactly what he instructed of me, and I progressed rapidly. Yet some others in the class did not.
I could see the “wince” on other students faces as he approached with his conte’ crayon to make the “needed” adjustments to their masterpieces. It was at this time that I was first introduced to the art of remaining humble, while completely “under-fire”. Though students paid their “teacher” to teach them how to “draw and paint”, they resisted his instruction every step of the way. They knew there were problems with their work, (and they could not figure it out without help), but they also knew what it was they were trying to achieve; (their perfect vision). It was this discrepancy that led to their resistance; they knew they were wrong, but they knew no one could possibly know what they “really meant to do”, ( hence, get your conte’ off my masterpiece).
Learning to accept criticism is the key to finding those missing “links” for an artist. In this day and age of “political correctness”, one need not look far to see shallow compliments and a true lack of substance in criticisms on most “art blogs”. If you like something about someone’s art, why not tell them precisely what it is that you actually like about it. If the need to “enlighten” someone to some obvious flaws crosses your mind, it helps to point out the good things first, (the more the better). This way, when you get to the “knitty gritty”, they will still be glowing from the “accolade preamble”.
As an artist who wishes to be great, (because I am too weak in the mind to know better, and I could really use the esteem, money, fame, yacht, etc.), I embrace those brave enough to let it all hang out, (I am referring of course to opinions, and not the “models”!). One may indeed get to a point in life, where continuous failure in one direction may lead to the possibility that someone else’s opinion may in fact tell them what they already know, (they are really crummy!). Now, what to do with this valuable information! Well, by listening to “others” or “them”, an amazing thing happens, we become aware of what our efforts are actually communicating to those “others”. From this, we can “adjust” our work to get the result we are looking for; then we can use the same system again: “what do you think of this piece?” By gaining continuous feedback, we see directly what others are seeing of our vision, and what adjustments may bring the desired results to the viewer. It is important to note however, one need not act on every comment offered, (nor break down and cry either), some critiques will miss the point completely, others will hit you “like a ton of bricks”, and still others, will show you how ignorant some folks can truly be, (try not to hurt these people). Either way, by accepting criticism (at face value), and not resisting it, (which is the natural tendency), one learns to “see” through the eyes of other’s, (taking the good, and rejecting the bad). Using this “humility tool” to read the accuracy of one’s attempt to communicate their conception to the public, opens many doors which would otherwise remain closed. Also important to remember, is that you are the one in charge of your creation, everything else is just a “suggestion” based on what you have offered for evaluation. As the artist, you are the creator of your image, no one knows but you what it is you are trying to say. Take the input of others to make your statement exactly what you want it to say, using “them” as the “tool” to let you know when you are truly achieving your goals. An old saying from Jesus, “practice who you say “I am”, until others say “you are”. Cheers
While I don’t disagree with Jon’s comments, I find his basic assumption about the position of the artist doesn’t seem to fit me very well. I don’t usually have a “perfect vision” of what I’m trying to achieve. And while it’s ultimately true that no one knows but me what it is I am trying to say, it’s also often the case that I don’t exactly know myself. The main function of criticism for me is to help me come to a better understanding of what I am doing, of what I care about and of my relationship with the world. The best thing is when people see things in my work that I wasn’t consciously aware of before, but that make a lot of sense to me. My level of consciousness is raised, and I have an enriched way of seeing things from then on. It’s actually pretty self-centered, more for my own growth than to please people or communicate with them better. I don’t mind if the latter happens as well, but it’s somewhat beside the point. (I guess you can tell I’m not supporting myself from my art!)
Steve,
I think you give a wonderful description of the creative process. As for selling one’s work, I think we should learn to think of this as just another technical problem like stretching the canvas or cleaning the brushes. Or maybe also a creative problem like designing a composition. In any case, selling has got to be brought into the process in a seamless way — for the professional artist, that is. We are not sure if we ever want to use Art & Perception as a place to sell artwork, but we chose the .com extension to remind ourselves of the importance of economics.
Hmm.
There is teaching criticism – something along the lines of: ‘you seem to be trying to achieve x. If that is so, you might be better off using a different red/getting the colour balance right/taking classes in perspective/etc’.
And then there is the rest. What you can tell me about my artwork is what you feel about it. You can’t tell me how I feel about it or how to make it better. You can’t tell me whether I have met my objective, or even whether I had an objective.
I am interested in your opinion, nonetheless, because, as Steve says, you might see something that I didn’t. Your interpretation might interact with my interpretation to help me create something new another time.
Your reaction may also help me establish whether a work is saleable or not.
If anybody feels that they have to comment on my artwork in a specific way then there is almost no point in them commenting, because I’m not getting the truth. It is being filtered by social convention, and I’m pretty good at predicting what the conventional response to any given piece will be.
Colin
Colin,
You wrote: “If anybody feels that they have to comment on my artwork in a specific way then there is almost no point in them commenting…”
Could you be more specific about what you mean “comment on my artwork in a specific way”? You are drawing a kind of boundary here, but I do not know where the boundary is. Your comment reflects a certain disappointment in discourse about art. I would like to understand you better. I feel there is something important that I am missing.
Karl,
I was reacting to the same thing that you were reacting to when you said “I disagree that one must preface criticism with praise”.
There is no “must” in my view. If somebody feels that they must say something, then they are not saying what they really think or feel.
There are so many conventions in photography criticism (or more correctly speaking, commenting on photos on the web) that it drives me nuts. There a number of parodies on the web – I’ll look one out for you.
My point being that I want to know what the commenter feels about the art, not what the commenter thinks that they ought to feel, nor what the commenter thinks is acceptable for them to feel. And certainly not what the “expert” at the commenter’s camera club might feel.
On a wider point (blog post thought alert), as soon as the words ‘should’, ‘ought’ or ‘must’ enter into any discussion about art then it is time to pack up and go. Art works best in a world without any oughts.
Colin
Karl, I agree with you, pointing out something “good” might be called “praise” (I didn’t use that word, or “must”, “ought”, “should”, for that matter), but if there is no time for anything good to be mentioned, “forget it”, get right to the punch of what is bad. Even though, in my experience as an artist, I can judge a fine art critic by what they see as “good” in my attempts, as well as the “bad”. Also, this post is “long-winded”, and I apologize for that, as well as for the italics, and grey fonts.
Steve, you say you “don’t usually have a clear vision of what you are trying to achieve”. How would you feel if someone only saw the “bad” in your work and nothing “good” for fear of praise. Since you said yourself, “your level of conscience may be raised” from the input of others, I am curious how your work will look when all you hear is of what is wrong. If Karl is right, you will only hear what folks do not like. because time is limited: and you will have no idea of what might be right in your efforts.
Colin, I think I agree with you: if you are saying you just want to hear what other’s have to say about your work; good or bad. As only “you” really know what it is you are trying to achieve, the input is for you only.
Jon,
Sort of. Or at least, yes, if you drop the phrase ‘good or bad’. Those words imply an objective standard, and I doubt anybody here would argue that there was one of those.
Colin
Colin, You have a true philosophical nature it seems, Buddah said there is no “good or bad”, there just is! We make such “events” so with our inputs and opinions. Besides, “good” comes out of bad, and “bad” comes out of good.
Karl, In regards to the too many words…”A writer who breeds more words than he needs, makes it a chore for the reader who reads”. Your point, and others are well taken. live and learn!
This post has been removed by the author.
Perhaps this is my usual hyper-sensitivity to nuances of writing, but it strikes me that you’re trying to have it two ways, to take both a hard position and a soft one.
You open your essay with a glowing description of a rigorously strict teacher, one, dedicated to correcting every minute error made by students. Furthermore, you make several comments like this one: “Either way, by accepting criticism (at face value), and not resisting it, (which is the natural tendency), one learns to “see” through the eyes of other’s”. The model seems to be that comments from a (presumed) superior are the final word.
However, you also make comments claiming that that criticisms are only “suggestions” and that artists “need not act on every comment offered”.
(I realize that the an artist considered “already educated”–which is to say is mature, professional– is customarily shielded from the kind of point by point criticism offered by your teacher. This can be good or bad.)
My own understanding (which I’m beginning to suspect is insufficient) more closely resembles the second view that I’ve extracted from your comment. Criticism–and not just that of the arts (writing is another example)–is an kind of mutual dialogue. You criticize me, I criticize your criticism, you criticize my criticism of your criticism, and so on until its time to go home, or out for lunch. This model reflects my own art education, and it also reflects what goes on in many art blogs.
I don’t want to abandon this view entirely, but it needs some kind of fortification. For one thing, not everyone is an equal in every regard; someway of acknowledging authority is often lacking. Probably the biggest problem is knowing when to shut up and get back to artmaking (or your day job).
On a different (although related, if you think about a little) subject, I note that my web activity has been oddly split. Most of my ideas and reasoning have been on other people’s blogs, most notably this one. All mention of actual works of art, and all enthusiasm for actual works has been on my own blog. This must be disorienting for people who read both. While some segregation of purpose seems healthy, I see that this is getting a bit scary. My comments here are getting awfully rococo, while my blog is suffering, as Jon said, from “a lack of substance in criticisms”.
I’m travelling for the better part of next week, so I’ll be mostly off the Internet.
Hi Jon,
I saw this post in my email read yesterday,and I wanted to comment right then, but once again, my busy life made it hard to do. Sorry. So once again I’m catching a thread after a string of comments.
First, I read Karl’s first comment several times. At first, I so strongly disagreed that I wrote a whole bunch of stuff in refutation, but then I re-read it and realized that Karl was talking about how insincere praise, mere social fluff, interferes with a critique. I think of the kind of gushy, “Oh I just Loooove your work” that goes on in say, deviantArt. These people are engaged in massive link exchange charades. It’s pretty disgusting.
That said, I DON’T agree that it is not necessary to praise; in fact, if someone has only negative things to say about anyone’s work, I will tend to discount that person as a critic. If that person is consistently negative, I will be inclined to consider that person possibly crazy and certainly — insufficiently socialized to be taken seriously.
In every piece there is good and bad, better and worse, correct and incorrect. Telling people what one really thinks means telling the whole truth.
Mere audiences look at a piece, go to a show, listen to music, whatever and are capable of only binary logic. It is either good OR bad. They say, “I like it,” or “I don’t like it.” While such information is not utterly useless, it is certainly unprofessional. Pros see the whole thing. They can take a piece apart and examine elements individually. they have a very good idea — at least &mdash how the work was done.
It is absolutely imperative to praise where praise is due. There has never been a work of art or attempted work of art since the dawn of the universe that does not have something good in it. The good is not always obvious. Talking about the excellent elements of a work is just as important as talking about the weaker aspects. Possibly, appreciating the fine parts is more useful to the artist than talking about the ineffective facets.
I for one consider the opinion of someone who loves me several million orders of magnitude senior to the opinion of someone who hates me.
On this website, I’ve seen two paintings offered for critique. The first was Jon’s and the second was Hanekke’s. Both paintings were each splendid in their own ways. I would not have said so if I didn’t think it. When I really loathe a piece I’m just as delighted to throw thunderbolts.
(And still notice something good in it)
Arthur,
You make good points, and you are a pro. Perhaps I do want it both ways: I would like to take the hard position (state the facts honestly), but say it in a softer “smoother” way, in the hopes it will have more power to the person being criticized. I do believe one can be “frank” without “throwing the baby out with the bath water”, as the saying goes.
In regards to the teacher/student relationship, it is this authors opinion that a “student” must at some point surrender themselves to being taught, if a student questions comments directed at their work, that is fine (that is how we learn). However, they may not understand the hidden steps that will lead to their success as the teacher does. It is true, some students may prefer to test themselves against their teacher’s authority, as I have also seen–but those students,(regardless of their previous experience in art), generally result in a poor student ethic, and those particualr types of students both pro/am generally progress slowly or do not progress at all,(outside of what they already know). Even if they are top-selling artists, which some were.
Lastly, if Monet were to study with Vermeer(for example), he would probably be there to learn the techniques of Vermeer. For Monet to expect Vermeer to teach in his genre would be unreasonable. My point being, that one should learn all they can from their teachers,(choose the teacher whose work they like; if possible), question if you must, but humbling oneself to learning will speed their own work, understanding, and over-all knowledge much faster than by challenging, commenting, and resisting every step of the way.
This whole post was nothing more than my attempt to say…”one should take all they can from the comments of others, consider how it applies to what they are doing, and be thankful they are willing to share anything at all with them”. By absorbing the knowledge of other’s insights, one may in fact discover many latent secrets they might not have been aware of.
Most folks in general have a hard time being criticized,(they become defensive); hence the title, “Learning to Accept Criticism: without hurting someone”…ie: “lashing out in anger at the one doing the criticizing.
Hi Rex, You got my meaning perfectly correct. Hopefully, your words may lend some light to other commentors of what I was trying to get out, and bring some clarifaction relief to me.
Ironically, I agree with everyone’s comments here, fake praise benefits no one,(yet there must be some good in all things), I do feel some of what I wrote was a little unclear, or could be taken in more than one way. Thanks for your clarifying insights. I couldn’t agree with you more about what is going on out there on many cyber sites.
I recently had a teacher criticizing my work really badly in class… it was in my group tutorial and she just ripped it off pretty nasty with words. I had to defend myself politely but she didn’t even give me ONE chance…
Ok, she mentioned about her own art, abstract, and how she applied colour etc but she didn’t say anything positive about mine at all… I felt totally backed and empowered by this above 40s woman who had no effort or intention to sympathise with me…In the end I almost felt like I couldn’t paint… even though everyone (colleagues) liked my work…
I wonder why she did that. Sincerity or insecurity?
I remember when I worked in an office and feedback had to be given to the employees. If things were not looking good we had to start with positive comments and then go to the negative ones otherwise the company wouldn’t have staff left. It’s common sense!
One interesting aspect of giving/receiving criticism I haven’t seen mentioned is the degree of trust that’s needed.
Let me expand a bit. For 8 years, I was a member of ‘The Monday Night Group’, discussed in a fair bit of detail in this essay, and in the Monday Night Manifesto. That group was an essential part of my art process; the feedback I got was invaluable.
Over the past year, the amazing enviroment of trust and respect that had built up over the preceding 7 years, though, got eroded by constant political ranting. Eventually, I realized that rather than looking forward to the meetings, I was not only dreading them, but discounting the feedback I was getting because I just felt like people were mixing their political feelings in with the feedback. I dropped out. I’m not happy that I have no similar place to turn, but it has been an object lesson about the importance of trust and respect in the relationship between the artist and critic.
On a different theme, it’s often a help to have a response prepared for those situations when someone (often a complete stranger) gives you criticism you feel is mean spirited. The one I use is “Thanks very much for sharing your opinion with me. I always take into consideration who is giving me feedback, and I assure you I always give feedback exactly the importance it deserves”.
Angela, I could not have said it any better than that! Your experience is my own, and I love the work place analogy. Why should we have any less courtesy towards individuals in an art class, than we would display in a real world environment; like where we work. It has everything to do with getting the message across, but not damaging the good that we already have in place.
Angela,
I said that mixing praise and criticism is appropriate for in-person discussion of art. My point is that on the INTERNET, it is difficult to say “I love this picture” without making yourself and everyone else ill. There is nothing wrong with the statement, but on the web, it is next to meaningless. You can type that with your eyes closed.
I often go to sites and think of leaving critical comments, but I look at the other comments and I feel that criticism might not be welcome — it certainly would not fit in with the other comments. So I just go away.
If you go to a web site and write a one-liner like “I love your work,” you may have good intentions, but all you really do is reduce the chance for meaningful discussion. That may sound harsh, but I think it is true.
Recently I did jump in and make somewhat critical comments on a site. What I found is that the process of writing helped me look at the work better. For the record, I did precede my criticism with some praise, but otherwise my comment would have made no sense. The point is, by just sending the smiley face in a comment, you cheat yourself as well as the artist.
Rex has written some wonderful comments of praise on this blog recently, as have others. This is very different, because they explain why they like something. Reading the comments here lately has been something magical to me, because the comments are emphasizing aspects of the work and they help me see it better. And the same holds for their criticism.
But if Rex only had time for a quick critical comment, I’d rather get that than nothing. That is all I am saying.
Of course, it’s easy to say this when I’m not showing much of my own work around here . . .
That will change soon.
Paul,
I once got this comment in a discussion online:
“I just checked out your site, and I must admit that (at least on the basis
of the images presented) the work looks rather poor. Maybe it’s just the
jpegs; but out of curiosity, are your works hand done from the ground up
(right from the drawing stage), or are they more mechanically oriented – for
example through the use of oil-lithography – with hand finishing? And could
you expand a bit on your claim they are ‘museum-quality’ ?”
I felt upset and confused. After a lot of thinking, I responded with:
“Could you be more specific about which images you want me to comment on?”
It turns out the person was not referring to me at all, but to an art-sales link someone had inserted in an earlier comment.
Which is to say, non-confrontational responses to criticism from strangers is a good approach, I agree.
Hi Paul,
First, I want to say what a deep affect your photographs have on me. Achieving your level of skill with a camera in knowing what to capture, when, and how, is astounding. Beautiful scenes, great eye for finding them, it is a wonderful gift you have.
It appears “familiarity really does breed contempt”, as what seems to have happened to “The Monday Night Group”. The importance of what you gained before this turn of events, is the whole point of this post.
Your concept of the “artist/critic-trust” is a great one. It seems this trust could easily be found by having both a mutual interest in the same thing, truly wanting to help someone, and being mindful of personal integrity,(as opposed to political). To me, “trust” is the letting go of “defensiveness”, if we feel threatened, or become defensive, our trust is going south; and quick. On very subtle levels, we all recognize a personal attack from a well thought critique: this is why I say delivery is everything.
Lastly, if one cannot take “ten paces, then turn and fire”, I think your suggestion of having a response prepared,(for those rare times),is a fantastic one; and clever. Thanks for sharing your story and the insights you have gained from “The Monday Night Group”, losing an artist of your caliper makes their loss a “BIG” one.
Karl,
I think we are all in agreement that “trite”, “banal” comments on blogs are worthless and plentiful, most folks could never bare the truth anyway: and probably don’t care. It seems that the point being made is how to approach criticism better, (the trust idea was great), anything to make folks more comfortable with having their work critiqued in the first place, and making the experience worthy, truthful, and to the point.
In regards to blogs and websites on the internet, an offer in their comments section to have their work critiqued here on A&P would be one solve; that way, they are asking for it.
In regards to Paul’s site, he must have close to 100 images to view, I thought they were exceptional images. I was amazed at his consistant “style”, he seems to capture what landscape/ portrait painters try to paint. In fact, I can’t think of anyone who understands “atmospheric light” compositions quite like he does; except maybe painters.
True, I have no idea of how he produces those images, if they are prints, lithos, etc., perhaps that is what you are referring to. But on an image basis alone, there is quite a consistancy to his approach. I would like to know more of what you think and why. True, I am looking at his images alone, they would all make great paintings straight fom the photograph. Strong compositions, great lighting, mood, I could go on and on.
It is amazing to see this thread go on like this, it seems very rich to me.
After all that gallery rejections, teachers bad critics and no recognition whatsoever of hard working attempts to make significant art, I must say Yes I am insecure, Yes I am in need of TLC and Yes I feel totally lost!!! So… when I get to seat down in the evening reading my cheesy comments: “I looove your work”…. genuine or not, THANKS GOD for that, because I almost stop believing in myself and that makes me feel so much better and have the strength to pick up a paintbrush the following morning…
Angela,
Your work is original, peaceful, calming, and sensitive. Do not despair! You are experiencing what some of the world’s finest artists have had to deal with (Gauguin, you will never amount to anything). Know this, you love art, you are good at it, you are passionate, smart, and you are in very good company! The right eyes will find your work, it just takes time.
About the comments issue, I was referring more about actual critiques and less about visitor comments left on a blog, (like the one I left on yours). You are certainly not alone in your feelings, (I love the nice comments on my blog as well; and they do help me), but sometimes I need to have more depth offered to me about my work, (it is not always easy to hear, and Paul offered some fine advice). Galleries have many reasons for rejecting new artists,(mostly because they are having a tough time with what they already have in inventory, they want to see your work over time, it is a big step for a gallery to take on new work, and very costly for them). I get gallery rejections all the time, (as a gallery manager for years), the truth is that many fine talented artists get rejected daily. In fact, I still have no gallery, need one desperately, and still can’t get a break.
As far as depressing goes, think about this… I have been an artist truly since I was four years old. I have tried to apply myself at jobs that used my art skills since I was 13 years old. However, folks did not like my “personal” work, but they knew I could do the work they had in mind. After schleping for others in the arts for over 20 years, I broke off to do what I knew I was good at, (hoping all those I had helped, would in turn help me), not so. I promptly watched all the doors close around me like I had died. Now, it is like I have fallen from the sky, and have to prove myself all over again; with no college credentials, no galleries, no past,(that applies to oil painting exclusively), no money, and really no one there to help me. With half a lifetime invested in my art, nice comments everywhere, I too am still looking for my break. Do not lose faith! I have seen it happen for others a hundred times, it takes time to be recognized, but there are those who are looking, they will eventually find you and your work. It would be a tragedy if you just gave up; really!
Jon,
I’ve been thinking about my last comment. I think that in the kind of setting we have here, simple statements of praise might be fine. I’m conflicted. I say this because I realize I have been writing short positive comments myself, and it feels okay. For example, I just love Hanneke van den Bergh’s bronzes. So I admit to being a hypocrite. Clearly, other people’s positive comments that were more specific about the sculpture are much more interesting than mine. On the other hand, it was interesting that there were no criticisms of the sculpture at all. That suggests to me that the praise set the wrong tone for constructive discussion.
Jon-
You write: In regards to Paul’s site, he must have close to 100 images to view, I thought they were exceptional images. I was amazed at his consistant “style”, he seems to capture what landscape/ portrait painters try to paint. In fact, I can’t think of anyone who understands “atmospheric light” compositions quite like he does; except maybe painters.
True, I have no idea of how he produces those images, if they are prints, lithos, etc., perhaps that is what you are referring to. But on an image basis alone, there is quite a consistancy to his approach.
Thank you, these are very flattering comments. But it sounds like you’re responding to something Karl’s written about my site or my work, and maybe I’m not tracking well this morning but I can’t find it. Am I confused?
In response, I’ll just point out that there must be something like 200 odd photographs on my web site, some of them scans from film and some of them direct digital capture. I have gelatin-silver prints of older stuff done on film but for the 2 years all my printing has been done digitally on a big 44″ inkjet printer.