The importance of critics and criticism"

[Sergio Villa]

I would like to start a discussion on the importance of the critique, constructive critique that is, on the process of improving our skills, technique and esthetics of our turnings. In fact I believe that critiques is always very important and even essential in this process. Without critique one has the tendency to sit on his own autistic convictions and believs and isolate himself from the rest of the world.

For me a critique is more about myself than others since to be effective, i.e. to be able to improve my skills, a critique must be metabolized and transformed in something I believe in.
In fact critics can be very personal and look at things through their personal eyes that can be fallacious. In the end I'm the only person that can decide if to accept or not a criticism. Meaning if to make it my own and incorporate it in my work but without criticism and accepting the risk is to become blister full of hot air.

While I believe in good teachers, I do not believe in gurus, since gurus are more the products of others then themselves.

Furthermore I want to emphasize the often elusive difference between technique, virtuosism if you prefer, and real beauty. The first tends to sit on his own while the second is a continuous evolving process that falls back into virtuosism and then mediocrity if not helped by criticism. Unless you are a Modigliani which is...impossible.

 

[Odie]

While I believe in good teachers, I do not believe in gurus, since gurus are more the products of others then themselves.

Hi Sergio.....

Now here is a statement worth examination.

Wouldn't a "good teacher" sometimes be a creation of other viewpoints? .....at least in the sense that some who teach have a reputation as terrific, favorable, mediocre, or not worthy. Whether that reputation is valid, or not.....would be the conclusion of any one individual, and not the group, as a whole. Can a group have the personality of an individual assessment?

We definitely have gurus within the woodturning community. There might be some worthy of that label, and some not so much........ Isn't the suggestion of being a "guru" more having to do with a following of supporters, than something (if not for a better term) spiritual, or majestic? I can think of some woodturning gurus that are no better at what they do, than many other lesser known, or unknown turners.

ooc

 

[Breck Whitworth]

"I would like to start a discussion on the importance of the critique, constructive critique that is, on the process of improving our skills, technique and aesthetics of our turnings." quote

Sergio, I agree completely that honest constructive critique of our work is essential to reaching our fullest potential. I think it could be a wonderful theme to look into. As long as most people understand the constructive aspect and not as a platform to impress everyone as to how much they know about everything. Long winded self serving answers profit no one, but honest advice even if hard to hear can be an exceptional inspiration to someone who truly wants to get better.
Like you said it is up to the artist to ultimately decide if the advice is worthy of acceptance and then applying. If a wood turner has a sensitive spirit and can't take anything negative to their way of thinking about their work then they should not submit their work to be critiqued in the first place. Just my two cents

 

[Odie]

"I would like to start a discussion on the importance of the critique, constructive critique that is, on the process of improving our skills, technique and aesthetics of our turnings." quote

Sergio, I agree completely that honest constructive critique of our work is essential to reaching our fullest potential. I think it could be a wonderful theme to look into. As long as most people understand the constructive aspect and not as a platform to impress everyone as to how much they know about everything. Long winded self serving answers profit no one, but honest advice even if hard to hear can be an exceptional inspiration to someone who truly wants to get better.
Like you said it is up to the artist to ultimately decide if the advice is worthy of acceptance and then applying. If a wood turner has a sensitive spirit and can't take anything negative to their way of thinking about their work then they should not submit their work to be critiqued in the first place. Just my two cents

Breck, you are one who has specifically asked for critiques, and have gotten some. This is the ONLY time when a critique is appropriate. Giving a critique is especially difficult, because it's one opinion. It's easy to accentuate strong points, and much more difficult to critique weak points. You have such natural ability for creativeness and style, that I'm pretty sure you have a good idea of how to see your own work, and have an ability to self-evaluate. Not everyone is the same, but you have been progressing so incredibly fast, that it's obvious you have some natural ability to solve your own problems.....

ooc

 

[john lucas]

At the school where I worked the art students regularly have critic sessions. I think these are wonderful and wish I had a way to set that up at the local level among fellow artists. Critic's don't have to be done by the teachers and guru's although they usually have a lot of experience and bring that to the table. Typically when we post a piece of work we get a lot of Atta boys and not many honest critics. That little reverse curve we put on the bottom of a bowl and we thought was so cool might not go over well at all in an honest critic.
The public is an honest critic only to a point. They either buy something or they don't and you don't usually know why. Design or wood choice may or may not be the factor. Price, is it a good day,bad day, did they not feel comfortable in the artists's booth etc. So you taylor your work to what sells but you really don't know why. A good honest critic from fellow artist who study design and try to fine tune their own work is a very valuable thing.
I think we should do here what they do on the WOW forum. Whenever you post a photo you write critics welcome. Some people can't handle an honest critic and there are a lot of different opinions out there, some valid an some not so if you don't write critics welcome then atta boys are fine but telling someone you don't like the way it curves is a no no. We do want to stay friendly here. However if you write Critic's welcome then it's fair game and you have to have the thick skin to take the occasional abuse for the one or two who don't think like the rest of the crowd. Of course critics can be done in a positive note to be helpful or they can be somewhat nasty so I ask that we try to be helpful in our comments and write them so it doesn't purposely hurt someone.
What I like about using other artists in the critic process is we all have different back grounds and came from different schools of thought as well as what we learned from our teachers. So I think you get a much more relevent critic from outside our medium. I look back to training as a photographer. We have little control over the shape of things we photograph so we have to use the tools that painters have used for centuries. You have to learn where and how your eye flows through a scene. How circular patterns, triangles, or straight lines make your eye move. Break a vessel shape down into these shapes to see how your eye flows around the piece and you get a much better idea of why one shape works and one doesn't
So in short I think critic is a wonderful thing, given by anyone, but when given by a fellow artist to me anyway has more value.

 

[hockenbery]

Critiques and other feedback have given me a look at my work through others eyes which has helped me refine my view of my work.
I have benefited from informal critiques from friends, juror critiques given after the selections of a Juried shows I entered, instructor critiques, and to a lesser extent from club show and tells. I also learn a lot from instant gallery critiques of others work that I can use or avoid in my work.

One resource open to those who bring work to the AAW instant gallery is intimate critique. Participant sign up and bring their work the the critique sessions organized by categories. A successful turner conduct the critique in a non-threatening environment. This is special service by the POP COMITTEE.

We all have the opportunity to give critiques. When I do formal critiques at regional symposiums, judge the Florida state fair, or at a club meeting or informal critiques in a class, an AAW intimate critique, or one on one. I try to be encouraging, honest, and helpful.
Foremost I try to keep in mind that the pieces we critique are often the best work the maker has done to date.

I approach looking at piece as a
The whole. -the form, interaction of elements, balance, the first look impression
Then look at details – curves, lines, balance, tearout, sanding marks, finish, finish surface...

When doing the critique I first like to say that these are my opinions. Then I discus positives about the piece. I then point out distractions, things easily corrected regardless of skill level ( an area that was not sanded well, sanding marks, draglines in the finish..) then I get to things I might explore in next piece ( a flowing curve not interrupted by flats, changing the height of elements, a crisper bead, a foot detail&hellip😉
If the person is close I do this in a conversational manner. Ask what tools they used for this and how much they'd sanded. A lot has to do with where the artist is. The newer folks I try to be more like a coach and cheer leader encourage them to look at thing they knew were not quite right and lead them into looking at the form. Experience turners I just ask them questions.

If I critique a hollow form- foremost is the form itself what does it look like, second is surface. I point out that weight and wall thickness and inside surface are not very important.
The owner of the piece will display it in their home. Their visitors are going to appreciate the form and surface. They are not going to pick it up.

Al

 

[Mark Mandell]

“Critique†is an endeavor that is often confused with the simple expression of a string of value judgments about the subject, be it an object, a writing, a play or film, or a performance of some kind. A real critique must have, at its basis, an in-depth analysis of the object within the confines of the concepts that apply to it.

Jim Christiansen and several other turner-artists have tried to formulate a set of categories to be applied to the analysis of a turning, with various catagories grounded in mechanical craftsmanship, choice of material, finish, and basic design principals. Jim and others have run classes and discussion groups trying to educate and advance the cause of meaningful critique. If anyone here gets to chance to join one of those sessions, I strongly recommend you do so.

When I was teaching, my art major students were required to engage in a critique of work every two weeks. During these sessions each student was required to verbalize on one or more aspects of pieces by others in the group. The exercise served to give each student some feedback on their work, but the main goal was teaching the students how to look at, see, analyze, and then express what they were presented with as a cognitive activity. Through this training they developed the ability to critique and understand their own work on a deeper level which was absolutely necessary to their growth as individual makers of things. Subjects ranged from drawings, photographs or paintings to ceramics, sculpture, or jewelry and “ata boy/girl†comments were absolutely prohibited.

The problem with attempting to critique from a photograph here, or on any other internet forum, is that the comments will, at best, be superficial and mostly valid in reference to the photograph that has been presented. Between the 2-D image and the tricks of lighting and the camera’s distortion, it is an exercise in futility to do an meaningful critique of a turning from a photograph because 99% of the object is hidden from view behind the computer screen’s surface.

Post pictures here and elsewhere if you wish (or need) to show others what you do, and something of the ideas you’ve come up with. It can be fun to share and see what kinds of things others are doing. Expect comments on your picture, as well as expressions of (hopefully polite) opinions about what you show, but don’t make the mistake of taking those comments, whether “good†or “bad,†“like†or “dislike,†to heart as they are more akin to discussing the album cover as opposed to the music in the recordings.

 

[Breck Whitworth]

Breck, you are one who has specifically asked for critiques, and have gotten some. This is the ONLY time when a critique is appropriate. Giving a critique is especially difficult, because it's one opinion. It's easy to accentuate strong points, and much more difficult to critique weak points. You have such natural ability for creativeness and style, that I'm pretty sure you have a good idea of how to see your own work, and have an ability to self-evaluate. Not everyone is the same, but you have been progressing so incredibly fast, that it's obvious you have some natural ability to solve your own problems.....

ooc

Odie I also agree with your statement critiques should be given only when asked for, the ones I have gotten over the years have, for the most part been very helpful to get me to look at my work differently than I was seeing it. Thus I was able to see possibly another way or a better way to do something to improve my next piece. The advice I have received here has already helped me and I encourage all turners to have the courage to ask for C&C on pieces they post. Most of the time I am sad to say I just forget to say that because most of the other forums I use know I always welcome their opinions as what they feel might make it even better.

 

[Charlie Knighton]

Jim Christiansen and several other turner-artists have tried to formulate a set of categories to be applied to the analysis of a turning, with various catagories grounded in mechanical craftsmanship, choice of material, finish, and basic design principals. Jim and others have run classes and discussion groups trying to educate and advance the cause of meaningful critique

.

I attended a rotation led by Jim Christiansen on this subject. I thought it was at st. paul, but when I looked for it in handout book, it was not listed. those were his catagories and it was a very good discussion. time changes most things, never say never, and taste change over time, sometimes coming back. all things are new again. anyway, my only point is to be inclusive, try to understand what the artist is attempting to express. you do not want a convent or censorship. DE's hollow forms were once new, and they were not a bowl or a spindle, good work will be accepted over time, the expression "starving artist" is very true, most only were appreciated after passing over.

 

[Sergio Villa]

So far, it is my impression, the discussion has been on criticism of some objects. This is fine and I agree with what has been said. There is another point that should not been overlooked i.e. the improvement that a good critique does to the critic himself. Trying to criticize a piece, if done correctly involves a serious effort to analyze form, colour technique etc and in doing this the critic uses and improves his vision and skills. In the end a critique is a study of the piece being criticized and this requires the use of the knowledge one person has on the subject. I believe it is a positive efford.

 

[Mark Mandell]

So far, it is my impression, the discussion has been on criticism of some objects. This is fine and I agree with what has been said. There is another point that should not been overlooked i.e. the improvement that a good critique does to the critic himself. Trying to criticize a piece, if done correctly involves a serious effort to analyze form, colour technique etc and in doing this the critic uses and improves his vision and skills. In the end a critique is a study of the piece being criticized and this requires the use of the knowledge one person has on the subject. I believe it is a positive efford.

You are, of course, correct Sergio. It's the old situation of the teacher learning from the students. The process of choosing, distilling, and presenting information in a way that those who receive it can use it in meaningful ways, forces a re-examination of the subject matter. When I taught the students in the critique sessions, I told them they had to "get inside the piece" to "put it on like a shirt and see how it feels from the inside" and then speak about what they saw and felt. Some were better at it than others. They quickly got past nit-picky little errors in execution and began to relate to what the maker had done; they could then respond to the ideas that were being communicated through the physical object in front of them. They learned how to express what they saw so that the maker could take their comments and judge for him/herself how successful their piece was on a number of levels. It was a learning experience for everyone present. Funny thing, what started out as a chore and not a little threatening for them turned into a very popular activity to which they looked forward.

PS: No drugs were allowed. That would have been cheating😉

 

[Hu Lowery]

critiques

Generally a critique should follow a certain form. It has been touched on already but I'm sure that it is written up many places on the internet too. Basically you respect the effort put into a piece and comment on what seems to be strong points before pointing out what might be serious or tiny niggles.

I'm chuckling right now because a man was recently flown almost halfway around the world to evaluate a new high dollar piece of equipment. A handful of issues with it, including it was ugly. Ugly matters because this equipment has to be sold. He used a colloquial expression to describe it and instantly knew he had made a mistake. The genie was out the bottle though and the expression has been much repeated!

While I'll post a picture now and then I'm not too concerned about critiques. I'll welcome them but having read hundreds of critiques of other pieces I have a pretty good idea what wood turners want to see. I also have a shelving unit in my living room with mostly junk in it. My first try at a shape or a piece that failed but I want to remember the shape. Sometimes just something to talk about. I note that without fail one piece has been highly praised by every potential customer, the ultimate critique! Many of the other pieces get their share of praise but some like one, some another. Pretty sure I could turn a replica cow turd out of pretty wood, put a high gloss finish on it, and sell it to some people, they don't get past the "flash" impression. Good to know, as a beginning turner that has a very sharp eye for flow I see my stuff as far from perfect. Others don't judge it nearly as harshly.

One thing not mentioned yet, is that critiquing the critiques can be of value too. The person writing the critique learns, some of the people reading the comments do too. I made a note not to refer to a piece of high dollar equipment with millions already invested in what was thought to be basically the final design as "homely as a mud fence!"

Hu

 

[Edward Weber]

A critique is something that is usually asked for by the artist in an effort to, see what others see, and by doing so possibly improve their work. Asking for critiques is just another skill or technique used by an artist. A critique is not personal, no matter how negative the comments.

Criticisms are usually unsolicited remarks comprised of negative comments designed to belittle the artists work and by extension the artist him/herself. Criticisms are not constructive and serve no purpose to the artist. A criticism only benefits the person doing the criticizing by somehow making themselves fell superior in some way.

That's my two cents

 

[Odie]

A critique is something that is usually asked for by the artist in an effort to, see what others see, and by doing so possibly improve their work. Asking for critiques is just another skill or technique used by an artist. A critique is not personal, no matter how negative the comments.

Criticisms are usually unsolicited remarks comprised of negative comments designed to belittle the artists work and by extension the artist him/herself. Criticisms are not constructive and serve no purpose to the artist. A criticism only benefits the person doing the criticizing by somehow making themselves fell superior in some way.

That's my two cents

That's a pretty good way to look at it, Edward.......

What would you call an unsolicited comment that was given in earnest to help? (other than poor etiquette)

ooc

 

[Michelle Rich]

I believe there are few people who are qualified to critque another's work. I always say: it is my opinion, or my preference is....or I like a,b, or c. Most of the so-called critiques I have seen are just that, opinions.

 

[Edward Weber]

That's a pretty good way to look at it, Edward.......

What would you call an unsolicited comment that was given in earnest to help? (other than poor etiquette)

ooc

That depends on who you ask 🙄
My comments are not carved in stone, there are sometimes exceptions. I know i have done it in the past, but usually only when I know the person. If critiques aren't wanted, I try not give them.

 

[Odie]

I believe there are few people who are qualified to critque another's work. I always say: it is my opinion, or my preference is....or I like a,b, or c. Most of the so-called critiques I have seen are just that, opinions.

That depends on who you ask 🙄
My comments are not carved in stone, there are sometimes exceptions. I know i have done it in the past, but usually only when I know the person. If critiques aren't wanted, I try not give them.

Unwanted criticism and critique seems to be the bottom line for what is considered unacceptable......and, Michelle's comment about opinion is just as true. If several people participate in critiquing one item, then there is bound to be an overlap, as well as complete separation of those opinions. She also pointed out that some are not qualified to give a critique, and I believe this isn't a matter of ability, as much as a preference of style and technique. Someone who specializes in spindle turning may not be the best judge of form in bowl turning......but they might, which brings us back to.....opinion.

ooc

 

[Curt Fuller]

I believe there are few people who are qualified to critque another's work. I always say: it is my opinion, or my preference is....or I like a,b, or c. Most of the so-called critiques I have seen are just that, opinions.

I think Michelle has said it very well. Not that there aren't a lot of excellent wood turners that could offer a great critique. But I think that when someone asks for a critique they should include their goals, objectives, etc that they were trying to achieve with the piece they want critiqued. I think most of us have somewhat of an idea of what we want the finished product to be when we put a piece of wood on the lathe. How well that works out is always up in the air. But without knowing what that idea was, a person offering critique may be going in a completely different direction when offering a critique.

 

[Edward Weber]

Unwanted criticism and critique ooc

I think you meant, unwanted critiques and criticism.

For me, Michelle's comment is a bit of a distinction without a difference. Isn't a critique a type of opinion?.
I think a combination of Michelle' and Curtis' comments are more accurate.
If you simply offer a piece and say C&C's are welcome or something like that, you do open yourself up to any and all comments. Maybe that's the unqualified aspect Michelle was referring to.
If you offer up your piece and say I was trying to.. or I was going toward... or even, has anyone done something similar that could offer..., then you filter out a majority of the unwanted or "unqualified" critiques.
The artist has a portion of responsibility when asking for a critique.
If you don't ask the correct question, you most likely won't get the correct answer.

 

[Sergio Villa]

To make things simple, as in reality they are, the words critic and criticism are well explained in any dictionary.
I also believe that when a piece is exposed in a public setting the public has the rights to criticize it. The politeness lies in the way the criticism is expressed and not in the criticism itself. But I understand that for many reasons many people do not like having their turnings criticized and therefore I do not do it.

To me exposing in a public gallery a piece makes any sense only if I can improve from that, otherwise why doing it? If the piece is laughable I prefer to hear the laughter rather than not. If the piece is good I believe that can always be improved with a serious criticism. Few have reached perfection yet.

Michelangelo is being quoted as having said that "True work of art is but a shadow of divine perfection".