Criticism..is it good, or bad to argue with taste?

[bazooka]

Derrel, if your words are true, then does that mean that art is not meant for the general public, but only for other educated artists?

I'm a Subway-everday-for-lunch non-art-educated kind of guy. There are photos that I enjoy, photos that I don't. There is French cuisine that I like (not much to be true), and probably better quality french cuisine that I wouldn't touch. I like what I like. If an artist makes a piece of work that other educated artists are googly over but noone else appreciates (and noone at the local art festival buys), is the artist reaching his intended audience? Is it a decision of the creating artist between quantity of audience vs a deeper appreciation? (Hoping interesting discussion follows...)

 

[bazooka]

Expanding a bit further and on my post....

If we use food as an example. I like cheap chinese buffets. It tastes great to me. It's absolutely filling. I could go to a gourmet Chinese restaraunt and find small serving sizes, and things that look, feel, and taste awful to me, but expect to pay 10x more. Perhaps the food took longer to prepare, more thought and effort were put into it, more composition was studied to arrange it on the plate.... Perhaps the chef spent 10 years in cullinary whereas at the cheap buffet, the chef learned from his mom, but I do not appreciate any of that. And judging from the success of fast food chains, many others don't either.

I'm not saying gourmet restaraunts are doing anything wrong. They are catering to a specific group of people. I don't think an artist has to cater to other educated artists, do they? If they do, does that make them less expressive, less authentic, or less of an artist?

 

[The_Traveler]

Just a little in-line question.
Suppose the expensive food tasted OK but not any different than the cheap food?

 

[2WheelPhoto]

A result of a Herd Mentality.

The Internet "herd mentality" is not a theory

 

[analog.universe]

is the artist reaching his intended audience?

This is it for me.

Has the photo affected someone? Has the photographer reached someone? Did it matter to someone? If yes then it's good art, end of story. It's certainly worth understanding the nuances of design and technique, because those are the tools we have to reach people. Critiquing based on technique, and based on how to improve what the photo is communicating, is absolutely worthwhile. Deciding whether or not it's art is impossible, and unproductive. Sometimes you can say, "yes this is art", because you've had an experience with it. You can never say "no this is not art", because you have no idea what others' experience with it might be.

 

[toddmclosson]

I am NOT trying to start a flame war, and I agree with you for the most part. I have a couple of thoughts. It does not require a degree to understand critique, just a sincere interest in the image. You don't need an education to understand basic principles, just someone to explain them to you. In my critique classes I always keep "cheat sheets" of art principles and explanations, because unless your a professional art critic, gallery owner, etc. there may never be a need to memorize those principles. I definitely consider it my job to teach anyone that wants to learn.

I trust my auto mechanic because I don't have the desire to learn his job, but I can certainly still provide uneducated guesses as to the "pings, knockes or weird squirrely sounds" coming from my engine. On another note - I think we're talking about two different things. You keep mentioning taste, as in an aesthetic you prefer. I definitely don't think critique and taste are the same thing. I never understood Robert Maplethorpe's taste, but his technique and intent are powerful. My basic rule of thumb (educated or not) If you don't like, it's not going to hang in your living room. Even if I COULD get you to buy the image (becasue it may have future value) you'll just wrap it up and store in the closet. Everyone has that basic gut reaction, no education needed, that is taste.
So if they don't have an education in the arts, they may not know how to appreciate the color saturation/lines/rule of thirds/and may just be limited to "It's pretty." That's ok too, let's just spread the word and educate our viewers!

 

[c.cloudwalker]

I am NOT trying to start a flame war, and I agree with you for the most part. I have a couple of thoughts. It does not require a degree to understand critique, just a sincere interest in the image. You don't need an education to understand basic principles, just someone to explain them to you. In my critique classes I always keep "cheat sheets" of art principles and explanations, because unless your a professional art critic, gallery owner, etc. there may never be a need to memorize those principles. I definitely consider it my job to teach anyone that wants to learn.

That is fine but do you hang around museums and galleries teaching people?

 

[Bitter Jeweler]

That is fine but do you hang around museums and galleries teaching people?

I have been known to skool people in museums, when I hear them says things like "I could have done that."

That's how I roll.

 

[mishele]

I am NOT trying to start a flame war, and I agree with you for the most part. I have a couple of thoughts. It does not require a degree to understand critique, just a sincere interest in the image. You don't need an education to understand basic principles, just someone to explain them to you. In my critique classes I always keep "cheat sheets" of art principles and explanations, because unless your a professional art critic, gallery owner, etc. there may never be a need to memorize those principles. I definitely consider it my job to teach anyone that wants to learn.

I trust my auto mechanic because I don't have the desire to learn his job, but I can certainly still provide uneducated guesses as to the "pings, knockes or weird squirrely sounds" coming from my engine. On another note - I think we're talking about two different things. You keep mentioning taste, as in an aesthetic you prefer. I definitely don't think critique and taste are the same thing. I never understood Robert Maplethorpe's taste, but his technique and intent are powerful. My basic rule of thumb (educated or not) If you don't like, it's not going to hang in your living room. Even if I COULD get you to buy the image (becasue it may have future value) you'll just wrap it up and store in the closet. Everyone has that basic gut reaction, no education needed, that is taste.
So if they don't have an education in the arts, they may not know how to appreciate the color saturation/lines/rule of thirds/and may just be limited to "It's pretty." That's ok too, let's just spread the word and educate our viewers!

I would love to have a copy of your "cheat sheet"!!! Is there anyway I can get one from you?