An Approach to Talking and Writing about Artwork Based on Edmund B. Feldman’s Model
Art criticism is an exciting and empowering discipline of art. When students critique artworks they gain the tools needed to meaningfully discuss art with others.
The formalist model of art criticism, introduced by Feldman (1967), is a favourite among art educators due to its simplicity (only four phases: describe, analyse, interpret, judge) and clear objectives. Its analytical phases and judging criteria are easy for students to remember, making it easy for them to use on their own.
According to Feldman, the four stage of art criticism are:
I. Description - listing what an art object seems to include
II. Formal Analysis - describing the relationship among the things that were listed
III. Interpretation - deciding what all your earlier observation means
IV. Judgement - deciding the value of an art object
I. Description
The words you use in the description are like pointers. They draw attention to something worth seeing. The words that you use to describe the work must be neutral. Terms that denote judgments must be banned from your vocabulary at this stage. Why? They are loaded and tend to influence your judgment too early in the process of looking at the work. In other words, do not use such terms as strong, beautiful, harmonious, weak, disorderly, ugly, funny looking, etc. If you are not certain about how to describe something in the work, do not assign a name to it. For example, it may not be clear whether you are looking at men or women. In this case, you should say you see "some people". It is wise to be vague about some details rather than to make an error that might throw off the final interpretation.
What you can describe
1. Recognisable subjects. In some descriptions, you can easily get agreement about the names of what you see, like a man, a tree, a lake, grass, children, animals, sky, and so on. Agreement is fairly easy to get when you are viewing representational works of art.
2. Visual elements and their qualities (form). Contemporary abstract and non-representational works rarely show us things that have proper or common names, so we have to describe visual elements of the form: the lines, colors, textures, shapes, forms, and composition we see. Use adjectives that call attention to the specific qualities of the visual elements such as vertical, geometric, organic, dark, bright, square, active, static, and so on. Now, combine the above adjectives with the nouns for visual elements: shape, color, line, space, texture, etc. This adds precision to your description of the work of art. It also slows you down so that you are able to see the work more completely without judging or interpreting.
3. Technical qualities. Try to describe the way the art object seems to have been made. See if you can identify what medium and what tools were used. Explain how the materials were manipulated to create the work. Technique is important to criticism because it is just as expressive as the shapes and forms we see.
* Remember: Description is neutral. Your language should refer to the visual evidence in the work.
II. Formal Analysis
In this stage, we want to find out how the parts of the work interact. What do they do to one another? How do the parts affect or influence each other? Describing the relationships among the things we see is a process known as formal or structural analysis.
Things to analyse:
1. Size/scale relationships. Comparing sizes gives us clues about the importance of parts. For example, large shapes usually seem more important than small ones. They seem to have higher "rank" than small shapes. Look for the largest, the smallest, and those shapes that appear to be about the same size. If you are looking at a picture in which spatial depth is represented, size is also a clue to the location of thins in an image’s space.
2. Shape relationships. Study and describe how shapes are combined in a work. This will help you acquire valuable evidence for deciding what the total work or art means. For example, analysis what happens when curved shapes are next to each other, or when they are next to angular or pointed shapes. Notice how jagged shapes offset smooth ones. Look at the edge of shapes. Describe them as hard or soft, even or uneven, etc.
3. Color relationships. Notice whether the colors of shapes are similar to or different from each other; whether they vary slightly or contrast strongly. Look for value relationships, or color schemes such as complimentary and analogous. Analyze whether a color area is lighter or darker than a nearby area. You may discover that colors are different while the values are the same.
4. Textural surface relationships. Notice whether the textural treatment is actual and/or illusionary. Notice whether textural surfaces of shapes are similar to or different from each other; whether they vary slightly or contrast strongly. Through analyzing the surface qualities of the work, you may discover the emotional qualities as well as the ideas conveyed by the art object.
5. Space and volume relationships. When analyzing an artwork, look for clues to the location or form. Notice which forms appear in the foreground or the background. Describe how the artist implied space (e.g. through the use of perspective, overlap, size, placement, color, light, and shadows, etc.). Notice whether the implied space is indefinite, seemingly open and endless; or whether it has limits and is enclosed. Pay attention to the empty spaces ? negative shapes or forms, and see if you can determine their effect on the positive shape or forms in the work of art. The way a sculptor, painter, or architect treats negative space may offer useful clues to the total meaning of the work.
III. Interpretation
Now you have to decide what all of your earlier observations mean. At this stage, you are making inferences about the visual evidence. An interpretation is really a set inference (educated guesses) about the meaning of the visual evidence. Don’t be afraid to propose an interpretation. You may find that you change or adjust your interpretation until it fits the visual facts. Be sure that you do not change or ignore visual facts in order to make your interpretation seem correct.
Guides for Interpreting a Work of Art:
1. Is there a "big" idea? See if you can identify a single large idea or concept that seems to sum up or unify all the separate traits of the work. Do not describe the object (you have already done that). Use words to describe ideas
2. How does the work affect you? Explain the sensations and feeling you have when viewing the artwork.
3. How does the work connect with your knowledge of art? Reflect on your knowledge of art history and artistic styles. Try to identify problems that artists have persistently tried to solve (such as problems of meaning or form or social function).
4. How does the work connect with your knowledge of life? Trust yourself. Draw upon your observations, your hunches, and your intelligence. Sometimes, impressions may come to you in the form of "looks like" and "feels like" reactions. These reactions may be funny, illogical or absurd, but do not reject them. Sometimes odd impressions can be important to explore and sharpen. They may offer some fundamental insight about the work being viewed.
IV. Judgement
The reasons for judging a work as excellent or poor are always relative to some context and/or purpose. Any broad judgement of art should be based on a philosophy of art, not on your personal preference (likes or dislikes). If you are resourceful, you can develop your own philosophy of art as a basis for judging the merit of any work that interests you. If you have not yet developed a philosophy of your own, you should consider some of the following items. They can help you begin to make judgements about works of art that are justified (logical, supported by reason, not just personal opinion).
Feldman identifies and describes three philosophies of art that seem useful for justifying critical judgements.
A. Formalism: stresses the importance of the formal qualities and the visual elements of art
B. Expressivsm: stresses the importance of the communication of ideas and feeling in a convincing and forceful manner
C. Instrumentalism: stresses the importance of the social intention or utility of the work.
Examples of Criteria for Judgement
A. Formalism
1. The formalist critic wants the experience of art to be devoted to contemplation of the relationships of the parts to the whole in a work of art.
2. Each part should enhance the quality of the parts around it.
3. It should not be possible to change a single element without spoiling the whole work of art
4. The viewer should feel a unity or wholeness in the work. If you have too much or too little emotion when you experience the work, it is flawed.
5. The Formalist critic wants pleasure in art to come from the art object itself - the combinations of sensations from its surfaces, colors, and other visual qualities.
6. Feelings and ideas should depend only on the way the artist shapes his materials.
7. Art that relies on symbols, or on subject matter, or on the viewer’s life-long experience is rejected by the Formalist critic.
8. The Formalist critic appreciates "art for art’s sake", and feels that no other reason for creating art is needed or even acceptable.
9. A masterpiece, according to the Formalist critic, is a work of art that has perfect visual organization and technical execution.
B. Expressivism
1. The Expressivist critic is interested in the depth and intensity of the experience one has when looking at art.
2. An excellent work of art could be ugly.
3. The Expressivist critic believes that the formal and technical organization of the work has to be good, otherwise it would not be able to affect his or her feelings.
4. The Expressivist critic has two basic rules for judging excellence: a. that the best work has the greatest power to arouse the viewer’s emotions b. that the best work communicates ideas of major significance
5. Art should look and feel as if it is based on reality, not other works of art.
6. Great art should not look calculated. It should seem to be the inevitable result of what an artist has seen or felt deeply.
7. The Expressive critic believes that art should make everyday life more meaningful and profound.
8. What matters is the artist’s ability to make the viewer believe in what the viewer sees in the work. The viewer must experience an emotion before the viewer can believe that the artist also felt and expressed it. The genuineness or actuality of the artist’s emotions does not matter and often cannot be determined.
C. Instrumentalism
1. The Instrumentalist critic believes that art should serve purposes that have been determined by persistent human needs working through powerful social institutions. Art should serve the interests of the church, the state, business or politics.
2. Art is at its best when it helps to advance some cause that will, presumably, advance the interests of humanity.
3. Art that depends on art or grows out of art is inferior, self-serving, and/or decadent.
4. The excellence of a work of art is measured by its capacity to change human behavior in public and visible ways. For example, great political art results in greater allegiance to the party. Great religious art inspires faith.
5. The technical and imaginative gifts of the artist need to be organized by an idea that is greater or more important than the private emotions of the artist.
]6. The Instrumentalist critic believes that, if the meaning of the work is good and is expressed through perfect organized form, then the work is a masterpiece. The phrase perfectly organized forms means the closest possible connection between the appearance and the social intention of the work.
*Source of this write-up will be updated soon.
The formalist model of art criticism, introduced by Feldman (1967), is a favourite among art educators due to its simplicity (only four phases: describe, analyse, interpret, judge) and clear objectives. Its analytical phases and judging criteria are easy for students to remember, making it easy for them to use on their own.
According to Feldman, the four stage of art criticism are:
I. Description - listing what an art object seems to include
II. Formal Analysis - describing the relationship among the things that were listed
III. Interpretation - deciding what all your earlier observation means
IV. Judgement - deciding the value of an art object
I. Description
The words you use in the description are like pointers. They draw attention to something worth seeing. The words that you use to describe the work must be neutral. Terms that denote judgments must be banned from your vocabulary at this stage. Why? They are loaded and tend to influence your judgment too early in the process of looking at the work. In other words, do not use such terms as strong, beautiful, harmonious, weak, disorderly, ugly, funny looking, etc. If you are not certain about how to describe something in the work, do not assign a name to it. For example, it may not be clear whether you are looking at men or women. In this case, you should say you see "some people". It is wise to be vague about some details rather than to make an error that might throw off the final interpretation.
What you can describe
1. Recognisable subjects. In some descriptions, you can easily get agreement about the names of what you see, like a man, a tree, a lake, grass, children, animals, sky, and so on. Agreement is fairly easy to get when you are viewing representational works of art.
2. Visual elements and their qualities (form). Contemporary abstract and non-representational works rarely show us things that have proper or common names, so we have to describe visual elements of the form: the lines, colors, textures, shapes, forms, and composition we see. Use adjectives that call attention to the specific qualities of the visual elements such as vertical, geometric, organic, dark, bright, square, active, static, and so on. Now, combine the above adjectives with the nouns for visual elements: shape, color, line, space, texture, etc. This adds precision to your description of the work of art. It also slows you down so that you are able to see the work more completely without judging or interpreting.
3. Technical qualities. Try to describe the way the art object seems to have been made. See if you can identify what medium and what tools were used. Explain how the materials were manipulated to create the work. Technique is important to criticism because it is just as expressive as the shapes and forms we see.
* Remember: Description is neutral. Your language should refer to the visual evidence in the work.
II. Formal Analysis
In this stage, we want to find out how the parts of the work interact. What do they do to one another? How do the parts affect or influence each other? Describing the relationships among the things we see is a process known as formal or structural analysis.
Things to analyse:
1. Size/scale relationships. Comparing sizes gives us clues about the importance of parts. For example, large shapes usually seem more important than small ones. They seem to have higher "rank" than small shapes. Look for the largest, the smallest, and those shapes that appear to be about the same size. If you are looking at a picture in which spatial depth is represented, size is also a clue to the location of thins in an image’s space.
2. Shape relationships. Study and describe how shapes are combined in a work. This will help you acquire valuable evidence for deciding what the total work or art means. For example, analysis what happens when curved shapes are next to each other, or when they are next to angular or pointed shapes. Notice how jagged shapes offset smooth ones. Look at the edge of shapes. Describe them as hard or soft, even or uneven, etc.
3. Color relationships. Notice whether the colors of shapes are similar to or different from each other; whether they vary slightly or contrast strongly. Look for value relationships, or color schemes such as complimentary and analogous. Analyze whether a color area is lighter or darker than a nearby area. You may discover that colors are different while the values are the same.
4. Textural surface relationships. Notice whether the textural treatment is actual and/or illusionary. Notice whether textural surfaces of shapes are similar to or different from each other; whether they vary slightly or contrast strongly. Through analyzing the surface qualities of the work, you may discover the emotional qualities as well as the ideas conveyed by the art object.
5. Space and volume relationships. When analyzing an artwork, look for clues to the location or form. Notice which forms appear in the foreground or the background. Describe how the artist implied space (e.g. through the use of perspective, overlap, size, placement, color, light, and shadows, etc.). Notice whether the implied space is indefinite, seemingly open and endless; or whether it has limits and is enclosed. Pay attention to the empty spaces ? negative shapes or forms, and see if you can determine their effect on the positive shape or forms in the work of art. The way a sculptor, painter, or architect treats negative space may offer useful clues to the total meaning of the work.
III. Interpretation
Now you have to decide what all of your earlier observations mean. At this stage, you are making inferences about the visual evidence. An interpretation is really a set inference (educated guesses) about the meaning of the visual evidence. Don’t be afraid to propose an interpretation. You may find that you change or adjust your interpretation until it fits the visual facts. Be sure that you do not change or ignore visual facts in order to make your interpretation seem correct.
Guides for Interpreting a Work of Art:
1. Is there a "big" idea? See if you can identify a single large idea or concept that seems to sum up or unify all the separate traits of the work. Do not describe the object (you have already done that). Use words to describe ideas
2. How does the work affect you? Explain the sensations and feeling you have when viewing the artwork.
3. How does the work connect with your knowledge of art? Reflect on your knowledge of art history and artistic styles. Try to identify problems that artists have persistently tried to solve (such as problems of meaning or form or social function).
4. How does the work connect with your knowledge of life? Trust yourself. Draw upon your observations, your hunches, and your intelligence. Sometimes, impressions may come to you in the form of "looks like" and "feels like" reactions. These reactions may be funny, illogical or absurd, but do not reject them. Sometimes odd impressions can be important to explore and sharpen. They may offer some fundamental insight about the work being viewed.
IV. Judgement
The reasons for judging a work as excellent or poor are always relative to some context and/or purpose. Any broad judgement of art should be based on a philosophy of art, not on your personal preference (likes or dislikes). If you are resourceful, you can develop your own philosophy of art as a basis for judging the merit of any work that interests you. If you have not yet developed a philosophy of your own, you should consider some of the following items. They can help you begin to make judgements about works of art that are justified (logical, supported by reason, not just personal opinion).
Feldman identifies and describes three philosophies of art that seem useful for justifying critical judgements.
A. Formalism: stresses the importance of the formal qualities and the visual elements of art
B. Expressivsm: stresses the importance of the communication of ideas and feeling in a convincing and forceful manner
C. Instrumentalism: stresses the importance of the social intention or utility of the work.
Examples of Criteria for Judgement
A. Formalism
1. The formalist critic wants the experience of art to be devoted to contemplation of the relationships of the parts to the whole in a work of art.
2. Each part should enhance the quality of the parts around it.
3. It should not be possible to change a single element without spoiling the whole work of art
4. The viewer should feel a unity or wholeness in the work. If you have too much or too little emotion when you experience the work, it is flawed.
5. The Formalist critic wants pleasure in art to come from the art object itself - the combinations of sensations from its surfaces, colors, and other visual qualities.
6. Feelings and ideas should depend only on the way the artist shapes his materials.
7. Art that relies on symbols, or on subject matter, or on the viewer’s life-long experience is rejected by the Formalist critic.
8. The Formalist critic appreciates "art for art’s sake", and feels that no other reason for creating art is needed or even acceptable.
9. A masterpiece, according to the Formalist critic, is a work of art that has perfect visual organization and technical execution.
B. Expressivism
1. The Expressivist critic is interested in the depth and intensity of the experience one has when looking at art.
2. An excellent work of art could be ugly.
3. The Expressivist critic believes that the formal and technical organization of the work has to be good, otherwise it would not be able to affect his or her feelings.
4. The Expressivist critic has two basic rules for judging excellence: a. that the best work has the greatest power to arouse the viewer’s emotions b. that the best work communicates ideas of major significance
5. Art should look and feel as if it is based on reality, not other works of art.
6. Great art should not look calculated. It should seem to be the inevitable result of what an artist has seen or felt deeply.
7. The Expressive critic believes that art should make everyday life more meaningful and profound.
8. What matters is the artist’s ability to make the viewer believe in what the viewer sees in the work. The viewer must experience an emotion before the viewer can believe that the artist also felt and expressed it. The genuineness or actuality of the artist’s emotions does not matter and often cannot be determined.
C. Instrumentalism
1. The Instrumentalist critic believes that art should serve purposes that have been determined by persistent human needs working through powerful social institutions. Art should serve the interests of the church, the state, business or politics.
2. Art is at its best when it helps to advance some cause that will, presumably, advance the interests of humanity.
3. Art that depends on art or grows out of art is inferior, self-serving, and/or decadent.
4. The excellence of a work of art is measured by its capacity to change human behavior in public and visible ways. For example, great political art results in greater allegiance to the party. Great religious art inspires faith.
5. The technical and imaginative gifts of the artist need to be organized by an idea that is greater or more important than the private emotions of the artist.
]6. The Instrumentalist critic believes that, if the meaning of the work is good and is expressed through perfect organized form, then the work is a masterpiece. The phrase perfectly organized forms means the closest possible connection between the appearance and the social intention of the work.
*Source of this write-up will be updated soon.
- Knowing students (Psychology/ development in Art)
- Making learning relevant through contextualising learning of Art
- Providing choices and empowering students to make decisions (in the art processes, learning goals and criteria of success)
- Facilitating reflection-in-action, reflection-on-action and critical thinking
- Facilitating creativity
- Creating a 'flow' (fluency, pacing, aesthetic flow)
- Creating a conducive art learning environment (organisation for instruction)
ARTFUL THINKING ROUTINE
TO FIND OUT MORE, CLICK TEH LINK BELOW:
http://issuu.com/captcurk/docs/artful_thinking-using_art_to_promote_thinking
TO FIND OUT MORE, CLICK TEH LINK BELOW:
http://issuu.com/captcurk/docs/artful_thinking-using_art_to_promote_thinking