After Jane Weinzapfel's 'Made to Measure' lecture and her comments upon the sporadic and segmented creative community of Cleveland I found myself wondering more then usual about how creative disciplines have become disjointed, arguing over fiefdoms and markets instead of creating a sort of standard with which to use as a base for acceptable design. I understand to a certain extent the hesitation with taking a stand upon a specific topic. On one hand unpopular opinion may result in a loss of credibility or perhaps even patronage. On the other creating a stir may spur an attempt of improvement instead of a careful plodding along an already tiresome path. I would argue that unpopular opinion spurs discussion more then a popular one and that repercussions would only be felt if there was either a sense of dangerous truth to the opinion and/or if the awarding of commissions were not based solely on merit.
When then is it proper to criticize and in what way is criticism actually useful? Well, now this is the crux of the argument. In some way criticism is only given to show an unfavorable reaction and in a way I am slightly insulted by this. It is rather simple to say something is boorish and ugly without any real offerings of better solutions. Perhaps this is a major concern, that criticism is offered not only in solely a negative capacity but with no attempt to correct the mistakes being made. Comments of this nature are easy to dismiss and do nothing to contribute to a possible dialogue about how something(the critiqued object/act) could be better achieved. Granted, criticising something with an actual attempt to understand or to offer alternative solutions takes not only time, but a grasp of what the original undertaking was meaning to accomplish and to some extent (granted not much) the limitations placed upon the artist in the first place.
I would also offer that perhaps there is a hidden code of ethics, that publicly stating an opinion on a contemporary's work somehow diminishes not only their attempt but also your own credibility. Again I would suggest that this is due mostly to the depth of the criticism. If grounded in intelligent and logical foundations then it should be easy to ascertain that the criticism is in no way a personal attack but rather a reaction to a specific problem's solution. I would also offer that without a set of standards, base minimums, that design (specifically architectural) should achieve then it becomes increasingly difficult to educate the public about design and/or hold architects to a set of standards. I am not in any way suggesting that a specific rule set be created for what is considered 'beauty' but rather that it become acceptable to point out a proposed project as one that does not achieve a certain level of aesthetics regardless of the school of thought that the design is grounded in.
At some point criticism should lead into discourse and investigation to possible design solutions that would respond to relevant and informed design reviews and would further make it possible for designers to not only inform their clients but also each other. There would have to exist a level of respect. Not so much as personal validation, but from the critic to the designer to make a comment that exemplified study and investigation, and from the designer to the critic to actually consider the comment. The worst critiques I had ever received are tied between two statements. One was a dismissal of a design based upon an inferred set of arbitrary standards ("It's ugly") and the other was approval for the same reason ("That's perfect"). Nothing led me to understand what about the project was creating the reaction and nothing helped inform me as to what the end goal was supposed to be. Both cases are of unhelpful, useless and dismissible criticism that I fear is too easy and vapid to completely avoid. However, by including observations in the critique (not guidelines or answer) as to how possible solutions could be realized one can earn not only the designers respect but also allow them to revisualize the problem and possibly solve it in a manner that the critic couldn't even foresee.
There is indeed an art to critique, one that I am sometimes guilty of ignoring, that I hope to usefully and successfully master in order to further creative discussions in this town.
No comments:
Post a Comment