Creative Darwinism

YES to outside, independent critic and an artist of really high reputation, voted by members of the collective, paid for its services. We tried that in the art club – it worked much better. Peers to peers works only if on voluntary basis and ends up to be positive anyway, not much value in it usually. Badly composed, overworked and with common subjects paintings are usually first to be sold. Sad but real.

Twice I have stood at the rear of a gaggle of people at a group show who were congregated around one of my paintings as someone held forth with, in one case, an opinionated diatribe, and in the other, a semi-humorous condescension. To my surprise, niether of these things bothered me in any fashion. I actually was quite entertained. Though, I’ll admit, and not to my credit, by being more entertained by the critical diatribe from the painter who had not been awarded second prize in the show, as had my painting. On the other hand, I learned a few things from the diatribe, but almost nothing from the condescending remarks, which, oddly, came from a retired art professor. I hope to be entertained again in the future. It is vastly superior to being totally ignored.

I think that when other people come and look at you are painting and make their critique and make suggestions on how to improve it and have different views it is very confusing and takes away from your own evaluation of what is lacking and errors you might have made.I believe it also distract your creative process.No matter how good their intent maybe it is not helping your thought processes in the progress of your work.Perhaps when you ask someone to view your work and ask his or her opinion it may also give you a fresh perspective on your work and you can see what errors or what is missing and make improvements on your own work.

Long ago, I devoted a couple of unpaid years to the establishment of a community art center and learned a lot. This was never designed as a cooperative. The three big lessons were these 1. Just because a person can get dressed in the morning is no proof of sanity. 2. “Look at what I did,” is primary among the thought processes of most artists. The corollary of this notion is “I am not all that interested in seeing what you did.” 3. Property rights are a clear road to dissent in group centers. Studios where there is adequate space to work with individual storage facilities work better than individual rental properties. When I returned to my studio after two years spent working at an open studio in Berkeley (ASUC) I packed up and left to continue my work alone. I could no longer pay the emotional rent.

There is a current truck commercial running using the catch phrase- ‘Go big- or go home.’ To all you artists out there who are afraid of having your poor little feelings hurt- GO HOME. To your mommy. She’ll hold your little hand while you have a good cry because somebody didn’t like your little painting. Enter a juried show and get rejected. And then learn how to have all of your emotions around getting rejected. It’s called growing up. Put your work up for a critique. And have somebody tell you their truth about why it does or doesn’t work for them. And learn to TAKE IT- and have all of your emotions around hearing somebody say something you don’t want to hear. It’s called growing up. God forbid you might have to grow up. We stupid humans- who are afraid of feeling difficut emotions and having our stupid feelings hurt- ARE THE PROBLEM. Dear Jane, learn to cry creatively- and then let go. It makes your art work better. And to you all- If you can’t stand up to anybody and everybody and actually defend your work- whether they like it or not- you will never be anything but mediocre.

Jane’s work is true, rare and wonderful. It partakes of most the known worlds and aspires to the unknown worlds. I am pretty sure she comes from a strong place and is not crying, as you suggest in your straw (wo)man diatribe. She definitely should not be the target of such a bullying response; nor should any artist. She seems to be trying to create a level playing field among a large number of disparate artists who may have different levels of training. Not everyone has the benefit of the MFA system of critiques. She seems acknowledge the vulnerable area of every artists’ psyche while trying to create a supportive, not destructive, environment for working together. I am very offended by this bullying tone. I am not sure where it came from, some sad personal place I suspect. Identifying with the oppressor? Be nice.

JBW knows, he talks, but he don’t paint.

The critiques I received over time were often confusing and sometimes funny. I think that the main key for being on the receiving end is to put oneself in the shoes of the person giving the critique, and try to understand where they are coming from. They are describing their values and knowledge which can initially be hard to grasp, or even may not be something we care for. The most useful nuggets I got were initially incomprehensible, and only unfolded over time through my learning process. I love those aha moments when I realize that what Bob said to me couple years ago (when I thought he was rambling), is a perfect help for today’s puzzle. Sometimes those words linger as an enigma until they eventually get translated to my artistic language and suddenly make sense. It may take years, so it’s better to file them then dismiss them.

I’m a quilter who loves to study art. The paintings chosen are interesting and mostly colorful. The Bird Energy painting makes me want to add some more color (and lines), although I don’t quite feel that way when looking at Stone Boats. I also like titles that add information or cause you to look deeper for something that you might have missed at first glance. I like whimsy and finding hidden objects. Sometimes I do things in quilts hoping someday someone will wonder, why did she do that? And I ask that about some things in your art, so to me, that is good. I like the unexpected use of color. Often I tell quilters that imperfections make things interesting, so don’t fear that. Uninteresting art of any kind isn’t worth doing. I could look at Jane Adams’ art a long time and still find enjoyment.

I love your idea of an anonymous collective crit! That is brilliant! What a super idea for art groups! I hate crits! I do enjoy a discussion about a person’s work as collective. The word “crit” brings out the worst. Having sat in on lengthy crits, I have found them a waste of time. It is more about some verbally expressive individual practising free flow public speaking on the masses, trying to sound intelligent. After politely listening and trying to follow their train of thought, I come away realizing they have said absolutely NOTHING! Anonymous responses would be honest, potentially useful even. 250.615.7344 2020 East Oona Boulevard, Oona River, BC V0V 1E0

I enjoyed the selection of Jane’s paintings. Now, that’s a lot more significant than it sounds, because she paints in a style I do not like. But it is immediately obvious that, unlike many (maybe the majority ?) of those who paint in this style, she really can paint. Moreover, she has a unique eye and has something to say that is worth paying attention to. Her individuality is so strong that I suspect she is not all that disturbed by criticism, whether by one or a group! More power to her elbow. It is a pleasure to study work which reflects such a strong personality, carried out with passion and skill.

Robert, In the spirit of your suggestions, I would be most interested to hear your critique of Jane’s paintings.

The paintings don’t look like they are done by the same person. In order to get a sense of an artist’s style, I always look for some commonalities that tie the work together. I like that. I didn’t study each piece in depth. That is just my impression after looking at the group of pieces. Love your letters, Robert. It is a treat to read them and they always make me think. I like that, too. Lincoln, NE

A helpful suggestion from a wise and seasoned artist is very valuable to those of us who mostly struggle alone.

Recently I had a group art opening at a new gallery in Brattleboro, VT, where I reside. One of the artists exhibiting, sat in the corner with a laptop and alternated between manipulating images with Photoshop and signing prints of his digital artwork. I chatted with him about his art and asked questions I typically ask other fellow painters like, color inspirations, subject matter, and composition. It was very hard for the two of us to relate on aesthetics. It also seemed that he cared little for aesthetics other than pixelated color and distorted photos. Is this the democratization of art that you mentioned in one of your earlier emails? I try to be open-minded about digital art, but I find it hard to take seriously. It appears that all the articles and blogs online applaud the democratization of the arts. Where can one find the other side of the coin? Are there books or article that offer a little criticism of this new phenomenon?

A 55 member artist-collective gallery —-hmmm? I think there may be something else going on and no one is being direct about it — or not. But I bet someone is thinking it. Surely, not everyone belonging to this group creates work of the highest quality. There are always some hobbyists who have money and want the chance to be a “real” artists. Artists with low quality work brings down the group. Buyers see novice work and keep away. So people drop the idea of having critiques in hopes to elevate the work and draw in more people. Others do this because they want to create a social environment. As said previously, this can be problematic. Personally, If I want advice, I go and ask someone their opinion. They know they can be brutally honest with me because I don’t take criticism of my work personally. If the issue is quality and not socializing. I think it is time to look for art students or people with promising work. This is tough because you will absolutely offend people. Perhaps starting a small group within the group of the highest quality artist and building from there will be best. I say thumbs down on critiques. If your in a gallery you should be professionals and not deal with student type activities to deal with socializing or not dealing with a bigger problem.

I publish the newsletter for a small art group (about 20) people in the midwest. When the decision was made to critique one another’s artwork we lost several members. Which was sad. Remaining members were from entry level 1 to absolutely out of this world -no number needed members. The challenge was to have members on every level to bring art and to expect honestly. In the newsletter, I wrote this – who better to critique your work than someone you know has every reason to want you to succeed. I used different phrases each month, but the message was the same. Our members are kind, but, not patronizing. Suggestions made have caused members to really go after ‘getting better, learning more, and yes – selling work’. In a small group, friendship binds us together. Everyone gains from improvement by the least member…then it hits you – there is no least member – only members needing a boost. Honesty builds trust and suggestions tried builds the heart to attain more. Critique is no longer feared but, absolutely demanded.

As a high school art teacher for the last 15 years, I have to say that if we didn’t go through the grueling art critique process, then student artists would not gain a critical eye. There are several approaches to the critique process that can be beneficial to many. One way is to have, like you had suggested, an opportunity for everyone to write what it is they think about the piece they are critiquing. I take it one step further in my classroom. I have the students write one compliment; a meaningful compliment (not just “it’s cool” kind of compliment) and a constuctive piece of criticism. Not only do they have to point out what they consider to be “flawed” but have to give some suggestions as to how that problem area can be remedied. Then I take all of the comments in, and type them out before they’re given to the artist to learn from. Yes, it can be time consuming to do this, but then the comments are truly anonymous since hand writing can definitely be recognized. This allows the students to have the liberty of being genuine. Another way of critiquing your own work, if you’re too self conscious of having others comment on your work, is to take a photo of your art piece. There’s something interesting about seeing your art as a photo that changes your perception and allows the problem areas to stand out more distinctly. Better yet, take a photo and then look at it upside down. When you do this, your artistic eye is forced to really critique in terms of the elements and principles of art instead of being swayed by the power of symbolic imagery. Ultimately, you can’t be a sensitive person when it comes to the critique process. You have to be willing to take the comments and use them to your advantage and learn from them. Otherwise, you’ll just be sitting at home with a lot of paintings that nobody is really interested in looking at besides yourself.

Once I was asked to critique an entire grade school of art for a statewide competition. I can still hear the criticism of my choices if I try real hard. We are working together weather we like to admit it or not. In my present critique I attend once a month, we always ask what the artist wants to know about their work. Some artists bring something framed. They really don’t want to know anything, just have everyone look. That’s ok as long as they know it. And my response in critique usually starts like this, “If this were my work of art, I would do this…” Everyone can teach us something, but no one can teach us everything.

Susan: Trouble is, many artists want to know what’s easy to fix in their work. Many need to be told to scrap this particular work and begin again.

Many who belong to art clubs or those starting out are artists who haven’t put in long hours (years) of study with a qualified teacher. Add to which, those who have a teacher don’t take the criticism when given by that teacher. They want to paint and methods and techniques are a minor nuisance. It is easier to get someone they admire to tell them what is wrong with their work than try and work it out in their head, classes or studios. Professional artists, for the most part, already know what is wrong with a piece and don’t rely on outside input. If they can’t figure it out, something is lacking in their training. Or they haven’t fully realized their concept. Practically speaking, when after painting for 20 or 30 years, the experience of failure teaches you to know when something is wrong with a work. Also after many years of painting, hopefully, you put your ego aside and critique your work honestly. Anyone wanting outside critique is fishing for compliments and doesn’t really want to hear what is seriously wrong. Another point here is- when you ask another artist to give pointers, invariably, they will speak from what they themselves believe to be correct and subsequently have no value to the person asking for help. Painting is a process of (self) discovery. When you stop asking what’s wrong and acquires the knowledge and experience to know what’s wrong is when your work improves. Here is a hint to where the problems lie: composition, form, pattern, paint application, subject, value or concept.

There are three elements at work in any critique: foremost are the ego of the artist and the ego of the one doing the critique. The integrity of those two personalities will split the difference whether anything productive comes from the exercise. The artist may or may not want to become a better artist (the third, and most desirable element) … but more often they simply want validation. Afraid to hurt feelings, that kind of critique is empty praise and does no one any good. Or, the one doing the critique, normally in smaller groups, succumbs to an ego-serving effort to elevate their own work above that of the artist in question and is unduly critical … psychology 101. It is a rare and wonderful thing when really good critiques are given by competent artists. It is positive with one goal in mind – to solve specific problems that can be identified. Therein is where one must start: “What are we trying to accomplish?” From that input you might determine the negative personalities that haven’t grown up yet, those who truly want to hone their skills, and your group arrive at the best critique model that will serve your members. Personally, I lean toward group critiques because you can throw out the worst and the best, and hopefully arrive at some meaningful observations. I’ve seen anonymous critiques turn vicious and feel if you’re not willing to put your name to a comment maybe the critique isn’t valid. Also, group critiques often turn into lively discussions the whole group benefits from. Good luck.

I guess it’s time to get in touch with my inner bailiwick…and, to repeat a well-known artist’s quote: “Don’t talk, painter, paint.”

It takes a sound character to make good use of anonymous communication. Anonymity should be used by removing one’s identity as irrelevant, and communicating sincerely and sensitively as if speaking in person. Respect of oneself and fellow artists needs to come across clearly if an anonymous contributor is to be taken seriously.

Group critique just might smother a person. Some things are better learned on your own. I think framing your own questions of areas you feel your paintings are failing might be useful and perhaps out of that someone might be more honest. Artists are competitive so I think it is wise to be alert to any other motives other than respect for you what you are trying to do.

Thank you for posting these gorgeous paintings. They seem filled with light and life. This is the type of work I strive to do. So, I keep working.

Look at the little people on horseback at the bottom of Payne’s canyon! I would have been just as convinced of scale without them. But I was happy to discover them there, as if by surprise.

This is an interesting combination of responses. It is also a worthy discussion. I have belonged to a group of about 5 or 6 artists that decided to have a “critique” group. But the word critique was not exactly perfect for what we did … or so we thought at that time. We each brought two or three pieces and took turns putting all of them up for discussion. The artist of the work was expected to talk about them as a whole, and also each individually. They were expected to tell (1) what was the intent of each one, (2) did they feel they accomplished it or not, or somewhat, (3) where were they heading, (4) what did they feel was working and what was not, (5) did they have ideas of how to move forward? The other members were only allowed to ask questions. They were not allowed to say how they would have done such-and-such. No one said “if it were my painting, I would do …”. If a question was asked from the showing artist on how to accomplish a specific painting theory … then if one of the other artists felt competent to speak on how they do it in their own paintings, … okay … but only after all the members had shown their work, and had their moment to discuss where they were and where they were wanting to go in their journey. It was a wonderful group … but three of them have moved to different parts of the US and we no longer meet. We are still friends, have all moved to higher levels of competency, but all are still actively learning and trying to hone their skills. And, we help others anytime we are asked … but first finding out what the artist is wishing to know or learn.

As part of creative Darwinism, one of the great survival skills is to learn to cooperate with others. Artists who would survive and thrive need to quickly ingest the wisdom of the past. Only then can they go on to a great future.

Nice paintings. They don’t take me anywhere I haven’t been. They are very very safe. The informational content is severely limited. Sorry ! No cigar this time.

Those are fantastic paintings. Much to be learned for those who are sensitive enough to see subtleties.

You have to allow yourself to make mistakes. Experience teaches you which ones to keep.

Crits can be about the painting: shapes, values, colors, warm and cool and brushwork, and not about the artist. There is no way to crit “I wanted…” or “I thought…” Let the painting drive the critique, because we do not all like the same paintings but like engineers we must know what is adequate, regardless of liking it.

To Susan Kellogg: Be nice? I’m nice. I’m NOT nice- TOO. You don’t like my not/nice part? My REAL part? My dead blunt honest part? I don’t really care. I’m not trying to be your friend. Being nice in a critique situation will never help you learn how to have ALL OF YOUR FEELINGS creatively and constructively. Our society/culture wants you to shut down any emotional thing it can’t handle. I don’t.