Critique isn't Criticism

There's an interesting (and passionate) debate on the Painting Forum about the difference between critique and criticism. Why so-called "honest criticism" can be so destructive, why the friendly, positive approach of critique taken by most forum members is more helpful. I think Lyn expresses it well:

"Outright criticism is unhelpful but we benefit from an analysis that points out areas that aren't working, praises areas that do work and opens the way to move around in a painting, or move expectantly and happily onto another one, rather than shutting the door on painting altogether which is what a blunt criticism could do. If you really don't like a painting on the forum, can't find anything good to say about it, I think it's best to say nothing and reserve comments for where you can offer constructive advice."

"I see myself as a beginner painter advancing and a lot of the advancing has come about because of the constructive critiques I've been offered here. When you're very blunt you run the risk of closing the door on such helpful advice and wonderful learning opportunities for yourself."

If you've only recently started painting, remember that putting how you feel into words is good practice for talking or writing about your own art. Don't feel you need to give an indepth criticism about every aspect of the painting. Pick one or two things and say why you like/don't like this.

As for worrying about hurting someone's feelings, the way you phrase what you say plays a huge role in this. Using "I think" "I feel" reminds the reader that it's your opinion not The Truth. For example, don't say "You put that big tree in a really stupid spot and it's ugly, paint it out." Rather phrase it something like this: "I think the big tree is too centrally positioned and dominates the composition too much."

Read more of the discussion on critiquing paintings and add your own thoughts...

See Also:
• How to Critique a Painting
• Painting Critique Checklist