METACOGNITION AND ART CRITICISM -( 6/7)
Criticism in the Arts
- As in the history-based disciplines, students are supposed to interpret, but in art criticism this
means something distinctly different.
- The interpretation is of the meaning of a piece of art is how it allegorically or metaphorically
reflects some aspect of real life.
- To infer intelligently what an artist may intend, students should draw on
- the major themes
- the major motifs
- Personal opinion is an integral aspect of interpretation. In fact, originality of opinion is prized.
- Still, an opinion must also have validity
- validity is derived from specific, supporting references to the work of art
- points in the work of art are the data or evidence of critical interpretation.
- Students are also expected to analyze and evaluate an artist's style, to compare and
contrast it with those of other artist.
- They must incorporate a historical understanding of artistic genres, styles and traditions
- They need to know which comparisons and contrasts are interesting.
- For example, examining stylistic differences between Rubens and Mondrian might yield an extensive list, but a
boring one belaboring the obvious.
- Of much greater interest are the fewer and more subtle differences between artists who occupy
the same or similar artistic worlds - Dali and Magritte or Warhol and Lichtenstein.
- An excellent paper then
- begins with a novel but thematic slant on a work of art
- and/or a credible analysis of its place within an identifiable tradition
- every aspect of the paper is strongly supported by the actual work.
- content is critical
- but so is the writing style in the paper itself.
- After all, art is communication, much like science is the scientific method.
English, foreign language, and comparative literature, the arts and much of philosophy
follow this model.