Is it okay to give constructive criticism in reviews and author forums

Ashi · June 28, 2012

The saying, "praise in public, criticize in private" is usually my policy. However, since criticism should be constructive, and some of them a little difficult to conduct in private because we're on the Internet, so a little bit of tact should be in place and it is usually a sticky issue.

Not everyone take it the same way. Some takes it personally, while others don't. I think that's the most difficult thing to assess before the reviewer gives out his/her opinion, hoping it'll help the writer, rather than distressing him/her. We don't know the writer personally!!!

I used to be the assistant for a photography class. My duty included criticize photos in a constructive way, to facilitate learning of course. Photography, like writing or any art form in fact, the beauty is indeed in the eyes of beholder. I understood this concern when I took my time to study the photos and gave "absolute necessary" criticism on photos that I believe could be done better. The ones that were below B grade level I simply gave no opinion (and there were plenty, because it's intro level class). I used to take that class and a photographer myself, so I do understand those photos were highly personal to the creator, even the ones that didn't make the grade. It's not my job to put the effort down, like a stereotypical snobbish art critic. That isn't helping anyone except elevate one's ego.

Specifically what I did was the following:

1. Criticize in private. Since it's not possible sometimes (the photos were posted in a private Flickr groups and I commented on them, along with other lab assistants and the instructor), so my reviews had a tendency to be cryptic. I tried my best to be only understandable to the target of the review (the artist themselves). That's not always possible of course, since all other classmate could read the review and there will always some who would get it except the person him/herself.... In that case you just have to be blunt and direct. Always use a humor though. Comic relieves are sometimes mandatory to ease a grave subject. It's a pedagogy, not a preach.

2. Criticize only the technical aspect, but avoid the subjective aspect. The artist should have the freedom to exhibit his own unique style. Any stylistic recommendation is in the danger territory of making the artwork unoriginal and uninspiring: a projection of the critic's desire rather than the expression of the artist's vision. I am not interested in seeing several photos of the same scene done the same way. It's boring. The only time to give out some stylistic recommendation is to suggest the current trend in art, so the artist wouldn't be living in a bubble (and even that is a recommendation, not absolute rule). This point is only important to work that has commercial value. Someone who shot photos of their family members and pets I did not give such advice. Enjoyment is more important in such work.

3. Point out good aspects of the artwork as well as shortcomings. Point out only shortcomings can be distressing to the artist who spent so much effort in the work. Point only good points don't do anybody good. We think we all know where our strength lies, but there are a couple points to consider: 1) we may or may not know the why, 2) we don't always see the photo the same way as the next person. Knowing what other people think as the strength of our own work can be an eye-opening revelation.

4. Another thing I learned from my business discipline is when in doubt, consider making a statement into a question form and making a question into a statement form. Why use such weird, indirect communication method you might ask. Well, for lack of better words, sometimes we're full of ourselves , and we make a terribly bold assumption. As the saying goes, "assume makes an ass out of u and me". So in that case, question the artist's motive behind what we believe to be an obvious mistake may reveal some insight. Hopefully we would realize some beauty in that creative new way of doing things. It also would save both the reviewer and the artist some conflict, which distracts the real purpose of the review, which is the improvement of the artwork. I don't remember the benefit of making a question into a statement form, but if I remember, I'll post it. I think it probably has to do with allowing the artist to exhibit his/her talent and to point out why I am wrong on the matter. In any case, the purpose is to paraphrase in order to clarify. People don't come from the same background so what we said might not be what they heard (sometimes we don't even know what we just said... ), so clarify through different words can work wonders.

5. This might be common sense to most. Don't ridicule the artist and his/her effort. I know it's reviewer's job to express his/her opinion, but do listen/read the artist's comment before doing anything. There is nothing more rude than criticizing for something one doesn't understand and not making any effort to understand. When in doubt, see point 4, before we make a clown out of ourselves.

6. When you don't enjoy the food, stir the food. It's a very effective method. When my Flickr contacts exhaust every single good point about my photo except the one I am most proud of, they did their job already without saying it. I knew that part of the photo must be improved, and perhaps I should be a little more humble. They did not offend me and I didn't feel offended.