Criticism
See also:  -[Art Criticism]
           
          
On this page:  {Intro}
               {Refs
               {Links}



Intro

Please send any comments via:  Frank at  fleeding at hotmail.com

Also note: I'm not really a literature type person, but
           rather an artist as such; grain of salt.

When we seek to talk about a work (whether it's a 
drawing/painting/sculpture, or a musical composition,
or a play/novel, etc...) we can address several 
aspects of the work itself:

 1) The what-ness of the work.

 2) How it speaks to us in our own time and
    environment.

 3) How it interacts with similar works.

In terms of technique, we might want to decide
the style that it is done in. For example, is
it in a realistic or naturalistic style, or is
it in the manner of the theatre of the absurd
and/or dada? 

Clearly things done some time in the past can
actually speak more directly and cogently to
us than something producec in our own time.
Take for example, "Waiting for Godot" or 
"The Agamemnon", "Hamlet", and similar plays
-- they all speak to the idea of present time
and history - but also to the role of the
individual caught up in the roll-out of history;
or the lack of it.
               
In many cases, we can draw parallels of the work
with other works that express similar concepts.
We might (for example) take the "fauvist" (wild
beast paintings) of deReign's "London Bridge" 
and others and draw parallels to John Coltrane's 
jazz work "Peace on Earth". Both glare and gawk 
back at us - forcing us to confront what the work 
is about. Both use non-traditional techniques 
and "colours" - one visually so, the other aurally
so.

We can then take broader assides in comparing
(eg) Toulouse Latrec's "At the Moulon Rouge"
and Erik Satie's "Parade and ballet realiste"
based on Jean Cocteau's work.

And so forth.

Of course, we can to far. To say that a work
is representing something just because of the
time it is written or created in and thus
characteristic of everything in that time
is just as misleading (in many cases) as to
say that we understand the work's creator
INTENTION. And hence the so-called intentionist 
falacy.








Refs


               

Links



  -[wiki entry]-


  -[about.com page]-


  -[]-


  -[]-