On Criticism

It is quite easy to give an opinion on something, but a lot harder to critically analyse, assess or provide feedback on a piece of art. So here I've compiled general guidelines on how to effectively critique another persons art, leaning particularly towards literary arts.
A criticism cannot stand alone in isolation, it is inevitably linked to our experiences, values and beliefs, so we need to include these factors and evaluate how they affect our interpretation of an artwork.

Critique implies judgement, as it compares the artwork as it currently stands to a set of ideas held by the critic. Bearing this judgement in mind, one has to be careful that one is judging/evaluating the art, and not the artist, even though the two are interlinked!

Ideally we should include some of the following factors to ensure we are focusing on the art:

• be authentic, multi-dimensional, varied and balanced
  
• take into consideration the diversity of the artists being critiqued, as well as the many contexts in which art occurs
  
• be accurate, objective, and fair and takes into account the range of competency displayed
  
• be free from bias, and sensitive to culture, historical contexts, gender, race and age
  
• be criterion-referenced
  
• be transparent, so that the artists is aware of what you have used to interpret their work
  

Let's go into some more detail on each of these points...

1. Be authentic – in short give your true and honest opinion
   
2. Multi-dimensional – don't just use one aspect to evaluate a work, there are varying components required to make up a piece of art, syntax and diction for literature, palette and technique for traditional art etc. Make sure that you're assessing all these aspects. 
   
3. Varied – don't fixate on just one aspect of a piece of art, look at all the individual aspects and how they harmonize to create the holistic piece
   
4. Balanced – Try and look at both positive and negative aspects and give feedback on both (see Sandwich method of critique)
   
5. Be Accurate – no one will take your critique seriously if your criticism doesn't actually relate to the piece. Provide quotations from the text to give as examples when you criticize, Show that you have carefully evaluated the text by referring back to it in context!
   
6. Objectivity – Is objectivity possible... not really...This is due not only the subjective nature of the reader, whose own world-views, ideas and cultural context will have an impact on their enjoyment of a piece of work, but also create conflicts with the artists views in context. So how is it possible to attempt to give feedback, on a piece of art that has an part of objectivity? The truth is, there is no way to accurately do so. Despite that bad news though, we can strive for consistency in our knowledge of our own cultural context and the criteria we use to interpret and provide feedback on a piece of art. Stick to your assessment criteria, and you'll be able to provide partially objective feedback (more on this later)
   
7. Fairness – How is something fair or not fair? This relates back to accuracy, is what you've said actually relevant to the current piece, and do you show that you have the required knowledge to accurately give feedback, ergo, you haven't taken your own misunderstanding of a concept and applied it to a piece of art. In short you need to know what you're talking about before you give feedback.
   
8. Accountability of the Artist – This is tricky as we are all at rather different levels of competency. Sometimes you can spot a person, that is writing in a 2nd language for instance, so when viewed in relative terms, what they've accomplished is phenomenal for their level, yet not to the expected standard of a mother-tongue speaker. The way we evaluate a beginner or first attempt at a new style or technique should be different to the way we critique an expert. Criticism should be pitched to the level of the artist that is being criticized, in short do some search for background info before critiquing, have a look at their Page, do a quick browse through their gallery and most importantly have a look at their individual comments on the piece.
   
9. Bias – Another tricky one to handle, as often we are biased without knowing that we are! Having a specific set of criteria to look for and analyze means that we can reduce bias to a certain extent. And be particularly careful when attempting to evaluate a friend's work, as we often tend to overpraise. Encouragement does not always mean you have to voice positive feedback only, sometimes providing someone with a challenge to improve can be just as motivating!
   
10. Sensitivity – Again this is rather difficult one to achieve, as we often adopt our own viewpoints before realizing that we're interpreting from a particular point of view, alien to the artist. This does not mean that such a viewpoint is invalid, but it does show a lack of understanding for variation across our “global-village”. As much as our world has become homogenized, there are still aspects that create diversity, and these need to be appreciated. As much as social movements may be supported, we also need to accept that conservatives have a right to their own opinions as well, however at no stage should such opinions be forced upon another. One may criticize from a particular stand point, (this is a key form of critique, whether it's Marxist, New Historicism, Feminism etc) but it needs to be stated as such so that the artist is aware of the viewpoint adopted, even if it varies from their own intended ideas.
    
11. Criterion-referenced – This simply means that you assess the piece of art based on what criteria it set out to achieve. This is not possible on all pieces of art, but it is useful for Workshop pieces, competition or prompt entries and if the author has stated their aims and intentions in their personal comment space. You may also set up your own criteria for evaluation... which I'll discuss below.
    
12. Be Transparent – Have you explained the criteria you used to assess their work, have you linked passages or parts of the text to your criteria and then actually provided your interpretation? It's not just about giving a holistic view of your opinion of the work, but getting down to the specific details and making the text clear and accountable.
    

Subjectivity vs Objectivity
Our like or dislike for a piece of art is fundamentally subjective. So how do we provide evaluation, feedback and judgement on a piece of art that we don't necessarily like. We need to have a basis for knowing what it is we look for our find beautiful or ugly. We need to know the standards and expectations we have of art. The easiest way to do this is through setting various criteria we expect from a piece of art (we may vary this dependent on the type of art).
i.e. the way we evaluate a sonnet might be rather different to the way we evaluate free verse. Both styles have different forms and techniques that need to be taken into account.
Below I will provide some general criteria that may be applied to most pieces of art.

Criteria
DeviantArt provides us with the following criteria:

Vision – Does the artwork present or reflect a point of view, theme or idea? 
Originality – Is the artwork fresh or new in its style, execution or approach? Is it something you haven’t seen before in its particular genre? Does it surprise you? 
Technique – Was the artwork skillfully created? Does the artist exhibit advanced knowledge of the medium and/or bring special focus to the craft of the medium used. 
Impact – Does the artwork resonate with you or evoke strong emotions? Does it make you think? Does it blow your mind? 
Deviousness – An average rating based on your selections within Vision, Originality, Technique, and Impact. 

Our current school syllabus (South African CAPS) provides us with the following criteria to assess student's work:

Content – How has the writer engaged with the topics and have they presented it effectively for their intended audience. This is subdivided into originality, interpretation, and overall depth and vision. Content is also the area where you can reflect on the ideologies, portrayed by the author, and engage on the themes and character portrayals.
Structure – This relates to how it is laid out. The way dialogue is expressed, inclusion of various types of social media, paragraph formulation, stanza layout etc. As a rough rule, I include punctuation under this heading as well.
Language – This is the nitty gritty details of the writing. You can focus here on semantics, connotation, figures of speech, as well as broader themes of syntax (grammar), coherence and clarity. Language also includes tone and register, whether it's the artists, narratorial voice, or in dialogue between characters.

Other criteria you would need to include according to your own ideas about art as well as assessment of particular types of art. As a critiquer you need to include knowledge of the type of art, for instance you can't critique a sonnet without referring to how it has effectively used meter or not! Your knowledge of the standardized forms will guide you here!

I hope these rough outlines will be of some assistance, to anyone engaging in critique, and assist you in developing other Deviants skills! Critique may be difficult to read sometimes, but it is many times through this discomfort that we learn, we need to grow and improve! Be sensitive to this need, by providing fair and honest evaluations, that are sensitive to the artists feelings, whilst remaining impartial.