What Are Reviews, Criticism, and What Is Their Role in Art and Media?

Basically, I like publishing my opinions, and the concept of having others read them is amusing.

I’ve never published (self or otherwise) a single review or piece of criticism, and I’ve only written two, but it’s a lot of fun, and I feel compelled to discuss it. What better way to achieve that than to have a lot of strangers read my perspective on the subject? Are you detecting a pattern?

It is vital to understand, however, that there is a distinction between publishing your opinion for others to read and writing a review and/or criticism. Let me clarify.

Your opinion is fine; loving or hating anything is legitimate; but, leaving it at that is uninteresting and unproductive. You should be able to explain why. Why you feel the way you do is because your viewpoint is significant to others; it may spark conversation and impact other people’s opinions. This is when your viewpoint becomes a review or criticism. I should probably define them.

A review is typically seen as a document written to persuade someone to see or not see a play. (I guess I should say “professional” reviews; I’m not referring to Yelp here).

A criticism is typically seen as a more in-depth examination of the relevance of a work, including why it exists and why it works or does not work. (It’s crucial to emphasize that criticism isn’t intrinsically good or negative; it may go either way. It’s a popular assumption that all critique is negative, that being “critical” means saying something terrible or harsh, but this isn’t true. It is merely a thorough examination of anything.

As someone who has no meaningful experience with the topic other than a single lesson on it, I believe this difference is ridiculous. In my perspective, any excellent “reviews” must also contain “criticism”. Sure, one might argue that anything intended to be a “review” does not evaluate a piece of art as profoundly as something intended to be “criticism”. My answer to such argument would be: How can you adequately assess anything without criticizing it?

You can’t, at least not adequately (though this is mostly determined by your purpose to discuss any topic you choose). Let me use my favorite very genuine movie as an example: “Big Explodey Action Movie 7”. Now, “Big Explodey Action Movie 7” is a highly entertaining film with a lot of explosives (it could have had more, it’s a little disappointing after 4 and 5, but it’s still better than 6), and massive genre-defining action moments. If possible, see it in cinemas with iMax, 3D, surround sound, and other special effects. I mean it: throw elbows for that ideal center seat; it will be worth the assault penalty.

I like “Big Explodey Action Movie 7,” but I couldn’t tell you anything about the narrative; you might claim it doesn’t have a plot and that the authors threw in a few lines of dialogue here and there between the bangs and booms. Here’s the question: Does this make the film bad?

If a movie is designed to be a pleasant spectacle to watch in a huge theater with fistfuls of popcorn and a big gulp down your throat, does it really matter if it doesn’t excite your intellect with a hard-hitting deep tale and sympathetic characters? Yes! But also… No!… Wait, what?

I should definitely make a point here: all positive evaluations include criticism. I don’t believe there’s a way around that, but you can write five two-thousand-word evaluations of anything, each analyzing five distinct components and reaching five different conclusions about the quality of the product in question.

I believe that the difference people attempt to draw between “review” and “criticism” arises from an artificial value put on what you choose to criticize. If you see a plotless popcorn-munching action movie for what it is and critique it as such, delving into how the score complements the effects, that can sometimes be viewed as “less valuable” than attempting to extract meaning from its nonexistent story within the larger context of explodey action movies and contemporary politics, or whatever else you want to discuss.

I believe some of this stems from the fact that most reviews will not attempt to cover everything in detail unless you want your review to take as long to consume as whatever it is you’re reviewing (which would be fantastic), so you end up trying to figure out what is actually worth discussing.

But why is all this necessary? Why should we read and write about art and media at all? Great question! It’s an issue that has come up many times in class this semester, and I believe I have an answer:

You don’t, really. Most individuals do not read reviews or criticism of the items they consume; they may watch trailers or interviews, but I would say that most people do not read reviews before going to see something they are interested in viewing. I know I don’t usually do till after I’ve watched it since I like seeing what other people think and comparing it to my own. So, if most people aren’t reading them, why are we writing them? Is this some type of ego trip? Is it to feel superior to the artist? No. Criticism is a reaction; most excellent work will prompt us to ask questions.

“Big Explodey Action Movie 7” uses surround sound to raise questions, such as finding family or criticizing climate change. The film’s use of big explosions adds to the impact of the message. My fictional movie example is running out of steam here, but the point is that everything is asking us questions, whether we want to or not, and who are we to ignore them?

So, if you want to put down your amusing little thoughts and have others read them and learn anything useful from them, bear in mind that you must have something to say and something to back up your position. Sure, being provocative and matter-of-fact may be entertaining, and if that’s your thing, more power to you, but if you’re truly wanting to interact with a piece of media on a deeper level, you need to understand why you feel the way you do.

Keep in mind that what you say does not have to be pompous drivel about why the curtains are blue and how it relates to the psychology of the genuine main character, the cashier who was on screen for thirty seconds. I like writing about why the curtains are blue, but if you want to dissect a two-second explosion for a thousand pages and have it as the reason you believe “Big Explodey Action Movie 7” is the finest piece of film ever made due to its special effects alone, do it. That seems like a fascinating read.

Why is it vital for art critics to get their evaluations published in the media?

It’s critical for them to get their evaluations published in the media because if no one has heard of them, no one will care what they have to say about art. What are you seeing? What is the composition of the artwork? Are there any identifiable images?

What is the aim of a critical review?

The purpose is to offer the editor with an appraisal of the text. to suggest to the editor whether the piece should be published, changed, or rejected. to give writers with constructive criticism and fair editing ideas.

What is the purpose of an art critique?

Art Criticism Definition, Levels, and Purpose: Lesson | Study.com
Its objective is to assist the critic or others in determining the worth of a piece of art. Art criticism is inherently subjective since it incorporates the art critic’s own interpretation, but it also leans on common concepts such as history, aesthetics, or a theory.

What are some instances of critique?

For example, you would evaluate a novel’s plot structure, characterisation, and setting; a painting’s composition, brush strokes, colour, and light; and a research project’s subject selection, experiment design, data analysis, and conclusions.

How do you criticize a review article?

To create an article review, begin by reading it attentively to comprehend the key points and supporting evidence. Assess the author’s standpoint, writing style, and any biases. Evaluate the article’s contributions to the field and provide helpful criticism.

What is the significance of art criticism?

Critics use their articles to teach audiences about historical and current art trends, methods, and the larger cultural relevance of artworks. They simplify the typically complicated realm of art, making it more accessible to the general audience. Art critics help to the preservation of art history.

How do you do an art critique?

To engage your viewers more, feel free to ask questions at the beginning or finish (after they’ve left comments). You may also begin the criticism by talking about your work and asking any concerns you have about it, allowing viewers to contextualize their remarks within your practice.