Michael Prater’s Art criticism reading review
- Farzana Ahmed
- Jan 12, 2017
- 2 min read
Things I found out
I learnt the many different models of art criticisms. The Feldman model is a simple and basic model. It involves:
- describe- the art,
- analyse- the principal of designs,
- Interpreted- the ideas and emotions.
- Judge- how successful the artist was at expressing the ideas.
This is a simple and easy model for students to follow (specially of younger grades)
It gives a format for students to start and get used to analysing and talking about art.
Modified Feldman/Mittler model
It is a more in depth and takes into account the contextual background of the art.
Prepare to critique
Examine literal Quality
Examine functional quality
Examine the formal quality
Examine the expressive qualities
Determine relative theories
This model takes into account the context and the background of the art as ‘in the absence of contextual information, these students would have walked away from this fascinating art object thinking it to be about its design qualities.”
Things I found interesting
“The emphasis on ideas as content expressed by artworks allow the viewer to better address more contemporary and post-modern works.”
The author is implying that the Feldman model is wrong and Modified Felfman/Mittler model is correct. I think both are useful for a teacher. And they can both be used and gradually on up on the grades.
Question
This article puts the point that to understand an art you need to know the contextual background. Is that really always the case? Can art not be viewed without any background knowledge and this be interoperated by the viewer?
I think contextual knowledge is needed to truly understand the intent of the artist. But the face value (visible aspect) of an art is also valuable. Students can look an art work and interpreted how they want and feel and does not always need to explore the artist intent. It can mean different things to different people which may or may not coincide with the artist intends, feelings or ideas.
Comments