What is the work saying? This is my question to myself when confronted with artwork that lacks formal strength (good use of the elements of art and the principles of design) and which also lacks technically sound use of the materials and its methods. Needless to say, it is a huge disappointment when I am unable to answer that question about the work’s content and simultaneously I am unable to console myself that the work possesses satisfying formal and/or technical qualities.
Recently, someone proposed large velvet textured swaths of cloth upon which they intended to paint a broad, black line. This person was preoccupied with Blackness in our racialised local space. However, nothing in the conversation surrounding the suggestion of this work offered a rationale for this particular gesture. I said, “If I walked into an exhibition and saw that I would walk out.” I meant it. My response to the work in progress was deemed “aggressive”. I admit, I was blunt and unwilling to give a thumbs up to an ill-conceived idea presented as art. There are quite a lot of those out there that make their way into galleries. And every time I see questionable art, I have to calm myself with my own sarcasm; everyone is an artist and even painted rubbish, given the chance, will be displayed as art.
Many, many years ago, I was in a quandary about a few recently completed paintings. I pulled the paintings out from their hiding place to show a colleague, requesting feedback. I was disappointed. The feedback I got was an enthusiastic utterance of “It’s ok.” The excitement in the utterance was unmistakable and might have been accompanied by an equally delight-filled, “I don’t see anything wrong with this.” But what does “It’s ok” mean as a critique of creative work? I didn’t have the good sense to ask what was “ok” about the work. I felt uncertain about the paintings while my colleague thought them ok but I did not have the words to solicit the explanation to see as he was seeing. Was it the colour palette that solicited the excitement in his tone? Must have been. By then I had gotten used to hearing variations of “It’s ok” but never being told more.
Years later, pondering the dilemma of my community’s stagnation, I reflected on my Burrowes art school and UG student days and my early professional life. In those reflections, I realised a grave problem – the absence of critical evaluation of works. Never as students did we engage in crits. Short for critiques, crits are sessions in which students and tutors consider the work of students for their formal and technical qualities discussing the strengths and weaknesses of the work in question. In these sessions, the clarity and merit of the content is discussed, as well as in relation to the formal and technical aspects. Instead in art school I heard, “It coming to come.” A friend told me that at UG the critical feedback she overheard was, “Wuk it up.”
“It coming to come” and “Wuk it up” are not feedback. They are nonsensical and Lazy (with a capital ‘L’)! No tutor or lecturer should say either or a variation of these to a student and no student should offer such feedback to a colleague.
Recently, I had a chance to work with senior students in a studio course. I was shocked. They were initially incapable of critiquing work. ‘I like your work’ suffices in some instances but it certainly does not suffice in the classroom, from an instructor to a student or a student to a student. Even if it is the starting point, what about the work is appreciated? Students should therefore realise through deduction aspects of the work that may need reconsideration. This is what is needed; development of a critical eye so that young artists are not easily satisfied with gestures because they received some likes.
In my community, we do not critically evaluate each other’s work. Years ago, another colleague-friend was in the habit of calling everything everyone did rubbish. Those of us who knew him got used to him and I think he was generally ignored. His behaviour was explained away with his biography. We have had a few such characters in our community to contend with over the years. Even if the work is deemed rubbish, what about it is rubbish? They never say.
Every idea executed does not deserve a thumbs up, a like, an easel or a plinth to be displayed on. Art’s public has responsibilities too. Look critically and with agency. Just as you would walk into a clothing store with a discerning eye and say why you like what you like, the same should be done with art. I also think part of the responsibility of art’s public is to not be intimidated by it. I viewed a documentary on the elusive street artist Banksy, in which one of his collaborators said art can be intimidating. Indeed, it can be. Especially the contemporary stuff that time has not distilled, so we, as the audience, must do so. But art does not need to be intimidating. Feel free to own your questions, your dislikes, your less than favourable (thumbs down) responses. You are entitled. Not because we (artists) make it, must you like it!
A friend recently admitted his hesitation to speak to a young artist regarding work he had questions about. He feared his race, sex, and social class would put him at odds with the young artist so he asked nothing. I understand him. His concern is legitimate especially in 2023 when the world is hypersensitive and when questions are not deemed questions, but assumed to be weapons and the modus operandi to usurp power by the recipient of said question.
Akima McPherson is a multimedia artist, art historian, and educator
