There's so many good points in that article, I don't even know where to begin. It is strange that there is no formalized critique structure. I think the biggest barrier to there being some sort of format with which to create valid criticism from the "back whens" to the "right nows" is the dependence on a style. Designers have to change hats constantly, so they need more formalized aesthetics to play around with - we're one trick ponies most of the time with self defined aesthetics that we get hired for . . . or don't. The author is correct. As to why this is - I think we're all shut-ins. We don't collectively talk about our work while in progress, and thereby haven't created any sort of linguistic structure to discuss and critique illustration. All that discussion basically stops when you're out of school.
Regarding the lack of discussion post-education... precisely, I agree completely. And very few people--artists, critics, writers, shmoes alike--have attempted to write that language and get the critique ball rolling.
Post a Comment