The B.F.A.’s had our first formal studio critique last week. Studio professor John Jurayj introduced a new format for the critique that allowed the work to speak for the artist, and resulted in critical conversations forming around the pieces. To establish this dialogue, each student wrote up a short statement about the piece that they were presenting, and was then only responsible for answering minor technical questions (vs. the typical critique structure in which artists formally present their work and answer questions throughout). This structure turned the discussion away from the artists’ perceptions of their own work, and towards a more objective view of the work itself; thus mirroring the gallery setting where artists are unable to defend their work, and viewer’s questions and concerns can result in gaps of confusion and the piece falling apart conceptually. The reality is that in the gallery world it is extremely rare to be able to stand beside one’s work and answer such questions.
Each crit was a 20-minute group-oriented dialogue led by John Jurayj as well as guest critics Jane Benson and Jane Farver. In addition to teaching the New York City Seminar and Professional Practice courses at AAP NYC respectively, Benson is a working artist in her own right and Farver a respected curator. Their unique perspectives on the art world helped round out the discussions and provided valuable professional insight.
The theme of the project was “The New York Times.” While incredibly open-ended, it gave us a new way of approaching a project in which the concept came first, and then the search for the right medium to represent it came second. This is a shift from our typical strategies of focusing on one material or technique first and then on the idea. Indeed, works spanned a variety of media including sound, installation, sculpture, painting, and performance reflected the reality of contemporary art-making within the predominantly post-genre art world of today.
