The Art of Critique: Why Giving Critique is Good

Giving critique is a fantastic way to learn about art and storytelling, flex your critical thinking skills, and possibly help another creator improve their current and future stories. But how do you critique something? And why isn’t it enough to just know whether you like or dislike something? Why should you dive into picky details? Keep reading!

Critique is an analysis

A lot of sources about critique focus on the work that’s being critiqued. By extension, it focuses on the creator of that work and how they could improve the work. That’s good, and I’ll get to it later, but critique is also important because it helps you, the critic, learn too!

Critique is an analysis above all else. Many people see negative connotations, but critiques are not always exclusively negative! A full analysis should include things that need improvement, things that are done well, and how or what the work communicates.

As you can see, delving into such an examination can not only help the creator of a work improve, but help you learn more about your preferences, how art and stories convey ideas, and how you can also create better work. By identifying a creator’s strengths and weaknesses, you can learn from their mistakes. Also, you may be able to approach your own creations with a more objective perspective once you’re in the habit of making a good critique.

Outlines for a good critique

As discussed, critique is an analysis and can include a lot of information. Here’s a brief outline for a critique:

1. Point out a general thing you like

2. Talk about the things that need work

3. Point out specific things that work well

A panel from The Spark – Vinny the vampire argues with Metti the devil.

This outline is pretty simple. As an example, let’s pretend Vinny from The Spark is critiquing the Spark evacuation. He might say something like this:

“(1) It’s good that the warning system is so efficient. (2) The guards are sometimes a little pushy and they don’t provide much information about the Spark, (3) but even if they don’t always communicate clearly, it’s nice of them to consider our safety.”

This is a good start! But maybe we can make a more detailed outline.

1. Point out a general thing you like

2. Talk about the things that need work and why

3. Point out specific things that work well and why

A page from Vanguard – Dulcie Brighthop worries about her proposal.

This outline provides more usable detail. As an example, let’s pretend Dulcie Brighthop from Vanguard is critiquing Watchtower E. She might be able to say:

“(1) I’m impressed by how far out this watchtower was built, and in such a short time. (2) I noticed that there are no people at it, which may not work well if the watchtower’s purpose is to collect and process environmental data. There are also holes and cracks in the building which could affect the tower’s structural integrity. (3) However, we received signals from this tower quite recently, which shows that the equipment is likely still in good condition. Also, there are no dead bodies or signs of struggle present, which may indicate that the crew is safe wherever they are.”

Some guidelines: always be polite, and never talk to a creator in a way you wouldn’t want someone to talk to you about your work! Sandwiching negative feedback within positive feedback can help soften the blow.

What to talk about

Usually you won’t be critiquing buildings and warning systems – you’ll probably be working with art and stories. What can you comment on if not a guard’s demeanor or the lack of staff?

Start off your critique with the thing that made you check out the work in the first place. Did you dive for the “like” or “favorite” button on that art? Did that one comic page finally make you start reading the story? This is the first item in the above outlines. What made you like or fave that art, or give that story a chance?

Next, there are a lot of attributes you can talk about in the work. Colors, composition, scenery, characters, designs, writing quality, and more are all great to discuss. You can also look at a creator’s technical skill in a medium – maybe they have a nice painting technique, or great panel layouts, or a dynamic animation style. Many creators will be thrilled to get feedback on any of these things.

Things to avoid

When critiquing work, try to avoid a lot of opinion-based terms – “this anatomy looks bad”. You might truly think that, but try to frame it in a more descriptive or helpful way, such as “the left leg appears longer than the right leg” or “that arm looks like it should not bend that way”. These will help you identify your preferences in art, and also give the creator a good place to start improving.

Also be aware of who the audience of the work is, and if it was intended for you. You might think a story is boring because it features a character whose experiences differ from yours – this doesn’t make the story bad, and it might speak to other people. Works by marginalized creators can fall into this – if you’re not queer, disabled, a person of color, or experience some other status that features heavily in a story, it might not interest you. This does not mean it’s bad, but rather that it was intended for a different audience to whom it’s much more interesting or meaningful.

The same can go for works from different cultures or time periods. The art or story might not mean much to you, but does to others who understand or experienced the context surrounding the work. If you recognize who the audience of a piece is, especially if you’re not part of that audience, you might be able to learn something new and find common ground with them!

You must also consider a creator’s intent. Just because a creator means well doesn’t mean their work conveys that appropriately. If they make a mistake it often doesn’t make them a terrible person. A creator might be clumsy and unaware of subconscious biases – for example, they might draw a dog so badly it doesn’t look like a dog, but rather more like a horse. This doesn’t make the creator a filthy dog-hater, and treating them as such is no way to offer critique that both sides benefit from. They might just draw horses more often and be ignorant of dog anatomy, with no ill intent.

You don’t need to critique everything

Finally, you don’t have to critique everyone’s work. First, don’t offer critique who creators who say they don’t want it. You can analyze their works for yourself, but sharing a critique with them will not do any good. Some people (especially young, impressionable creators) are not always in a good place to handle critique yet, and that’s okay. Other creators might have personal struggles that make it hard for them to accept negative feedback on their work also – instead of helping them improve, your critique could simply discourage them. Allow these people to improve their work on their own terms.

Some people might not expect critique, especially on casual works. It’s possible that they’ll appreciate it, but ask yourself if the thing is worth critiquing. A quick doodle and a 2-minute animated film might warrant very different responses. In general, stick to critique when a creator requests it.

Finally, occasionally people are just trolls. They might ask for critique but argue with your analysis every step of the way. They might also use it as an excuse to be rude. If you identify one of these, it’s not worth engaging with them.

Now that you know a little more about critique, go out there and start analyzing!