After watching the recent 3-Point Perspective video on the 10 Sins of Art School, I’m left a little troubled by one of the points. I’ve attended several art schools and sat through critiques. Often when a peer’s work is held for review most had nothing to say. For my part it is usually because the piece wasn’t agreeable to my sensibilities. How can a person offer constructive criticism when they don’t agree with the artist’s choice of rendering, composition, storytelling, etc? Their choice could be due to a novice understanding of technique, but it may also be their personal style.
There were two instances when an instructor called on me to give comments and I guess I was too honest. The classroom broke out like I just dropped the gauntlet on someone. I don’t think my observations were out the line, for the instructor agreed with me. I often wonder if they asked me to speak because they themselves cannot make certain remarks in fear of negative performance reviews. We all can’t emulate Lee’s bold declaration of distaste.
After class some people suggested I disappointed the person in review. I was told as a student of a higher skill level my voice held more weight and should have been more responsible with my words. In my defense, I did not use negative words like ‘bad’, but the measured statements were curt.
I guess what I'm asking is what is the best approach to critiquing someone’s art when their body of work opposes your own artistic values? Especially with someone whose at the early stages in their studies. How does an instructor promote technique when the student is adamant on keeping their rendering minimal or intentionally crude to maintain the ‘hand-drawn’ aesthetic?
@willicreate I'm interested in giving my two-cents.
Can you reference the part of the podcast that you're referring to? Do you off the top of your head remember what the time stamp was? I assume it was the part about "Lee's bold declaration of distastes"?
@willicreate when I'm called on to critique some ones art who is at a very low/beginner level, i usually just pick out one thing to tell them to work on so they don't feel like i'm crapping on everything they did. If they are a student that cares about getting better they can take that advice and then if you critique them again you can tell them something else to work on.
I like the sandwich technique
Its important to be honest and to not "fake the compliments". Search for the good and you will find it (it doesn't have to be big).
I was thinking about this yesterday, especially as I feel like I have a blind-spot when it comes to my own work and wish I could get some honest critique but am not sure I could handle it! (Any negative criticism plays over in my head like a broken record, but I instantly forget anything positive. 
)
Well, my thoughts are, when it comes to illustrations that are unsuccessful, it doesn't matter what the style is, one can easily tell whether it's amateurish (except of course when it comes to my own (due to the aforementioned blind-spot)). I can think of many illustrations with styles or subject matter that I don't like (eg. Manga. Seriously, I hate manga) but I can appreciate when it's done well (and cringe when it's done badly).
Same when something's in a loose or messy style. For example, this week I popped in to a little gallery exhibiting a diverse bunch of abstract paintings by local artists, and I could easily see which ones were professional and which looked as though the painter watched a YouTube video on how to make money from abstract art. They're possibly of the opinion that abstract art can't be "good" or "bad" and might be trying to get away with something they think should be easy, but even a non-abstract artist like me could see it.
So... what's my point?
Oh yes. First point: I don't think the style matters - people can still critique it fairly. (Eg, if everything is out of proportion and has weird perspective, that's great; if the whole picture is trying to have perfect perspective and a few things are off, that's something to point out.)
Second point: how we critique it does matter. And of course there are tricks and tips like the sandwich method, or 3 positives then 1 negative etc. But I think it goes deeper than that: what are the motives of our heart? Are we proud, or arrogant, or looking down at the other person or their work? Does seeing their mistakes make us feel better about ourselves? Are we using "being honest" as an excuse to be blunt and unfeeling?
My opinion is that a critique should be personal, and by that I mean done in a kind, caring way, knowing what the person's strengths, weaknesses and aims are. There is a place for tough-love, but I think that's best coming from someone who knows and cares about the one being criticised. People might disagree here, since I know that it's hard to get honest feedback from friends who are scared of hurting your feelings or who aren't professionals themselves. However, I think at the very least the one giving critique should know what that person's style is and what they're holping to achieve through the image.
In conclusion - since this is turning into an essay while I procrastinate from my real work - I think we who give critique should do it humbly, with loving honesty, considering foremost the aim of the illustration rather than our personal opinions. We should aim to build the other person up, not tear them down.
And we who seek critique should take it humbly, not getting defensive or taking it to heart, but ruminating on it in order to take what's helpful and leave what's not.
And now I'm not even sure if I've answered your question, but at least this entertained me for a while.
@alexw Here's the timestamp: https://youtu.be/Cyq3ioZFXYc?t=2628
As for my comment on Lee, that was intended to be a non-serious callback to an earlier video: https://youtu.be/W8gDvK0J6K0?t=3351
Also, thanks those who've responded. Will need to sit and think about the feedback given.
As long as you are being objective in your comments, there should be no issue. True, many people can be sensitive to critiques, but then they are the ones who will not improve, no matter what their style. If you watch any of the critique arenas or HTFYA videos, the majority of the fixes are objective, never changing the style of the art, but the execution of art principles or the composition for the betterment that of particular illustration.
@willicreate Thank you for the references! I get what you're saying now.
So I guess my take on your last paragraph question, which was "best approach for critiquing...when their body of work opposes your own artistic values."
#1 We all can't control people's responses, even with good intentions of growth, sometimes people take it the wrong way, misinterpret it, etc. So positive or negative, you have to tread through their response with patients. I've given critique to my wife, and friends with good intentions and it was misinterpreted. And I have to evaluate how I communicated. Which is just a life long skill in it of itself.
#2 Once you've critiqued, for any skill level, remembering there's the chance the person will not to be receptive or regard your values to the degree that you perceive. Meaning, we might think, "dude, this is helpful! Here's my two cents!", but they could like, "Mm, sure ya...whatever..." and not accept it. You can agree to disagree with them, and vice versa with you.
Unless you feel like their artwork is legitimately bad, you can argue why you think they need improvement, change or whatever. You can humbly submit the critique to them, while keeping in mind the principle I noted in #1 about their response.
The term constructive is to build up in my own funky definition. And not every building is built up the same in the world. So you might think your words of encouragement (the critique itself) will build them up, but they might disregard it. OR they might think, "Oh my gosh! I did not see that! Thank you!" 
So TL;DR version is, you should still bring out the critique, with confidence and a defense, but remember to humbly submit it and accept their response of whatever it may be. If you feel like they're going down a bad path you can nudge them a little more, because your heart intention is "I want you to succeed, here's what I think might be the solution."
One more thing! You can think of each of the people you critique as a close friend, if you see your friend going down a path that is not good, and you are a good friend to them and care about them, you're GOING to tell them "bro! Where are you going?! You need to take this better path!" That's an extreme case, but the heart intention behind your statements of encouragement or critique is "I see something wrong, and because I care about you as a person and your work, I think this is better route."
There's also the reality that we all have to face with critiques, in and outside of art creation, is that we have to abide by the words that we say to people. Like a feedback loop of giving critique, and living by it, or realizing our critique was incorrect and then we improve in a different way.
@willicreate when I'm called on to critique some ones art who is at a very low/beginner level, i usually just pick out one thing to tell them to work on so they don't feel like i'm crapping on everything they did. If they are a student that cares about getting better they can take that advice and then if you critique them again you can tell them something else to work on.
