Fade to black...

Fade to black…

Recently, I became aware of the plight of a student who created a painting that included a naked woman as a component of the content. It’s important to note that the painting wasn’t finished.

The student met with the professor teaching the class for an in-process critique. The professor objected to the portrayal of a female nude in the painting, stating that the student was objectifying women and strongly suggesting changes in content. The student reported informing the professor that the painting was not finished and also stating that it was not the student’s intention to objectify women. The student also reported that the professor rejected the student’s reasoning and, especially, the student’s stated intentions. Reportedly, the exchange went on for some time, leaving the student feeling defeated before the painting was even finished. As a result, the student painted over the entire painting with black paint. None of the original content of the painting remained visible—it was simply solid black paint. The student reported wanting to leave the painting completely black, or perhaps to sand certain sections to reveal portions of the content hidden beneath; however, none of the nudity would be revealed if this technique were utilized.

Many things come to mind….

First, I think it would be inappropriate for the student to present the now all-black painting at critique. It smacks of bitterness and anger and would be an unwise and disproportionate reaction. Moreover, I think the strategic sanding in order to reveal certain content, but not other, is ridiculous.
Second, no matter what the professor’s reasoning may have been, I believe that it was inappropriate for the professor to judge the student’s intentionalism for anything other than that which the student stated. Given that both parties understood that the painting was not finished, it was inappropriate for the professor to strongly suggest a change in content to prevent the painting from appearing to the professor as though women were being objectified.

At this point I feel the need to interject a disclaimer: I am not a proponent of the objectification of women. However, I am a card-carrying member of the ACLU (yes, I can produce the card), and as such, I support every First Amendment right to freedom of expression. That said, presuming that the student is telling the truth, the student stated that it was NOT the student’s intention to objectify women; rather, to specifically incorporate a naked female form in the execution of the painting’s content, which was unfinished.

Third, every person who comes in contact with this painting—or any other work of art—is entitled to his or her own interpretive embrace. Every person who comes in contact with this painting—or any other work of art—is entitled to his or her own judgment of its success, including judging the success of the student’s own stated intentionalism. However, prescribing, suggesting, or otherwise enforcing a change in content or subject matter is simply wrong, no matter what the teacher’s social critique or the offense that may be taken. If an individual has such a critique—that women are objectified by the production of such imagery—that’s fine. It’s valid criticism. Nevertheless, it can also be wrong. Not all [nude] female imagery is created to objectify women, although some definitely is. Not all [nude] female imagery objectifies women, although some absolutely does. It is, however, the student’s right to make this choice. And we must remember, what we have here is a student who has stated clearly that this was not the student’s intention.

The opportunities missed here are enormous!

1. The professor—despite an obvious personal social agenda—could have let the student finish the painting and then provided relevant critique—including social critique about the objectification of women—i.e., other ways in which the painting might be interpreted. By insisting on the change of content, the professor decimated the opportunity for genuine teaching and learning in this situation.
2. After completion, the professor could have experienced the student’s intentionalism and interpreted the painting in the manner in which the student intended—keeping an open mind. This is not impossible.
3. The success and value of the painting—based upon personal taste—could have been assessed. It may have been a success—it may also have failed—but we will never know.
4. The student could have learned that “the idea” behind the painting—no matter the intentionalism—didn’t work. On the other hand, it might have. Again, we will never know.

Although another student witnessed this incident, I hope to treat this critique as a philosophical example, fully taking into account the fact that the professor has not commented. If the events in this story have been related truthfully, then I believe my critique of the situation is accurate.

Throughout my experience in art education I have come to believe that there is simply nothing that can ruin a developing artist like bad critique. Those who undertake the responsibility to be teachers of art hold the aspirations and talents of their students in trust, and their words of praise or condemnation carry immense weight. This is certainly not to say that students should be treated with kid gloves, showered with empty praise, and insulated from harsh appraisals when these might be appropriate. If a work of art is truly a failure, the instructor should say so.

But, negative criticism is not the same as bad critique. Bad critique attacks the artist rather than the artwork. It imposes someone else’s values on the artist’s work. It destroys the artist’s sense of self, kills creativity, and thwarts ambition. The student in this story was harmed by the professor’s bad critique—frustrated, angry, discouraged, and now contemplating an action that could result in a low grade, possibly jeopardizing the student’s academic future, or capitulating to demands that would undermine the student’s artistic integrity. This is, in my opinion, a vile position for the student to be forced to occupy, but such is the result of bad critique.

Let all who teach or study the arts take heed.