Critique

Before architecture school, I had never engaged in a formal studio or creative critique. Sure, I’ve taken some drawing courses at community college, but that casual interaction is nothing like being grilled as a full-time student–though that’s probably an overstatement. Critiques are an interesting experience. When you’re dealing with art, there’s an inherently subjective component to evaluation: there’s no objective right or wrong way to do things (as long as you follow your instructor’s directions). However, during the critique, as you walk through all the students’ work, you can sense that some works are inherently “better” than others. It’s not necessarily graded or anything; you can just sort of sense it.

As I finish the first two weeks of my first formal studio course, I can’t help but subconsciously develop a new strategy for my future. Right now, I’m probably an average or above-average student, but in art, I think you want to strive to be the “best.” It’s a competitive job market, after all, and there’s value in standing out with an award if you can. I guess academics are similar. One attribute I noticed in an earlier post is my tendency to finish work early (probably the earliest) among my peers, but not necessarily produce the “best” work. While I don’t think working fast is necessarily a bad thing, at the end of the day, what matters is the quality and aesthetic beauty of the final product.