Persons more learned than I am (everyone) cite four steps for critiquing artwork.
1) Describe the work. Just the facts and details.
2) Analyze it. What are its elements (line, shape, form, value, color, texture, space) and principles (balance, proportion, emphasis, movement, pattern, rhythm and variety).
3) Interpret it. What was the artist’s intention?
4) Judge it. Did he or she succeed? Was it worth doing in the first place?
I bring this up because Saugatuck’s awning activists are at it again. (See “Protest ‘butterfly’ protected as art, men say,” Page A1).
I had no problem with the large green canopy John Porzondek and Bryan Serman installed at their home in 2009 in the first place. They’ve made many improvements to an old, tired structure since they bought it. Plus it’s their property.
I did have a problem that they didn’t first seek a permit from the city’s Historic District Commission. They had been through that process before. So why did they skip it here?
For full story, pick up a copy of the July 17 Commercial Record or subscribe to the e-edition.