Some artist say that they never read reviews about their performances. Famous Finnish pianist, conductor and composer Olli Mustonen obviously did. He refused to play for several years in Helsinki because of a music critic of the leading newspaper. Mustonen new that he was (and still is) a great pianist, but somehow couldn't stand the poor reviews that the critic gave him, time after time. Was the critic harassing the artist, or was he honestly trying to be objective? Many supported Mustonen's decision and felt that he was attacked unduly.
We are taught not to take criticism personally. I think that's as difficult as trying to be objective. Here are some reasons why I believe we cannot give objective criticism:
- Personality - we reveal our own personality in our appraisals, like the critic of Olli Mustonen
- Values - we judge according to our values
- Context - we think what's right or wrong in relationship to other similar things
- Ideology - we interpret things according to our beliefs and morality
- Social pressure - we tend to conform with our social environment
- Experience - a nicer word for prejudice
- Knowledge - as experts we know better
- Fear - we don't want to be ridiculed
- Personal gain - sometimes a certain kind of evaluation can raise our status or further our aspirations
If objective criticism is a myth does it have any value? I think that designers and artist can still learn from it. It is, however, important to understand that critics are people, too.
