Chapter 4: Critiques and Evaluations
Writing a critique is similar to writing an analysis in that you need to have an introduction, summary paragraph, three or more paragraphs discussing literary (or advertising) features to discuss, plus a conclusion. The main difference between an analysis and critique is that a critique evaluates something (e.g., a poem, advertisement, short story) based on criteria whereas an analysis describes the components, the style and structure, of something, showing how the parts work together, but does not include opinion or evaluation.
To analyze the style, tone, and structure that a writer uses to communicate a literary experience, you need to understand the basic components of literature: its language, forms, and sounds, and the distinctive elements of poetry and fiction. These were discussed in the previous chapter (Ch. 3 Analysis) with literary examples provided to let you learn and practice the process of understanding the tools used to create the literature. You prepare for interpretation by observing the text and answering the initial questions after a selection trains you to read closely, to carefully observe details of the literary text, and to explore how these details function in the works.
The literary devices discussed in the previous chapter and available for review here—figurative language, metaphors, similes, imagery, and allusions—all contribute to make a literary work resonate with meanings on various symbolic, levels. The meaning of a poem, a story, or a drama begins with its literal level; the reader understands this level by tracing the most obvious aspects of the story, the setting, the plot, and the characters. If you were to tell a friend about a movie you had just seen, for example, you would tell him the basic story first, filled with sufficient detail to allow him to understand it. Since your friend has not seen the movie, he or she must depend on the details you have observed and express in your summary. These details sketch out the story, providing answers to the “reporter’s questions”: the “who, what, when, where, and why” of an experience. From a clear picture of this literal level, the two of you may then explore the symbolic levels of the film. Perhaps you find specific images that suggest meanings as they appear in a scene, or perhaps you find the whole film meaningful in terms of your emotional life or spiritual life.
Your friend may also ask you to give your evaluation of the movie, and in this chapter you will be asked to write and evaluation of an advertisement, short story, poem, film, or essay. You might be tempted to quickly respond with an “awesome” or a recommendation to “not waste your money”; however, responses such as these are not the same as a critique. Critiques contain thoughtful evaluations of short stories or whatever, by comparing the works to established criteria. For example, you could evaluate a character in a play or short story by comparing the character’s actions and qualities to criteria such as character development, flat or dynamic characters, etc.
In writing evaluation, you need to identify exactly what you are seeking to comment on. When you are clear about what it is intended to be or to do, you can avoid comparing “apples to oranges” as the saying goes. That is, you must know the purpose the object is designed for before you critique it. You would be foolish to judge the architecture of a cathedral by noting that there is no place in it to store hay and house horses. You know the difference between a cathedral and a barn. Each may be evaluated, but according to the terms of its right category: a cathedral by its intended function, a barn by its function. Confusion comes when these categories are not so clear. The purpose of specific writing and other arts sometimes appears ambiguous. Is this “black comedy” play serious, or comic? It may be hard to tell. Is this “performance art” supposed to be interesting? Am I having fun yet? These thoughts come as we experience something whose purpose is unclear to us, and until we can clarify that purpose, we probably should refrain from judging it—at least in public writing. But when we can establish the purpose, the reason something was made or written, then we can test it: does it function as intended? Does it strike a false note anywhere (with inconsistent diction, unmotivated action, unbelievable situation or escapes from situations)? These may be faults. Awkward dialogue could destroy the mood that an author wants to build in his two lovers’ dialogue; the unlikely intervention of the death of a rich aunt who bequeaths all her money to her poverty-stricken nephew would probably be objectionable in a realistic novel. But these very things may be appropriate for works with other literary aims. And a surprising intervention that solves problems or protects from dangers is an old device that still works fine for movies with a high fantasy content, such as the James Bond series, the Indiana Jones films, and the Star Wars epic. Again, knowing the purpose of the writing or art is necessary for any kind of valid critique.
​
​
​
​
​