Thesis abstract:
We live in a success-oriented culture and, as a result, we experience constant assessment throughout our lives. From academic grading in school, to professional evaluations in the work place, we rely on external assessments for feedback and validation.
In graphic design, critique is an established mode of assessment. Designers seek and respond to feedback from colleagues in hopes that the process will yield effective design solutions.
Critique conventions inform my method of working. I address feedback in a generative way and attempt to determine the point at which critique ceases to be productive.
As designers, how much feedback should we seek? How do we decide which advice to follow and which to discard? To whom do we listen?
In my work, I co-opt the vocabulary of critique, cloaked in niceties and reinforced by repetition, to demonstrate its limitations. Using a hyperbolic approach, I identify and mirror the language back to expose the veneer of objectivity and test the limits of subjectivity. I replay feedback in exaggerated form, to challenge the perception that critique is an infallible process.
