The Crit as Crucible: Explorations with Words in the Studio

The group critique, better known as the crit, is the central pedagogical pillar of most graduate programs in studio art. This discursive form, dating to the nineteenth century, sees students orally defending their finished (or nearly finished) artworks. Professors and peers explore projects with their creators--providing opinions and probing questions that spur new working directions. Ideally, instructors and fellow students weave a group tapestry, embellishing bolts of ekphrasis with references to theories and other artworks. However, in practice, these co-productions are not always pleasant. Painter Lisa Yuskavage compares them to boot camp: “in the military they break you down to build you back up... At Yale they break you down and leave you to put the pieces back together.” Additionally, there is a danger that crits become merely platforms for participants to flex their intellectual muscles or engage in personal politics and one-upmanship; here, words do not square with the work (in his short essay on the crit, Kurt Radke remarks: “I once witnessed two instructors nearly come to blows over ... interpretations of Rosalind Krauss, while a confused student patiently waited”). The culture of crits varies significantly from school to school, reflecting the ethos of each. This paper will draw upon journalistic accounts, interviews, surveys, and artistic engagements with critique sessions in order to provide a history of the crit at a selection of US MFA programs. Ultimately, the figure of the crucible encapsulates crits, which are equally generative, constrictive, and even traumatic verbal explorations of visual art.