1. Description. ( Detail how the art actually looks. )
2. Analysis. ( How are the materials, tools, design elements & principles arranged
or manipulated to create the artwork. )
3. Interpretation. ( What is the artist expressing and what do you make of the artwork's statement. )
And 4. Judgment. ( Is it a successful work of art & why? )
Keep in mind to attack is to assault. To appreciate is to employ empathy.
To critique is to have a set of values to apply in the appraisal of the artistic effort.
For would-be collectors, curators or critics this process may lead to how one connects with the artwork on an intellectual or passionate level and does this result in the need to own, exhibition, or write about the actual work of art.
In my work I tend to have a construct of goals, imagination and reasonable technique based on form following function. Effect grounded in concept. Experiment bound by the moment. The context may shift from that of historian, critic, or artist with the same steps being applied. All while being mindful of the potential of the methods and materials being used.
Usually each individual Rhythmistic image is part of a larger body or collection of work. It is a unit of a whole.
I hope curators, collectors, and critics will be mindful of this.
BTW: I reserve the right to grow and become better at all of this along the way. Thanks!
Rhythmism has future-primitifism as its syllogism.