At 5/23/11 07:36 PM, Luxembourg wrote:
How bad is it to make a review based on the idea behind a piece or of the author instead of on the actual image?
This depends. If the entire piece relies on the idea behind it, then yes, critique the idea (ie. Duchamp's "the fountain").
If the idea is a major part, but technical aspects are also part of the overall effect (ie. Andy Warhol screenprints) then critique the idea mainly, but dont forget to mention the technical aspects.
If the idea is present but the main focus is technical than focus more on the execution than the underlying meaning (ie. pre-raphaelite art), but feel free to mention the meaning.
If there is a flimsy idea and nearly all of the focus is technical than dont bother mentioning the idea and just focus on the technical (ie. hyperrealist art).
In the case of this piece I would say it falls into the last two categories. He wanted to draw a character, but then decided to modify it. Its a loose tribute at best, no need to get anal about minute details that no one really cares about. When Fernando Botero draws a fat mona lisa, you dont attack him saying "but the mona lisa isnt fat" its his stylistic rendition.
If in the comments he mentioned something that wasn't accurate, who gives a shit, its a fictional character anyway and its not hurting the actual piece is it?