Feldman's Method of Art Criticism

Describe: What do you see?

• A very large (over 3 metres tall, almost 8 metres wide) painting done in black, white, and grey.

• While not entirely realistic, we can see people, animals, and objects: a screaming woman holding her dead child, a fallen solider with a broken sword, a horse in pain, a bull, and other human figures.

• There are objects like a lightbulb, fire, and fragments of broken things.

• The shapes look jagged and fractured, like shards of glass.

• Overall, it appears like a chaotic scene.
  
  

Analyse: How is it arranged?

• Lines: Sharp, jagged, broken lines create tension and chaos.

• Shapes: There is a combination of geometric and organic shapes. The humans and animals depicted appear as flat and distorted shapes. Triangular shapes repeat across the painting, creating a sense of aggression and violence, and directing our eyes in zigzags.

• Colour: Only black, white, and grey are used. This makes it depressing, and also stark, like a newspaper photo. 

• Space: While there is some negative space depicted by black and dark grey shapes, the composition is generally tight. Figures are crowded and overlapping, adding to the feeling of panic and confusion.

• Value/Contrast: The subject matter is generally painted in white or light grey, making it stand out from the dark background. The extreme light and dark areas create a sense of drama.

• Movement/Rhythm: Diagonal lines and twisted figures create a restless, chaotic rhythm. They guide the viewer's eyes around the painting in different directions, creating a sense of disorientation.
  
  

Interpret: What does it mean?

• The painting shows suffering, destruction, and horror.

• The crying mother and dead child suggest loss of innocent life.

• The horse and bull may symbolise the Spanish people, violence, or cruelty.

• The broken soldier on the ground could represent the defeat and destruction of war.

• The lightbulb at the top may represent modern technology used in destruction (bombing), but could also suggest the "spotlight" of truth.

• Picasso painted Guernica in response to the bombing of the Basque town of Guernica during the Spanish Civil War in 1937.
  
  

Evaluate: How effective/successful is it?

It is powerful and effective because...

• It is big: The giant size makes viewers feel overwhelmed, like they are inside the chaos.

• Lack of colour: The limited colour palette expresses the depressing tone of the event and keeps attention on the horror without distraction. 

• Abstract style: Its style (jagged, fragmented, harsh) matches its violent subject; it would not be as effective if painted realistically or beautifully.

• Generally positive reception: It is widely recognised as one of the greatest anti-war artworks of all time, still relevant today as a symbol of peace and protest.

It is not powerful or effective because...

• It is too abstract: The distorted figures and Cubist style are confusing, making it hard for some viewers to understand what is happening.

• Lack of colour: Using only black, white, and grey makes it feel flat or dull to some people, compared to the emotional impact colour might bring.

• Detached from the event: Viewers who do not know the history of the bombing of Guernica may not grasp the meaning, so it loses its impact.

• Overly crowded composition: So many figures and shapes are crammed together that it can feel overwhelming or messy, making it hard to focus on one message.

• Cultural distance: Modern audiences may be desensitised to violent imagery (due to movies, media, video games), so the horror may not hit as strongly.

• Symbolism is unclear: The bull, horse, and lightbulb have been debated endlessly but because their meaning is not obvious, some may feel the painting fails to communicate clearly.

Tip: Address the reasons for why the artwork may be effective or ineffective, but eventually make a stand and explain why you feel so.