There are four main components to reviewing the arts: to set the scene using all appropriate senses, to give a detailed analysis saying why or why not the subject is successful, to address the bigger implications of the subject, and to use clear and sophisticated vocabulary all while having a casual tone.
Theoretically, people read reviews to assess whether or not they want to allocate a portion of their leisure time to the particular subject. Because of this, it is always effective to give the reader a visual as to where they are, what they’re looking at, or what they’re listening to. In addition to merely factual information, it gives the review a relatable and personal quality that will not go unnoticed. In my review of the Word4: Type and Image exhibition I made sure to use sound, scent, color, and touch to give the viewer the feeling that they were in the room with me; all components that played important roles in the exhibition.
After the reader knows exactly what it is they’re seeing or hearing, it is important, then, to give your opinion. This needs to be not merely a statement of your approval or disapproval, but rather an analysis of why, in the context of which it was created, it is successful or unsuccessful. In Ashley Zenner’s review of the Columbia College’s Chaos Concert on April 28th, she included countless details that supported why the event was unsuccessful. Touching on everything from the hour wait in line, terrible sound quality, and unsatisfactory performance from Deerhunter – she gave the relevant details to support her judgment.
After the analysis comes the punch. So they know what you think about it – but why does that matter? Relating it to the bigger picture and addressing the larger implications really puts the finishing touches on why or why not they should participate. There are multiple approaches in which this can be taken. In Mythologies, by writer Roland Barthes, he takes seemingly unimportant objects and turns them into cultural and wordly issues. His witty, and some times, sarcastic tone, is the punch, it allows the piece to come full circle, beginning with the tiny details, adding up to the larger trend, which in turn reveals the larger implications. On a more compelling note, in his review, DeAndre Harris O’Kelley uses shocking facts to inform the reader of how Congo/Women Portraits of War: The Democratic Republic of Congo, a Columbia exhibition, relates to the larger picture at hand.
And lastly, but perhaps one of the most important things to consider, is the language and tone with which you write. After all, these three components will mean nothing if your reader does not understand what you are saying. Most important is just to write. In a medium, like reviewing, it is more important to have a voice and be straight to the point that to have flowery and overly-robust language. Reviews are meant to inform and describe, so do just that. It is very possible, and most effective, to use clear and casual language, while still achieving a high level of sophistication.
