In the Between Realities project reviewing the project was part of the project. It called for a special approach to art and design criticism. One or two evocative pictures accompanied by a single review written by a commissioned critic who has seen a particular piece probably only once, has been replaced by a more slow, complex and diverse way of reviewing:
slow criticism < > more time
Following a project over a longer period of time enables the critic to see it evolve, talk to different stakeholders and gain an impression of a broader context. It allows the critic to go beyond the singular experience of a final expression by immersing himself in the process of making and analysing what he encounters during its conception and after its performance. In this way he can grasp more of its meaning and the effect becomes clearer.
multiple criticism < > more space
Describing a project from the perspective of different disciplines opens up dialogue and debate. By not focusing solely on the maker or the final performance, but also on what is happening off stage – within the audience and all participants backstage – makes the total effect of the production more comprehensible.
This way of reviewing, which requires more time and space, might be suited to more scenographic works – be it theatre, scenography, architecture, art, product design, fashion and so on – because it unravels more layers within a project. In doing so it is more capable of weighing the overall value of a performance.
During its realization, Between Realities was reviewed in part by members of Domein voor Kunstkritiek (Domain for Art Criticism), a platform, lab and academy for art critics in the Netherlands.