10 I The Process

h ink of a time in your when you received really useful feedback. Where were
T
you? Who was talking to you? Exactly what was it that made the encounter so
constructive? When the conversation was over, what was your perspective?
are questions we often ask when we introduce the Critical Response
Process. In calling to mind a particular situation or individual, most people can
readily name aspects of the interaction that left them feeling motivated rather than
the criticism. Some will answer the questions by naming specific qualities:
respect, trust, specificity, clarity, insight, integrity. Others cite particular approaches
"TRE" CRITICAL.. "'RESPONSE' their effective partners-in-critique used in addressing the work under consideration:
""PROCESS CAN "BE" APP!.IE1) starred by pointing out the things that were already working well" or "She asked me some
To ALMOST great questions, which me with a lot to think about."
A ""'PE'R5.oN MAt\ES ... Contemplating our encounters with people who have a capacity for giving useful critique,
it is possible to draw out a set of frequently recurring values and techniques. It's also obvious
that when people have the experience of constructive feedback, they want to have it again.
Critical Response Process harnesses the values that most of us can name, taps some
of the techniques that many of us have experienced, and combines them into a sequenced
The resulting Process makes it possible to experience and re-experience
kind of feedback that makes you to get back to work on the artwork,
project, or the performance under consideration.
A
 The Process I 11
The Critical Response Process enables a group of people to uncover their various aes-
thetic and performance values and, by being patient, apply them to a creative work-in-
progress in a way that pushes the artist's thinking forward. Critical Response Process
can be applied to almost any kind of creative product: new works or interpretations of
existing works in dance, theater, and other performing disciplines, not to mention writing,
visual art, design, planning, public speaking, curriculum development, teaching processes,
anything a person makes...even dessert.
elements of a Critical Response Process session are the four core steps of the
Process and participants in roles: an artist showing work, a fucilitator, and a group of
responders. These are detailed in next two chapters, along with about follow-up.
Because much of the technique Critical Response resides in the role of the facil-
itator, we follow this with some additional guidance for the person assuming that role, .., EVE:"N DESSERT
emphasizing particular issues that may arise in conducting the Process. In a final chapter
we survey a the many variations to which the Process has been applied.
This publication is intended to offer a detailed (but by no means exhaustive) introduc-
tion to the Critical Response Process. We present it an awareness of the limitations
the written word to impart a process as elastic and nuanced as this one often is. Since
Process is dialogic and experiential in nature, it is perhaps best learned by doing, so we urge
people interested in applying Response to rake advantage of the opportunities that
the Dance Exchange offers for in the Process.
 14 I The Roles §
The Artist
Since a work of art is typically the focus of a Critical Response
session, the artist's contribution is essential to the unfolding of
the Process. The artist's own attitude walking into the session, in
combination with the control that the Process affords the creator
of the work under discussion, win vitally influence the direction
ensuing dialogue takes. The artistic task under consideration
may be either generative or interpretive in nature, and the prod- The Responders
uct may be at any stage of its development. Artists need to be at A Critical Response session typically engages a group of people
a point where they can question their work in a somewhat pub- who watch, read, listen to, or otherwise experience the work to
lic environment. They also need to be able to hear positive com- be discussed. This can be as few as one person or up to hun-
ments that are specific, not "this is the greatest thing I have ever dreds, as when Critical Response is used for post-show discus-
seen." (Since we all wait for that comment, it can be difficult sions (an application discussed further on pages 46-48). Sessions
hearing anything else.) The Process is most fruitful when artists engaging five to twelve participants have some advantages: easier
are invested in the future evolution of the art they are showing, management for the facilitator and the opportunity for more of
or at least in the possibility that they can learn something of the responders to participate.
value to aoolv to future projects. Responders can be friends or strangers, peers or public,
experts or novices, all depending on choice and circumstance.
Whoever they are, it is important that these observers sincerely
want this artist to make excellent work Occasionally, especially
when competition is a factor, people looking at work may not
want the artist to succeed, especially on her own terms. While
the notion of actively harnessing our responses to the idea of
Their best, not your best
When artists meet peer-to-peer in the Critical
Response Process, part of the success of the
session lies in the perspective that participants
bring to the circle. As a responder, you really
want the artist to do their best work, not some-
only as good as your last work. The corn-
petitive impulse is a useful force in artistic ere-
arion, but I encourage people to enjoy the relief
of setting it aside for a little while.
- I iz 1erman
 i The Roles I 15
another person's excellence may not be achievable in every
case, it is always worth striving for.
Are fellow arts practitioners the best responders to an
work? The answer may vary according to what kind of
feedback artists are seeking or where they are in the develop-
ment of work Certainly the tools of the Process have proven
very useful for creators engaging people who may not
of themselves as artists: The artist can walk away with valu-
able information about how the work communicates to a
general audience, and responders will otten gain consid-
erable insight from the act of articulating their reactions.
Groups that combine peer practitioners with less seasoned
viewers may require extra sensitivity from the facilitator to
assure specialists' technical or conceptual jargon doesn't
intimidate non-specialists into silence.
The Facilitator
Although these sessions are geared to the needs ot the creator,
much of the success of a good Critical Response session lies
with the facilitator. This guidebook is intended in part
as a primer for people assuming that role. The facilitator's job
description includes initiating each step and managing the
transition to the next, keeping the Process on track, and
assuring that the artist and responders all understand the
guidelines and get the most our of them. In these capacities,
the facilitator may need to playa variety of translating,
coaching, and policing functions. Beyond these basics, the
skilled facilitator can choose to playa very active role to
deepen the dialogue further. We expand on these possibilities
in Facilitation Fundamentals and Deepening the Dialogue
sections of this book
-rt-le- FACILITAToR. ASSUME'S
A VA.T( lET..., OF
_
.. ..
"'TI2:ANSLA-n:>R
. .... I
 18 I The Steps Qo
o
ritical Response sessions are initiated in a variety of Process, even before experiencing the work under consideration.
C
ways: artists schedule dialogues among peers or Knowing what to expect and how each step supports the suc-
informally gather a group of responders to see a ceeding ones helps participants to make better use of the
work-in-progress, teachers adopt the practice for the Process. Responders who know they will have a chance to
benefit of their students, and institutions offer ses- express opinions by the end will experience the rigor of the
sions as a dimension of their programming in artist support and earlier steps as stimulating rather than limiting. If participants
audience development. The Process can be applied multiple follow the sequence of steps with a little patience, mutual
times in the development of a particular work, or employed in respect naturally emerges. Over the course of the Process, even
combination with other modes of feedback. The focus of a the most disparate points of view can be taken into account
Critical Response session can be a full work or an excerpt, pre- through dialogue and response.
sented in formal performance, informal presentation, or in-class When conducted in its formal structure, the Critical Response
showing. As Critical Response has evolved, we've come to spend Process consists of four steps. We will describe each one, followed
more time explaining the steps and sequence before starting the by ideas for optional activities that can happen after a session.
The meaning of meaning
When I first introduced the Process, I named step one
"Affirmation," which encouraged facilitators to start the Process
by saying something like "Let's start with affirmations. What did vJ\\1\1" \.--I Af>
you like about what you just saw?" But now I discourage this 5\ \ t'\\JLAIING ')
approach, as it tends to put the emphasis on the artist's feelings
NG "l
rather than the art itself and how it is commu nicating. When we
start by naming the fact that the work has meaning at all, and
offer options for responding to that meaning, we broaden the !"ifMORABL-E' ') )
lens by which responders can experience and comment. The ..,-OU C.rllNG >
new phrasing encourages responders to be more specific
MeAN\NGFlJL
enabling them to name their experience and affords artists a o
different of accepting that information. Thewhole dialogue
becomes less about individual psychology and more about the
power of art.
-Liz Lerman
 The Steps I 19
CORE STEPS
Step One: Statements of Meaning
No matter how short the presentation, how fragmentary the excerpt, or how early the
stage of development, artists want to hear that what they have just completed has sig-
nificance to another human being. This natural condition can be so intense at times
as to appear It makes sense, then, that the first response artists hear
should be one addressing the communicative power of the work just presented. So
the facilitator starts step one by asking the responders either "What has meaning for
you about what you have just seen?" or "What was stimulating, surprising, evocative,
memorable, touching, meaningful for you?" Other adjectives can employed in
question: "challenging," "compelling," "delightful," "different," "unique." The point is to
offer responders a palette of choices through which to define and express their reactions.
Though we discourage facilitators from explicitly for "affirmations" (see "The
meaning of meaning," opposite page), step one should be framed in a positive light.
Contrary to this spirit a responder once said, "It is meaningful to me how bad this work
" a statement that definitely required facilitator intervention. Bur step one comments
not need to begin "I liked..." If artists only wait for "I liked...," thev can miss all
other ways that people communicate.
Thus the Critical Response Process begins with the philosophy that mean-
ing is at the heart of an artist's work, and to start with meaning is to
the essence of artistic act. Meaning is a huge category that can
hold a wide range of response, a fact often demonstrated by step one.
Responders may feel called upon to make broad pronouncements about "
the work, but artists invariably value hearing about details as well. Nothing is
too small to notice.
It is in step one that we can first notice people's different values. A very active facilita-
tor might draw attention to the variety of aesthetic and social values that people in the
circle bring to their role as audience by asking participants for their observations at the
end of step one. It is in that moment of group reflection that responders first become
aware of the numerous ways people see art, and the array of value systems underlying
their differing visions.
Step Two: Artist as Questioner
This step is the two rounds of questions and answers. The creator asks the questions "R'£ ME MBeR l
first. The more artists clarify their focus, the more intense and deep the dialogue becomes. NOll·UNq IS Too
The facilitator can actively assist artists in forming their questions. Some artists are
able to analyze their work, and form their dissatisfactions or dilemmas into questions with
SMALL To ND11c.£.
ease. For others, it is a new experience.
 In the act of clarifying, the artist has a wide range of choices marion they Here the facilitator may need to probe with
from general to specific. Facilitators can make artists aware of more questions-not answers-to help the artist find the heart
their options along this spectrum, and how those choices will matter. (See Sample Dialogue, page 56 for an example of
yield different kinds of answers. General questions often elicit of facilitator guidance.) Often we observe that the artist
more varied responses, which can be helpful if the artist is seek- has same questions as those watching. When the artist starts
a broad survey of reactions to a particular of the work. the dialogue, the opportunity for honesty increases.
But when an artist poses her inquiry broadly, she may find that
the response is not addressing the issue that is really at the root Step Three: Neutral Questions from Responders
her question. Specific questions, naturally, bring forth a more The dialogue is now reversed, and responders can ask the artist
focused and commentary. While no prescription dictates informational or factual questions. Further, if they opinions,
which kind of question will be most effective, artists can consider responders can take this opportunity-in advance of stating
several factors in formulating their questions: Where am I in the opinion in step four-to form the opinion into a neutral question.
process of developing the work? Working from the of infor- Thus, instead of saying, "It's too long," (an opinion) or "Why are
I've heard in step one, where would I like to expand or your pieces always so long?" (a question that couches an opinion),
focus the response? Do I want an overall gauge of the a person might ask, "What were you to accomplish in the
effectiveness, or focused guidance about particular challenges? final section?" or "Tell me the most important ideas you want us
Artists should approach the furthest extremes on the general- to get and where is that happening in this piece?"
to-specific spectrum with caution. The most general sort of ques- The neutral question presents another aspect of the in
tion-"Well, what did you think?" can mire the Process in some facilitator needs to active. For many people, forming
usual pitfalls of an open discussion where any topic is fair
game those most insistent about expressing their opinions
dominate. Far from opening up the discourse, the breadth
possibility can shut both artists and responders down. By
same token, the use of very specific questions, such as "Did it
work when I shifted the mask to the back of my head?" or
Astep toward critical thinking
Before adopting the Critical Response Process at
"Should I have my arms up or down in the final image?"
amounts to an opinion poll. This can be useful if the artist is try- Jump-Start, we would tip-toe around each other and
ing to resolve the choice between options and if responders justi- never have substantive dialogue. The Process has
fY their choices. But if these are the only kinds of questions enabled us, for the first time, to talk about our work
an artist has, the either/or brand of specificity limits the potential in a profound wa!:J. In our educational programs and
of the dialogue. monthly work-in-progress series we often put par-
Playing a bit closer to the middle of the spectrum can be very ticular emphasis on step two: it helps artists devel-
fruitful: "How did you experience my transitions from one char- op critical thinking skills by learning to ask astute
acter to another?" or ''I'm working right now on the way I questions, and that is where one can open the doors
express a strong feeling, so what did you think of the for crrnnue
section?" Such questions offer responders the opportunity to .. Steve
say what they think and to name some of specifics
Jump-StartPerformance Co.
themselves.
Artists can always broaden or narrow
follow-up question if the original query
exploration with a
yield the infer- ... '¥" J
 The Steps I 21
""KE:S'Pot-.\DER QuESTlONS:
OPIN\ONATE1'> ... ." NEUTRAL
KIN\) of
-io:
(\
<1
WHfS
,t: CAJ<£
So
a neutral question is not only difficult, but a seemingly ridiculous session as a direct result of the neutral question. And the more
task if criticism is the point. But the actual process of trying to open they are to the possibility of hearing what others are saying,
opinions into neutral questions enables the responder to rec- the more they seem to learn from it.
ognize and acknowledge the personal values at play. Often these When defensiveness starts, learning stops. The
are very questions that artist needs to h'ear. Response Process emphasizes the benefits of getting artists to
The neutral question is a common stumbling block for peo- about their work in a fresh way, as opposed to telling them
ple. Therefore, it can help, when introducing the Process. to lead how to improve their work or asking them to defend it. This aim
the group in practicing how to form neutral questions. do is supported by the discipline of the neutral question. People who
the facilitator might suggest a non-neutral question based are used to giving feedback from a position of authority-teach-
on a hypothetical work of art (not the piece under review), by ers, directors, adjudicators-may feel at first that step three makes
posing something like the following: "Let's say that after a dance them sacrifice the right to tell the truth very directly. But many
showing, a viewer questioned the lighting by saying 'Why was it discover that they can say whatever is important through
so dark?' Can you suggest neutral way to phrase that question?" mechanism, and in the process, get the artist to think more
The group will soon arrive at a possibility like "What governed reflectively than he might if the opinion or solution were directly
your choices in lighting the piece?" (See chart, page 23 for more stated. The opportunity for opinions is coming up soon in step
examples of neutral alternatives to opinionated questions.) step three allows the responder to determine the relevance of
For some people the neutral question may sound like a cover- the opinion and lays the groundwork for the artist to hear the
up for the real action, and it can indeed function that way. But opinion from a non-defensive posture. (For more discussion of
even the most hard-edged, "I-can-take-anything-you-dish-out" "fixing," see "The Challenge of Exits," Page 42.)
artists seem to become more receptive and involved in the critical
Step Four: Permissioned Opinions
Now the facilitator invites opinions, but specifies that opinions
must be offered with a particular protocol: Responders first name
topic of the opinion and ask the artist for permission to state
it. For instance, "I have an opinion about the costumes. Do you
want to . . d.
In response, the artist has the option to say "yes" or "no." The
artist may have several reasons for not wanting to hear the opin-
ion: perhaps he has already heard enough opinions about
costumes and wants to move to something else; perhaps is
very interested in hearing about the costumes, but not from
responder, or perhaps the opinion is irrelevant because of factors
not yet established by a neutral question, i.e., the costumes used
for the showing have nothing to do with those planned for the
ultimate presentation. In every case artists have the option to say
_-_.
" or "not right now."
fl...... .,
Opinions like objects
I sometimes demonstrate one of the functions of
the "I have an opinion ..." permission requests in step
four by doing this: While I'm in the middle of my
explanation of the step, I'll wad up a piece of paper
and toss it at an unsuspecting group member, who
flinches and fumbles in response. Then I'll
up the paper, make eye contact with the same
person and say "catchl," then toss to a now-
deft receiver. Opinions can feel very much like
objects thrown at us. If we have no preparation we
can often feel affronted rather than engaged. But
with a little notice and a moment to adjust to what's
coming at us, we can be in a much better position to
"catch" the opinion.
- Jabn Borste/
't ¥ J
 is the cake so dry? What kind of texture and consistency are
you aiming for in this cake?
Why is the videoso long? How are you thinking abouttime in relation
to the viewer's experience?
How do you expect the reader to comprehend How are you hopingthe readerwill
this passage? experience this passage?
What madeyou put the entire cast in green What's the significanceof the colorgreen
costumes? to your concept? OR Talk about your
costumingchoices.
Arethe photosin the series intentionally Whatkind of reaction are you hopingto
banal? elicit from a viewer?
Have you shownthe text for the brochure to Where are you in the processof developing
an editor yet? the brochure?
Have you thought about getting an actor to What would you like to addto our
read your poetry for you? experience of the poetry through your
use of voice andgesture?
Why do you think you needto tell the moral Where do you want your listenersto be at
of the story at the end? the endof the story?
Whywould you want to draw dead animals? What ideasdo you want to conveythrough
your choice of subject matter?
understand what this song How did you prepare your interpretationof
the song?
isn't your season programming offer- Whatis vision and how does
ing moreopportunitiesto emerging artists? it inform your programming choices?
So, do you always chew gum when you What's the role of gum chewingin your
dance? performance? OR What attitude are you
hopingto conveyin your performance?
 _. I·"······· &'
FOLLOW-UP Be NewBusiness, Unfinished Business
At times in the course of a Critical Response session, responders
FOLLOW-THROUGH want to get into a discussion about the subject matter of a work,
particularly if it broaches an area of social or political controversy.
Closure
The Process is now complete. If it has functioned well, the On other occasions an issue of aesthetic perspective or artistic
responders feel invested and engaged, and the artist has gained technique will seize attention. The resulting discussions mayor
a fund of useful, even inspiring, information. At this point the may not relate to the specific evolution of the piece, and the
facilitator has several options to bring the Process to closure. emergence of such topics may require the facilitator to make a
Thank yous to both artist and responder are usually in order, judgment: Is the emerging issue central to the discussion of the
and appreciated. The facilitator may ask for observations or artist's work and can it be discussed within the protocol of the
request that the artist or a responder offer a summary of the dis- four steps? Can the varying opinions be addressed directly to the
cussion. This can be done by posing a question to the artist like: artist rather than exchanged responder to responder? Are strong
"Based on what you've experienced in this conversation, what's feelings about the issue hindering the Process and will a time-out
your next step in working on this piece?" Though occasionally for a short, managed discussion enable the Process to resume on
artists need more time to assimilate the dialogue, they usually track? Or, on the other hand, does the group have a need for a
respond readily and specifically, often with reference to key conversation about the issue which can nonetheless be clearly sep-
points they've heard in the session. This short exchange affords arated from the content of the work? In such instances, a subject
artists the final word in the discussion of their work as well as a matter discussion can be added to the session following comple-
moment to consolidate the information they've gathered tion of the Process's four steps. This added discussion is often a
through the Process, while responders get confirmation of the viable option as it avoids breaking the momentum of the peer
purpose their involvement has served. response but addresses the needs of the group. For example:
During step three at a Critical Response reviewing a show of
regional art at a Midwestern arts center, a responder questioned
5oM€T\ME"S AN ART\$T MA'f FEEt READ'f
To EXPE"R\ME"-\T AWA'I.
 The Steps I 25
the idea of "regional" in relation to New York as the supposed Sometimes, depending on the scope of the work and the
national center for visual art. This sparked a flurry of reactions. It medium, an artist can feel ready to experiment with changes to
was clear that the topic was vital to many of the participants the work right away. A dancer/choreographer wants to see what
that the discussion, if pursued at that moment, would derail the happens if he alters the facings in a section of his work. A poet
response ro the program itself 10 meet both of these needs, the decides to try reinstating a passage from an earlier draft. A pho-
facilitator guided the Process through step four and then initiated tographer realizes she can re-edit a series by replacing two of her
a discussion of the group's vital topic, images with other prints she has brought to the session. These
A discussion that follows completion of the Process can be changes can be presented to the group on the spot, and the
fruitful for both the artist and the group even when the content session can return for a few moments into step twO to entertain
is not stirring controversy. An artist discovering that the circle the artist's questions about new approach.
contains people with personal experiences related to the subject In teaching settings, the Process can transfer into a coaching
of the work might benefit from an added discussion to hear mode. Following the four steps, the teacher asks the student
about some of those experiences. When workshopping a piece where she wants to take the work, or may give directive guidance
among peers, an opportunity to discuss points of technique or for next steps, moving immediately to a coaching session where
aesthetics is a chance to draw from the collective wisdom of the various options are tried and reviewed. The group may continue
group. Facilitators can pose such options to the artist. to be involved as responders, or simply serve as witnesses.
Another variation is to engage group in trying some of the
Back to Work approaches suggested by the session. (see "Sustaining the Critical
By virtue of the fact that we are using Critical Response, we can Response spirit," below)
usually assume that additional work remains to be done on the At times work can be developed through a series of Critical
art under consideration. How the work advances to its next stage Response sessions. When the same group is involved in multiple
is up to the artist. But first steps can be taken during the gather- dialogues about a developing piece, it observes how the artist is
ing, and if the group is a class, support circle, or ensemble that using the response to evolve the work. This typically gets the
regularly meets, a thread can be sustained from the formal responders highly invested in the outcome and leads them to a
Critical Response session into other activities. deeply informed response.
Sustaining the Critical Response spirit
After Critical Response sessions, I encourage student artists to re-enter the rehearsal/creation process in a similar
spirit of inquiry and discovery. The activities I recommend fall into three inter-related, but not necessarily sequen-
tial categories: 1} Labbing the work, usually driven by a dialogue between artist and teacher/facilitator and thus
engaging skills from steps two and three of the Process. The entire class or ensemble can be involved in this exper-
sometimes splitting into smaller groups, each seeking its own solution to the same problem. 2] Subject
matter discussion, often exploring artistic ideas or social context and drawing on different perspectives in the
observer pool. 3} Generating a research list for information that can't be gleaned from immediate lab or discussion.
These activities are not about the teacher making decisions for artists or the group taking over; the goal is to give
the artist more: more information, more choice, and a wider view.
-Peter DIMuro
Liz Lerman Dance Exchange