When I read the chapter for next class, the question that how could I apply what I obtain from such literature critics into design critics makes me confused.

Let me elaborate it in the following two sub-questions:

1. When we critique works in literature, film, paintings, etc. the values a critic can reveal may exceed the author’s intentions, sometimes we even have such a reaction towards a specific critic:”are you over-thinking?” So, where does the value of works exist? In the chapter for next class, it puts forward the similar question:

There are correspondingly different conceptions of the critic’s ta sk: to explore a personality expressed in a work or to explore intrinsic properties of a “verbal icon”.

I haven’t finished reading the chapter, maybe the rest words will help but now I’m still confused…

2. From my perspective, to critique a design is more straightforward than to critique a piece of art works. Because designers express their intentions more directly. Although we cannot see the whole value of design right after we know about it, activities like what we conducted in last class can really help to find out a way (the four approaches proposed by Jeff) to come up with an objective evaluation. So, what is the lessons we can learn from art critics? This question accompanies me while reading the chapter, I tried to map what it says to design critics but still feel lost there.