Precise Use of Art Terminology
The critic's use of the discipline's own terms (composition, rhythm, contrast, plot, maqam...) with their precise conventional meaning in that art, rather than as loose metaphor
The five levels
Each anchor describes what separates one level from the next — not a general description of quality. This is the text the evaluator itself reads.
-
Level 1 Below Standard
Art terms are used with a clear factual error, or entirely absent though the work calls for them
Example Describes the poem's rhyme as its "meter" in a prose text with no prosodic meter at all
-
Level 2 Approaching
One or two terms used precisely, the rest of the critique in generic non-specialist language
Example Mentions "color contrast" precisely once, no other term anywhere else in the text
-
Level 3 At Standard
The discipline's core terms are used with their correct meaning for this kind of work
Example "Plot", "conflict", "turning point" all used with their correct narrative meaning
-
Level 4 Above Standard
Precise specialist vocabulary beyond the basic terms, used correctly in context
Example Distinguishes between "visual rhythm" and "balance" rather than using one for the other
-
Level 5 Exemplary
Precise specialist vocabulary deployed so it reveals a real visual/aural/linguistic distinction invisible without it
Example Uses a precise term to distinguish between two superficially similar cases in the work
Where does your own work sit on these levels?
Submit one work to be read against this criterion alone: your position across the five levels, why you are not higher and why not lower, three literal quotes from your own work, and one exercise with its success check. Your first card is free.
Price: 7 SAR · Included in Pro & Artist Plus · First one free — Pricing details
Read my work by this criterionOther criteria in the same art
Whether every evaluative judgment is paired with a specific pointer to an actual location or detail in the work that grounds it
The five levels →How clearly the critique distinguishes "what is in the work" (description) from "my opinion of it" (judgment), rather than blurring them in one undifferentiated sentence
The five levels →How closely the work's details the critic describes (color, shape, composition, word, rhythm) match what is actually present in the work
The five levels →Whether the critique goes past the first impression to uncover relationships or causes not obvious on the surface, rather than stopping at surface-level description
The five levels →The critic's distinction between "what is seen in the work" and "what it is presumed to mean or symbolize", and whether the move from the first to the second is signalled
The five levels →Whether the critic's judgments hold together across the text, rather than contradicting themself evaluating the same element or equivalent elements
The five levels →Whether evidentiary grounding is sustained throughout the text, rather than concentrated in one paragraph while the rest of the critique is unmoored judgment
The five levels →Whether the critic explicitly distinguishes between what is personal taste preference and what is judgment grounded in a general, defensible artistic standard
The five levels →