The French painter Marcel Duchamp coined the phrase: ‘Not everyone is an artist, but everyone is a critic’. That still rings very true today with a myriad of ways for people to voice their opinion on a subject, product, or concept, either in person, in print, or online. And as many of you will know, criticism can have a much bigger impact on us than praise. 

The art of being a good critic isn’t an easy one, but Journo Resources recently held an event with freelance journalist Katie Goh to cover how to write an engaging review. Plus, what you need to do to successfully pitch the idea and get it commissioned. 

The Heart of a Review 

There are of course many topics and areas that you can review and critique, but our focus is on the arts, meaning reviews of art, books, film, television, music, and theatre. We’re currently seeing fewer of these types of reviews in traditional magazines and newspapers due to the new media models and a rise in ad-funded digital media.  

There is still a place for this form of writing and type of journalist, but a critic must devote their time and attention to art and want to tell the reader why this artwork is worth their time and money. The heart of a review is giving the audience context, describing and setting up the piece of art, and explaining your reaction to it. For example, you don’t just want to summarise a TV show or film you’ve just watched; you need to be able to express what it felt like.  

The Writing Process 

When it comes to writing the review, there are some key prompts and questions you need to consider. For example, what’s your initial reaction to it? Does it make you feel excited or emotional? What was the most memorable moment? If a friend asks you what really stood out in that piece of art for you, what would you tell them? What works and doesn’t work? And ultimately is this worth a reader’s attention, money, and time? All of these questions can be starting points for the review and questions to consider throughout the writing process. 

The article itself should avoid using too many adjectives or cliches. The more specific you can be with your description, the better. It’s also no good reviewing what isn’t there. If you say, ‘Oh I wish they had put this in and done that,’ it doesn’t give the reader any more information, only your thoughts and opinions. You don’t want to make any moral judgements about characters or the decisions they make in the film/book/TV show etc. Again, that’s your opinion and separate from the actual review. The article isn’t a marketing campaign for a piece of art, so your review needs to be fair. 

The Different Types of Art Reviews 

There isn’t just one set way to write a review but the most common approach tends to be a 300-to 800-word article. This will normally be published in print first, then online. The audience will vary depending on the publication. If you are writing for the likes of The Guardian or The Telegraph, it will be for an audience with broad and varying interests. However, if it’s for Empire or Pitchfork, your review will be for an audience that’s interested in a certain topic e.g. film or music. Whichever type of audience you are writing for, reviews are normally formal, authoritative, and written with clarity. 

Another type of review is a critical essay which is generally over 1,000 words. Due to the higher word count, this is a deeper dive into the piece of art and offers more contemplative analysis and context than a short review. These critical essays can be seen in the likes of the London Review of Books and The New Yorker, and the writing is more questioning with the writer’s voice clearly present throughout. 

The rise of the podcast over the last four or five years means this is now a popular medium for conducting reviews, along with the more established radio. Reviews on either of these tend to be more informal and are normally more accessible to a wider listenership – especially if there isn’t a paywall. Plus, you can see reviews on different types of social media platforms like Goodreads and Letterboxd. These vary greatly in both tone and length, and while they’re unlikely to have gone through an editorial process, they can still be very interesting and insightful. 

The Pitching and Commissioning Process 

When you’ve got an idea for a review, you’ll want to pitch to an editor. The problem is that the most common type of review, the short one, is the most difficult to get commissioned as most publications will have a team of trusted reviewers. Therefore, you’ll need a unique hook to give yourself a better chance. For example, you might be based where a tour is starting, or already have a media pass to a film festival. It does mean that critical essays and features can be more successful, as publications aren’t guaranteed to have dedicated staff for these type of reviews. 

Normally, you’ll pitch before doing the work as whatever you’re looking to review has yet to be released. It’s good to pitch the idea around a month ahead of the release, as editor’s can potentially get you access to the press night for a new film, book etc. In your pitch, you need to tell the editor why this matters right now and what the hook is for the reader. Perhaps there’s a trend in certain artists music or it touches upon a wider problem in the industry.  

If the pitch is successful and you get commissioned, you need to check with the editor what the deadline is for the piece, what the fee is, and how to invoice that publication. It’s good to take on board any edits and feedback they might give about the piece and try and establish a good relationship with the editor for any future work.