Write a 4 page criticism paper on the painting “Christmas” by Palmer Hayden. Please try to keep it around 4 pages (double spaced, normal margins) but not less. The majority of this paper is your own encounter with the artwork without any outside input. Only the 4th section involves research. Papers include a title page, footnotes, and a bibliography consisting of at least two scholarly sources in addition to the 4 pages of your paper.

Step 1: Description (If you read this part to a friend, they should be able to recreate layout of the image)
Identify the work:
1. Who is the artist? What is the title? What is the medium?
2. What are the dimensions? Is it particularly large or small in scale?
3. Where is the artist from and what time period was the work created in?
List the objects/figures:
4. What do you see first?
5. What do you see second?
6. What is happening in the scene? Describe figures, body language, facial expression, and the interaction of figures.
7. Where are they located? The woods? A church? Is it in a deep space? Shallow?
8. Are there any important objects within the setting? Name them.
9. What is the light source? The sun? A street light? What is the quality of the light? Warm? Bright? Dim? Diffuse?
10. Are there distortions to proportions or scale?
Step 2: Analysis (builds from description)
1. Which visual elements (line, shape, value, color, texture, etc.) are most noticeable and why? Only discuss those which are relevant!!! They may not all be relevant?
a. Are lines an important element? Skip this if not. Has the artist used thick and thin lines? Curvilinear, rectilinear, organic? What effect do the lines have?
b. What types of shapes are used? Curvilinear, rectilinear, organic? If it is 3D what kinds of form?
c. How are color contrast used? Compliments? Temperature? Saturation? Are there many earth tones? Or is it mostly monochromatic?
d. Is value contrast important? Is it dramatic? Subtle?
e. Does texture play an important roll in the composition? Is there actual texture or just implied? Is there a lot of impasto with paint, or what are the surfaces like with sculpture?
f. What about space? What type of perspective is used? Is there purposeful distortion of space?
2. Is there a focal point? More than one? How do you know? Use the analysis of element to determine this.
3. How does your eye move around the composition? Why? Implied lines? repetition? Value? Color? How are the visual elements arranged? (Describe the design of the composition. Triangular? Radial?)
4. Is the composition symmetrical/Asymmetrical or some of both? Is there balance, harmony, chaos? Some of each?
Step 3: Interpretation (draws from description and analysis)
1. Based on this close description and observation, look at the title and time period. What do you think it means? What is this work trying to communicate? What is the mood or feeling that is evoked? How is the mood connected to the meaning or symbolism?
2. How is this meaning conveyed by the visual elements you have noticed and the design of the composition? How does it come from facial expressions and body language?
3. Is there distortion? Is color and/or shape symbolic or realistic? What does this mean?
4. How might what you know about the time/place in which they lived influence your idea about meaning?
5. Are there objects that are symbolic? Gestures?
6. Explain any iconography that is used. Common Icons: Jesus, Mary, Buddha, Venus.
Step 4: Judgment (incorporates description, analysis, and interpretation)
1. Was your interpretation of what is strongest about the work valid based on your research? Or did you learn something which contradicts your interpretation(s)? Be sure to name one of these theories as the basis of your judgment!
a. Formal
b. Contextual/Socio-Cultural
c. Expressive
2. What is strongest about this work: Expressing emotion? New use/arrangement of elements? Statements about gender, religion or politics? Did this work influence other artists? Is it of benefit to others? Why?
3. How does this work compare to other appropriate examples? Contrasting this work to another one that came just before it or is similar to it is one way of judging its success.
Conclusion
1. What was your goal in writing the paper?
2. Why was it important to use a critical theory?
3. How would you summarize your findings? This sentence is like a thesis statement: