Problematising, critical thinking, and round manhole covers

A biography of Pope.L said he 'problematised' race, work, and sex. I wondered what that actually meant so I looked it up and it's really interesting! 

I assumed it meant effectively to make complaint about... It's funny how the word 'problem' has so many negative connotations nowadays, especially in business. Making something a problem is seen as complaining about something trivial. Actually, I guess it literally means to formulate something in a way that it can be solved.

From my understanding, to 'problematise' something is a critical thinking technique whereby you take something 'commonly understood' and reframe it as a problem to be solved, to effectively question it from scratch. E.g. I could problematise cat ownership (my cat just jumped on the bed) by starting to ask questions like "why do we have cats?" "who owns who?" "do cats want to live with humans?" "who gets to decide who can have a cat, and why?" "why cats, why not other animals?" etc etc A way to approach is, according to Wikipedia, is to put quotes around the thing you want to explore e.g. Picasso was a great artist -> Picasso was a 'great artist'. The questions start to pour in....

I am really interested in critical thinking - I feel like it's something I've often done (people compliment and complain about my 'questioning everything'). Interestingly, I think it's what we tested for in Google with the "General Cognitive Ability" interviews that I always seemed to get lumbered with - those funny interviews that the press loved to report on - the aim of them wasn't actually to see if candidates knew why manhole covers were round, but rather to see how candidates approached problem solving, especially assumptions. Actually problematising was encouraged at Google, especially in the heady post-IPO times when I joined - often with amazing results ("How do I delete back-up tapes I can't access" - hint, what does 'delete' actually MEAN here) and sometimes less amazing results ("Why are email, chat, and documents all separate things?")

Reflecting on reflecting on the CSM Show

I've been reflecting on my blog post written after the CSM Show. I don't think it was unkind, but it was perhaps unfair. I think it was worthwhile learning from the art I saw, but I think the distinction between a 'show' and an 'exhibition' was lost on me, and I think I probably lost out as a result - rather than going expecting to critic the art, I should have gone with an open mind, curiosity, and a bit more generosity of spirit! I could have enjoyed their triumphant moment with them, had fun, and learned more about other people's experience of art, instead I moped around and made a fool of myself.

Reflections coming out of the last 24 hours (which have been difficult at times):

• Everyone has to make their own art - setting out to make 'good art' is a fallacy - you make the art that you make, and you learn, but the aim is to make the art that you think is 'right', not to make art that other people expect. Conversely, you have to see everyone's art as you find it - as a good friend said "when I see art I think is bad, I go and find some other art to look at, can't you do that?"
• As JK said, it's hard to untangle the art from the artist. I see now that dismissing art is like dismissing people, it's sad and destructive
• There is no universal truth in art and that is terrible and also wonderful - as someone with a 'science' background, it's terrifying, and that's why I wanted to (and still want to) do this MA
• If you are talking to the artist, questions are the most wonderful things. One of the best bosses I had taught me that. You could say "I find the colours garish" or you could say "Why did you choose those colours?", in the second case, you both win - you learn something new, they maybe learn something about themselves. In the first case, everyone looses - you state something you already knew, and they think you are a twat

But:

• It is valid to have opinions about what art you want to make and not make
• It is valuable to seek feedback but not always valuable to act on it
• It is valuable to share your opinion when it is sought
• It is valuable to have opinions about other people's art, but only for your own purposes - people will make art that isn't the art you want to make. This is a useful way to learn about the art you DO want to make, it is not a reason to consider their art 'bad'