Writing Feedback / Art Nouveau - Glasgow Style (essay) [2]

Art Nouveau - Glasgow Style

Found in England, Art Nouveau was truly the first international design style. The Glasgow Style is usually linked with the Art Nouveau period. The Art Nouveau movement was characterized by stylized, flowing, and curvilinear design that included floral motif. It took various style from oriental, rococo and Celtic art. Art Nouveau was essentially a rebellion against Victorian design. It is easy indulge in Art Nouveau as the decadents did. The decadents developed a hierarchy of nymphlets and goddesses. It became the first commercial art that beautified industry products. One critic wrote that Art Nouveau was one of the imaginative style in the history of design. Glasgow Style was developed by Charles Rennie Mackintosh, a Scotsman, who was inspired by Celtic ornament. The Glasgow Style was a rejection of the most Art Nouveau's motif for a more functional design. It broke away from the flowing style and introduced "cubic style." The Glasgow Style focused on geometric relationship between the whole and its part. As a result, the Glasgow Style became the standard for modern style and opened pathways for geometric design.

Charles R. Mackintosh
Mackintosh was a Scottish architect and designer and the creator of the Glasgow Style. He was born in Glasgow on June 7, 1868. He attended the Allan Glen's School, which taught many famous pupils such as Lord Todd and George Wyllie. At the age of 16, he was apprenticed to John Hutchinson, an architect. At the same time, he became a draughtsman for Honeyman and Keppie and eventually became a partner in 1901. He attended the Glasgow School of Art and met his future wife, Margaret Macdonald. Mackintosh's style focused on restraint and economy. He favored simple form and natural materials instead of embellishment. He also favored the use of texture, light and shadow against patterns and ornaments. Asian style and modernist's idea were also an influence in Mackintosh's work. He wanted to build art around the needs of the people rather than vice-versa. After his death, his work became increasingly noticed. The Glasgow School of Art was renamed the Mackintosh's building and is said to be one of the finest buildings in the United Kingdom.

Speeches / Another critique essay about my speech [2]

Name was changed to protect me.

Critiquee thanks!

The following is a partner speech critique on me, X. The topic of the speech was to convey the central impression of my partner. After watching my performance on tape, my impression was that the speech was a mediocre one which failed to the requirement of a detailed body. The organization and delivery were poor while closing was decent.

The organization of my speech was poor and failed to provide sufficient information to support my partner's central impression. The details that I supplied was vague but was relevant to the central impression which was that my partner was talented and dedicated. The audience did not receive adequate information because of my sloppy organization. As I watched the video, I noticed that I was extremely nervous and managed to skip over some of the information that I had written down on paper. I did not give exact details on my partner's poster competition entry.

The delivery was also poor. The video clearly showed that I was nervous and stuttering over some of my words. My hands were noisily hanging on the podium which distracted some of the audience members. I was staring at a specific point in the room and did not adequately devote my eye contact evenly within the room. My voice volume was low and

as a result some of the audience could not hear what I was saying. A positive note is that my feet remained firmly on the ground. My appearance was appropriate for the speech requirement. As a result of my poor delivery, I do not think the audience was interested and it was made worse by my nervousness.

The closing went much better than the other parts of the speech. I meet the closing requirements by restating the central impression, partner's name, and invitation to the audience. The closing helped to tie up everything but was overshadowed by the scarce details provided within the speech. I did initiate the "touch" but my partner did not follow through probably because of my meek appearance. The audience definitely knew when to clap because I offered a clear signal. The closing met the minimal requirement thus did not leave any lasting impression to the audience. I did not remember what I talked about so the audience will not remember my speech. Overall, the closing was one of the better things of the speech.

The organization was underdeveloped but would easily been fixed with more details about my partner. The delivery was also poor and could be remedied by several hours of practicing and memorizing my speech. The closing was the only decent thing about the speech. The "touch" needed work and I could have been much more noticeable when trying to initiate the "touch." I would have given my performance a C.

Writing Feedback / Partner introduction speech - critique essay [2]

Name was changed to protect person

Partner Introduction

This paper discusses X's partner introduction speech. The partner introduction speech was to be focused on the central impression of the person's partner. X's speech was a very average one, missing the main goal which was a central impression of his partner. X's organization was lackluster, although his delivery and closing were pleasant.

X's speech organization did not meet the requirements of the partner introduction. He started by introducing himself and his partner. X then went on to state that his partner was very family-oriented as his central impression. The following details that X provided did not exactly explain why or how his partner was family-oriented. X provided his partner's birthplace and life growing up which was unnecessary and did not add anything to the central impression of his partner. Overall, I failed to see how his partner was family-oriented. It was certain that during his speech, I was uninterested and no longer actively listen. If I was bored, I am sure that other audience members were also bored.

On the other hand, X's delivery was good with only one problem that I spotted. It became obvious that X was reading from his paper rather than devoting most of his time at maintaining eye contact with the audience. As the speech progress, eye contact problem became less severe but was still noticeable. He had very good posture besides the occasional shifting of his feet. Another thing that X did well was the placement of his hands which were always situated on the podium. He met the requirements of wearing a collared shirt and decent pants. His enunciation was good, I understood everything he said. As far I could tell, there was no distracting quirk about his delivery except eye contact. His delivery was very good and I thought it helped to maintain some of the attention. The audience was able to get the information effectively even if it was unnecessary information.

X's closing was average. He met the requirements for a closing which was to restate partner's name, invite the audience to get to know his partner, and to restate the central impression. X restated that his partner was family-oriented although I did not know exactly how his partner was family-oriented. He initiated the "touch" which is a plus. The closing did not leave a lasting impression because I forgot everything he talked about the very next day.

Overall, the speech was an average one. His speech organization need work such as the elimination of unnecessary and the inclusion of necessary details to meet the speech requirement. His eye contact needs improving which could be done by the making an outline of his speech with only phrases and not full sentences. X's closing was fine and I could not find a major complaint about it except to not restate the exact opening. I would have given him a C+.