How does this artwork elucidate its Critical reception?
Art historian Charles S. Moffett describes the drastically different ways in which Cassatt's painting was received by art critics during its time. "Conservative critics" such as Eugène Véron and Arthur Baignères heavily criticized most of Cassatt's art for its depiction of light and its effects. Véron faulted the artist for being "a colorist," saying that "she works to reproduce exactly certain effects of light, which are not always pleasing. Her Femme au théâtre [sic] includes reflections that are yellow, green, etc., that may be real, but are hardly agreeable to the eye."However, many of the conservative critics, who were usually critical of Cassatt's work, "begrudgingly" admitted to liking The Tea.  For example, Baignères wrote that even though "the facial expressions are completely neglected... the young woman seen at an angle in the foreground is well modeled in the light, with neither gimmick nor repoussoir."
Although the painting received a considerable amount of approval from critics, it also received some negative comments. Moffett notes that from "a purely academic point of view" Paul Mantz's description of the piece as "poorly drawn" is not warranted and "seems surprisingly capricious, but perhaps his strong admiration for such earlier artists as Delacroix prejudiced his interpretation of Cassatt's realistic Impressionism."  Moffett finds Le Siècle critic Henry Havard's disapproval of The Tea to be more fair.  Havard wrote in a criticism that "finally, Mary Cassatt was not the only one who has made compromises this year. Her talent remains alive, but her originality has abated. Of four portraits that she shows, only one is out of the ordinary; give her one or two more years, and you will see a lamb who will desert the fold and run with the wolves."
Impressionism Delacroix Mary Cassatt Eugène Véron Henry Havard Le Siècle