ARTH 1440: Historical Survey of the Arts
Paleolithic through Gothic – Caves to Cathedrals
Paper 01 – Observation and Comparison (40,000 BCE to 100 BCE)
Archaeology and art history are based on observation and comparison. For your first paper, you are asked to pick one from among the works of art or architecture that are included in the file “Paper 01 Works Uncaptioned.” Choose wisely: you are asked to write an essay on it of about 1,000 words (800 to 1,200 max). The paper should include a detailed description of the work that you pick and a comparison between it and one or two of the works that we have looked at and are included in the modules. The main goal is for you to argue the identity of the untitled work of art – in terms of origin, date, author and meaning – on the basis of your own description of it and comparison with one or two known works. You do not need to be right – it is not a guessing game – but you need to be convincing, that is, you need to build an argument for the “identity” of the work on the basis of your observations and comparisons. No outside sources on the untitled work are needed beyond the image(s) in the file (indeed, they would not help).
Start by looking carefully at the image(s) of the work that you pick and then write a formal analysis of it. Begin with a general description and then move on to more specific elements. Think of describing the work to someone who is not seeing it: by the end, your reader should have a complete mental picture of what the work looks like. Your description should deal with all aspects of the work, such as composition, figures, background, lines, colors, proportions, iconography (i.e. subject matter), size, material, technique, conservation (remark on any signs of damage, incompleteness, restoration), etc. Make the most of the visual information provided by the work itself and point out its inherent aesthetic qualities. Focus your description on the details that you believe are especially relevant and revealing: they may lead you to a particular reading and interpretation of the work.
After you have given a formal analysis of the work as it appears to you, next offer comparative evidence, that is refer to one or two works that you know from class. On the basis of your comparison, add a paragraph or two about possible artist, patron, date and historical context for the “uncaptioned” work. In the end, your analysis may bring up one or two questions that should go into the conclusion of your paper together with a summary of what you have learnt from your in-depth visual description. Keep in mind that this is not intended to be a research paper. The main goal is to exercise your ability to observe, describe in writing, compare and demonstrate your skills at offering an account of relevant visual evidence.
The paper must include 2 to 3 images of the works that you mention with full image captions underneath: artist, title, date, medium, etc. You are asked to include a bibliography with a list of sources (2 to 4) on the comparative evidence that you are referring to in your paper. One of the sources that you list needs to be a page from the website Smarthistory (https://smarthistory.org - check the “cite this page as” at the end). A starting point in searching for information about the comparative evidence is also the Library Resources Guide https://guides.lib.lsu.edu/ART1440_CriticalResponse1.
Evaluation will be based on the quality of your description of the work, your formulation and articulation of ideas, the construction and overall format and intelligence of the essay (see Grading Form below). Remember that a short paper can be harder to write than a long one: it needs to be well constructed with proper introduction and conclusion. Each word must count: be precise but also detailed, choose each word with care, describe accurately and make sure that each sentence says exactly what you mean. Write in full sentences with carefully composed and connected paragraphs. Before submitting the paper, proofread your final draft for correct spelling, punctuation, capitalization and syntax. Right at the beginning, have your name and a meaningful title for the paper. You are asked to post a digital version of the paper (in Word or PDF format) via Turnitin on Moodle (under Paper 01). The deadline is Wednesday, October 12, by 11:59 pm.
For extra credit – Self-assessment regarding Paper 01 (up to 150 words for up to 5 points)
What do you think are the strengths of your paper and its limitations? Did you come across any difficulties? Using up to 100 points, what score would you give your paper on:
1. Selection and coverage of material: /100
2. Understanding of material and how to add reliable captions: /100
3. Paper structure and presentation: /100
Any specific aspects of your paper on which you would like to receive feedback:
|Description (visual analysis)||10/10|
|Information about subject (iconography)||10/10|
|Information about material and techniques||10/10|
|Conservation: signs of damage, incompleteness, restoration, etc.||10/10|
|Choice of comparative evidence and use of it to argue for a specific identification of the untitled work||20/20|
|Title of your paper, logical organization and content (information provided and thesis developed in the paper)||10/10|
|Grammar, style, format, spelling, capitalization, punctuation, etc.||10/10|
|Bibliography (Chicago or MLA style) listing sources and websites that you have used - 2 to 4 entries, no more; one of the sources needs to be a page from Smarthistory (https://smarthistory.org - check the “cite this page as” at the end and cut and paste what follows)||10/10|
|Images with appropriate captions (Chicago or MLA style)||10/10|
|Self-assessment (for extra credit)||up to 5|
|What the paper did well:|
|What can be improved:|
For models of visual analysis and compare and contrast
- Dr. Beth Harris and Dr. Steven Zucker, “How to do visual (formal) analysis,” in Smarthistory, September 18, 2017, accessed February 6, 2020 – 9:52 https://smarthistory.org/visual-analysis/
- Dr. Steven Zucker and Dr. Beth Harris, “A brief history of the representation of the body in Western painting,” in Smarthistory, August 10, 2015, accessed February 6, 2020 – 8:21 https://smarthistory.org/a-brief-history-of-the-representation-of-the-body-in-western-painting/
- Dr. Steven Zucker and Dr. Beth Harris, “A-level: A brief history of the representation of the body in Western sculpture,” in Smarthistory, June 14, 2017, accessed February 25, 2021, - 7:56: https://smarthistory.org/a-brief-history-of-the-representation-of-the-body-in-western-sculpture-2/