|
Art 2201 Exam 1 Spring 2009
ANSWER GUIDE ( FOR ALL
THE ESSAY CHOICES THAT WERE SELECTED)
These are summaries
of the points I was seeking in your answers.
They would need to be developed into full-blown essays, rather than the
sketchy way they are presented here, but this should give you ideas of what
I sought and how I assessed your answers. Outlining in his fashion may
help you as you prepare for the next exam.
If you have
difficulties, call CourseDen 678-839-6248. Prepare the document in your
word processing program (MSWord ONLY), then import it into the CourseDen
assignment submission site. At the CourseDen assignment submission site,
find the ADD ATTACHMENTS button and click on it. Then click on UPLOAD FILE,
then BROWSE; This will take you to your computer, where you will need to
locate the file you saved there. When you find the file on your computer,
select it, and click on SAVE. Its title should appear in the Window, with a
checkbox next to it. Click on the checkbox, then click on ADD SELECTED and
then click SUBMIT. (Make sure you click on both ADD SELECTED and SUBMIT).
You will see the title of your file there as a confirmation that you have
submitted it.
Your
document title should be in the following format:
Lastnamefirstininitial2201exam1.doc EX: johnsonj2201exam1.doc.
DO NOT submit your
essays in separate files, put them all in one document, with the essays
numbered, and submit only one file to me.
THE EXAM:
-
Select 2 pairs of works, 1 pair from
Group A and 1 pair from Group B. A pair is one to the right with one
to the left of the same number. Number your choices: A2, B8, etc. For each
of those pairs, fully identify the works, using the following scheme: (can
cut and paste into your document)
A1.
Your Left:
Your Right:
Period/Style:
Period/Style:
Title:
Title:
Date:
Date:
Artist/Architect, if known:
Artist/Architect, if known:
Location, if architecture
Location, if architecture
or architectural decoration:
or architectural decoration:
FINDSPOTS CAN BE IMPORTANT, BUT ARE
NOT ID POINTS, SHOULD BE TAKEN UP IN YOUR ESSAY.
MUSEUMS ARE NOT ID POINTS
-
Write a fully-developed essay in which you compare
and contrast these works. For each
pair, write a
UNIFIED essay,
using complete sentences, in which
you discuss the works in relationship to one another. What is the point of
the comparison? Is the subject matter similar, or is there some other
issue by which the two might be linked? Evaluate similarities and
differences between each two. Consider purposes of each and its
significance within the stylistic/historical period in which it was
created. Also consider: media/material, size, style, artist, location,
etc., as appropriate, with particular attention to the ways in which these
features differ between these two works.
Do not make lists, tick
points, or write separate essays on each.
Do not write a skimpy or minimal answer.
Discuss as fully as possible, using information from
your PPT files and your text materials, and your own
thoughtful observations. Use proper terminology and explain what the
terms mean, as appropriate. Do not use Web materials. (I will
count off if you do.) Write a fully developed essay of 1-2 pages for each
topic.
-
Select 4 more single works, different from the ones you used for
the comparison/contrast essay. Identify them fully, in the sample
format, state one significant fact for each, in sentence form.
-
EXTRA CREDIT (Optional, up to 20% extra). Select
another pair from the choices, again none of the ones used for either part
above, and identify, as above, then write a compare-and-contrast essay, as
above.
Form your answers from both the text and PPT videos.
This NOT a research project. DO NOT go surfing the web
for your essay material. If you use any sources, give proper citations. Do not take data from
text or PPT videos verbatim-- paraphrase -- use your own words and
synthesize the information, and add your own reflections to these sources
from looking at the works and considering the issues. Do not limit
yourself to the short segments on the specific works, but consider also
the information and opinion given on the eras and their concerns, as well
as other examples of similar monuments, as long as you are careful to
distinguish the one here from the others in relevant ways.
Grading and commentary on your answers
includes assessment of :
-
the relevant points about the
works of art
-
following directions
-
clarity, grammar, logic
-
reflection of information from text and
PPT videos
-
careful, thoughtful reading and
listening, with discrimination about importance of ideas and their
context, as well as attention to structure of what you read, hear
(modifications, clauses, & C)
-
Writing: I do not grade your
writing per se but poor
writing really mars your communication of what you have learned. I
am likely to makes notations about your writing organization, spelling,
mechanics of writing, tenses. Do not use quotations in your answers --
put things into your own words to demonstrate your understanding
-
for the section on significant facts,
they should be truly important specifics in art historical terms -- NOT
"fun facts" or superlatives or generalizations or trivia
-
superlatives should always be avoided and
sensational or hype -- when they are appropriate, they need to be
carefully modified (i.e. "...earliest
known,
...oldest surviving or
extant.
Scoring: ID points = 4 points per work of art; C &
C essays = 25 points each; significant facts, in part 3 = 4 points each;
extra credit = up to 20 points. Test total = 100. ( you could
make more than 100%)
click on thumbnails
to elarge:
|
↓GROUP A
↓ |
 |
1.
-
ANE (Neo-Sumerian). Nanna Ziggurat, Ur. 2100-2050BC;
-
Egypt: Pyramid Complex at Gizeh
2528-2490BCE-
-
Gizeh was the necropolis for royal families of Khufu, Khafre, Menkaure,
and for each of them included burial places for their entourages, priests
-
each includes
valley temples at the river, mortuary temples near the pyramids,
processional causeways in between.
-
Typical of Egyptian provisions for
royal burials, supplied with all possible needs for the afterlife.
-
While
the Egyptian pyramids were of permanent stone materials and created to
accommodate the expectations of the afterlife, the ziggurats were of
mud-brick construction -- much less durable, and were focused on the
needs of this life.
-
The ziggurat was typical of the ANE: located at center
of community, for religious and civic purposes (record-keeping, etc.) =
central to daily life.
-
As to outward appearances: the ziggurat
had recessed paneling in sloping (battered) sides = light-catching visual
effect, some painted white. Pyramids were also likely to be white-surfaced,
as the outer sheath, now missing from most, was smooth light stone.
-
Decoration:
Ziggurats were also decorated with cone mosaics while pyramid rooms were
often supplied with paintings related to afterlife activities or beliefs.
-
The ziggurat was essentially a man-made
mountain a temple base, to place temple closer to the deities while
the beb-ben form of the pyramid was a sun symbol, a ramp
for the pharaoh to make the afterlife journey to the heavens on
symbolic sun's rays
-
the pyramid is essentially a funerary
form, having evolved from the mastaba/grave marker; Ziggurat is a
man-made mountain -- temple mount/base
-
Each
has a ceremonial,
staged approach to the structure.
-
While there are superficial
resemblances between the two types of architecture, their construction
and purposes were quite different from one another.
|
 |
 |
2.
-
Egyptian.
(Predynastic or
Old Kingdom) Palette of Narmer,
c. 3000BCE.
-
ANE
(Babylonian/Amorite) Stele of Hammurabi. 1792-50BCE
-
Each work is evidence of public
proclamation of king's power, used to establish his authority, with use
of written language
-
Palette is typical of Egyptian works assoc. w.
royalty; recognizable as such: use of conventions of representation;
particular composite view (explain); Symbols for pharaoh: crowns, garb; Established
Canon of proportion for royals -- its conservative use over centuries helped
guard society and expressed its values; King is larger (hierarchical scale); Hieroglyphic cartouche/serekh;
Slate/schist. Low-relief carving, 25 H;
Ceremonial, enlarged version of utilitarian object apparently created for
display in a temple
-
Palette marks the historical event of unification of
Upper/Lower Egypt under Narmer/Menes,
deities included; i.e. Horus,
Hathor;
Arrangement in registers (horizontal
bands) of uneven
size on the 2 sides. This palette shows
interactive influence with the ANE through intertwined feline necks which
surround the cosmetic-mixing well (for kohl).
-
Treatment of king's representation sets
up the standard for depction of Egyptian royal figures:
idealization and the "canon of proportions"
-
Stele of Hammurabi
is typical ANE/ Mesopotamian in
political propaganda assoc. with royal imagery;
Law comes from deity through the king = shown by scene at top; King
has royal headdress deity with horned headdress
-
horned headdress: divine connections of king;
hierarchical scale; ANE where notions of
kingship arose
-
Mesopotamian conventions of
representation vary -- here relatively naturalistic where some others are
more puppet-like; composite view, with preliminary (not yery
successful) attempt at foreshortening of figure -- showing the volumes
of form as they recede into space
-
Dignity of enthroned deity with mountain footstool, versus standing
king
-
Basalt,7H; relief carving, cuneiform inscription
-
monument made for public display;
Large post for edict of proclamation of law code: Specific
infractions, penalties; cuneiform inscription
explains all
-
"construction",
"building" not appropriate terms for describing process of
creating subtractive sculpture
|

 |
 |
3.
-
Egypt,
The Great Sphinx, Gizeh, 2520-2494BCE;
-
ANE/ Assyrian.
Lamassu,
fr.
Palace of Sargon II, Khorsabad.
720 BCE.
-
Each is a type of hybrid guardian figure that includes a portrait
of the king in combination with an animal form body. Each typical its
culture is assertion of power of kingship. Each is subtractive
sculpture, carved out of larger block of material
-
ANE presentation of king Sargon II as
fearsome, intimidating, powerful;
Rel. to deity in elaborate horned headdress; Limestone, 14H; Careful carving with
lots of detail and great attention to surface, which is typical of ANE
sculpture: curled hair, wings, veins,
etc. Measure of naturalism
in animal forms and portraiture, but imaginative; 2 viewpoints: frontal,
side (5 legs).
-
Colossal Sphinx is much larger
(65'HX240'L) --a monolith carved at site from living rock, wears the
headdress with lappets & C of standard pharaoh headgear;
Identification of specific king: perhaps Khafre,
(disputed). Enormous size, set out in the precincts
of the Great Pyramid complex in Gizeh.
-
In each culture, other hybrids included
other combinations of animals, humans in various configurations
-
-- here the Egyptian work is Lion body
and Pharaoh head, the other is winged bull with king portrait head Similar guardian figures
in other Egyptian places, sometimes in pairs or greater numbers, sometimes lining
entry avenues, and sometimes as hybrids of different animals, especially
rams. Carved of sandstone, heavily eroded from blowing sand over
the centuries, so it appears to have less detail than Lamassu --
may not have originally been the case.
-
Lamassu pairs seen throughout the
palace where they assert the power of king, remind visitors of his
might. Other lamassu are winged lions, and used in many palaces,
other sites, with different details of form, decoration; some have
cuneiform inscriptions. Would originally been brightly and colorfully
painted.
-
"construction",
"building" not appropriate terms for describing process of
creating subtractive sculpture
|
 |
|
4.
-
Achaemenid
Persian. Reconstruction of Hall of 100 Columns,
Palace
of
Darius
and Xerxes at
Persepolis,
Iran.
500 BC
-
Egyptian.
Model of Hypostyle Hall from
Karnak,
Amon-Ra
Temple. 1290-1224BC.
-
Each is
a depiction of a hypostyle hall -- a large hall to accommodate
crowds; each is of stone construction, change from mud-brick in late
Ancient Near Eastern although standard in Egypt
-
At Persepolis there
were addorsed bulls/lions capitals on columns, span space, distribute
weight of roof; relief carvings depict subject people from all parts of
huge empire willingly bringing tribute, distinguished by garb, headwear
-
Egyptians also used hypostyle
form for large halls and post and lintel construction, but their
capitals were generally either lotus blossoms or papyrus buds.
-
ANE
columns had fluted shafts, Egyptian column shafts were covered with relief
carved & painted imagery and hieroglyphics.
-
The hypostyle form (Forest of columns)
was a means of construction
of large halls to accommodate crowds, easily expandable
-
Clerestory: raised center section which
allowed for
light through upper wall sections there, was an Egyptian innovation that improved usefulness of this type of
hall because innermost areas tended to be dark.
|
 |
 |
5.
-
Sumerian Lyre, fr. Tomb 789 (Kings or of Queen Puabi); 26CBC
-
Post-Amarna
Egyptian, NK. Anubis, the Jackal god, from the tomb of Tutankhamen, c.
1325 BC.
-
Both are examples of the sorts of lavish grave goods that were
supplied for royal burial in each of these cultures.
-
Lyre is typical of some ANE art in use
of conventions of representation with simplified, composite view of figure
(explain) and use of fantastic animals for depiction of stories and rituals.
Mother-of-pearl/shell inlaid into wooden panel, stylized bull head of gold and lapis
lazuli. sound box panel arranged in registers.
Frequently-seen motifs include master-of animals, scorpion-man from Epic of
Gilgamesh, animals bringing sacrifice in procession, and playing type of
instrument on which panel appeared. ( Bearded bull often seen in ANE, as
well)
-
Each shows afterlife beliefs about need for
grave goods reflecting the deceased interests while they were alive a
musical instrument
for wealthy aristocratic person or a formal representation of an important
deity related to the Egyptian death cult.
-
The Egyptian Anubis, the jackal-headed god
was in charge of the weighing of the heart ceremony -- an important rite
of passage into the afterlife, and he shows up in may of the depictions
of afterlife ceremonies, along with Osiris, the god of the underworld.
-
The lean and elegant sculptural form of
Anubis was part of the remarkable
find of treasures in the tomb of Tutankhamen that was discovered in the
1920s -- one of the only more-or-less intact examples of a lavish royal Egyptian burial.
-
The lyre was one of several and part of
a group of lavish goods in the royal ANE tomb
|
 |
 |
6.
-
Sasanian silver plate
with image of Shapur II Hunting Rams 5th-6th CCE
-
Post-Amarna Egyptian Golden belt buckle
from Tomb of Tutankhamun 1325BC
-
Each an example of really refined
metalwork, created with great technique and skilled craftsmanship for
imperial rulers, who are depicted in the work
-
plate is silver with touches of mercury
gilding and niello
-
buckle is gold filigree
-
Sasanians, successors to the Achaemenid
Persians, who resurrected the Persian imperial glory centuries after
defeat by Alexander the Great by conquering the Romans in their
territory, used such lavish works as expressions of luxurious court
life and as royal gifts
-
the Belt Buckle is another item in the
royal treasure horde in Tutankhamun's grave and was provided for his
afterlife needs
-
Ruler image on plate is of Shapur II,
identifiable by the distinctive crown, which varied from one king to
another. The royal hunt theme, with the king in lively pursuit
of rams, is a recurrent theme; motifs of fluttering scarves, braided
horse tail, boldly patterned quiver, lavish horse trappings are
frequently seen in Sasanian art
-
Ruler image of Tutankhamun also shows
ruler and horse -- here with chariot, perhaps also at royal hunt, or
perhaps in battle; image somewhat related to that of the king on the
painted chest in the same tomb; his image related to the Amarna style
figures of Akenaten and family; king in hierarchical scale; overall
image full of symbolism seen elsewhere in Egyptian art
|
 |
|
↓GROUP
B ↓ |
|
 |
7.
-
Mesolithic Rock Painting: Herding and Feeding. Tassili,
Algeria 6,000-4,000BCE
-
Paleolithic cave painting Altamira Spain: Bison.
12,000-11,000BC.
-
Each shows groups of animals, depicted on rock
surfaces and applied with crude implements like sticks or hair brushes,
using earth pigments.
-
Paleolithic painting at Altamira
includes scattered images of bulls that were applied at various
different times and with little or no regard for having the images
relate to one another
-
Mesolithic paintings at Tassili
reflect the changes in lifestyle during that era by showings groups of
animals that were corralled into herds and tended by groups of people
who had begun the sort of village life that was focused around helping
one another to tend to the animals and perform other activities related
to communal living. It includes a feeding trough and different
species of animals, along with men and women who are taking care of
them.
-
Differences between the two paintings show the
differences in lifestyle in the 3 phases of the prehistoric era.
|
 |
|
 |
8.
-
Paleolioithic Mammoth Bone House
reconstruction, the Ukraine. 16th-10th CBC
-
Mesolithic Hut reconstructions in
village, Ulster, 7000-6000BCE
-
examples of early attempts to create
shelter from available materials by prehistoric man
-
imaginative Ukrainian use of large
animal bones carefully placed for framework, then covered with skins,
sod, other available material to provide some protection from elements
-
equally imaginative use at Ulster of
less sturdy materials -- branches and other wooden poles, also covered
with hides or sod
-
the Mesolithic work appeared in
conjunction with other such structures, as well as other evidence if
Mesolithic changes -- pottery, more complex tools, other signs of
settling down and cultivating crops and herding
|
 |
|
 |
9.
-
Prehistoric/Neolithic. House at Skara Brae, Orkney Islands, Scotland,
3100 BC
-
Village at
Çatal
Hüyük,
Turkey.
Ancient Near East. 6500-5500 BC.
-
Each is typical of late prehistoric period - Neolithic
with village settlements and permanent
housing.
-
At Skara Brae, they used post-and-lintel technique
basic architectural form, for various furniture forms, along with
stacked stone walls. Stone structure, made more comfortable with
furs, grasses. Well-organized, plan for needs: storage, food
prep, waste, sleeping. Centered around hearth. one unit was
apparently for common use by villagers
-
Also typical Neolithic was the other
village: early Ancient Near Eastern, village life, apparent cooperation
of groups; Entry through roofs, with ladders perhaps a defensive
measure; Mud-brick construction wit timber frames, perhaps whitewashed. Large
proportion of shrine rooms, evident worship of bull; Decoration with
bulls, hunt scene, volcano scene; Bakery facility common for the group;
Passages through windowlike openings in walls. platforms in each room
apparently used for seating and beds
-
while unitary groups at Skara Brae
apparently lived together in single rooms, at
Çatal
Hüyük,
units were comprised of several rooms each
-
each also had evidence of other
artifacts, pottery and crafts -- at Skara Brae, an incised-decoration
pottery was found; at Çatal
Hüyük,
there were many more forms of art and tools, as well as embellishment
of interior spaces with pained and plastered forms
-
while there was proof of farming and
herding at both villages, and of obsidian trade at
Çatal
Hüyük,
it seems more likely that the people of Skara Brae would have also
been engaged in hunting
-
differences in climate should be
considered in the construction and arrangement of each village -- the
harsher northern seaside climate at Skara Brae would not have allowed
the simpler arrangement and openness seen in
Çatal
Hüyük,
-
Each shows
accommodation for family and communal living in the Neolithic era, as
people settled down.
|
 |
|
 |
10.
-
Prehistoric
(Paleolithic). Head and antlers of a deer, cave painting from Lascaux
Caves in France. 15-13MBC.
-
Prehistoric (Paleolithic). Chauvet Cave, France: painting:
Rhinoceros 30-13MBC.
-
Each
is typical of prehistoric art in simple depiction, on available
surfaces, with available earth materials. Some are simple renditions of form with relative
accuracy and some sense of naturalism for animals, but not so much for human
forms, which were rare in the cave drawings or paintings.
-
The deer is
somewhat less sophisticated in rendition and shows how artists sometimes
overemphasize or exaggerate features of an animal that are striking to
them, like the treatment of the antlers here, even though it is based in
close observation of the natural forms.
-
The horn of the
Rhinoceros is also somewhat more exaggerated, but done in an elegant way
that seems to indicate, as do many of the drawings and paintings at Chauvet, that there was a longer tradition of practiced and skilled
artwork in some of the caves than had previously been described, when
this cave was found in the 1990s. Its discovery led scholars to
revise their opinion in this regard.
-
The drawings and paintings in most
sites seem to be reflecting
activities of era; Probably "sympathetic magic" for hopes of success in
hunt, some have arrows and arrow marks. Also shows attempts by artists to
create imagery in response to their visual world, and to show interest in
aesthetic issues. Simple renditions of form with relative accuracy and some
sense of naturalism. In many sites, there is evidence of repeated
return to the same spot, perhaps a sacred ritual site, as art has been
obviously created by various artists at different times.
|
 |
|
 |
11.
-
Prehistoric (Paleolithic) Human
with Feline Head. c. 30,000-28,000BCE, Mammoth Ivory 11 5/8" H.
-
Prehistoric (Paleolithic)."Venus" of Willendorf. 28-25MBC. 4.25"H.
-
the feline-headed human is a very early sculptural form, showing imaginative
combination of 2 species
-
each is subtractive sculptural form,
carved from natural materials
-
each shows a keen observation of
naturalism in form, but with an imaginative interpretation that
emphasizes certain features more than others for artistic purposes
-
the Limestone female seems to perhaps
have been a fetish figure, a talisman or charm for fertility of
humans, animals, plants -- all of which would have been of great
concern to early people.
From the time when people were still nomadic, the sites of creation
for these is unknown, as they could have been carried far from those
spots
-
Both are of relatively small, portable size,
although the female is less than half the size of the other
-
actual purposes are uncertain, but
scholarly conjecture has been offered for each.
-
The Venus Figure has emphasis on female reproductive parts, de-emphasis
on other features and rudimentary arms, with no facial
features and cap-like hair. While the sense of proportion is exaggerated,
and the shape is likely distorted in some parts, there is ample
evidence of a keen examination of naturalistic features of certain
parts of the anatomy. There is a preponderance of female figures in prehistoric carving.
This one
found in Austria, although it is not known where it was made, and there are many from other locations, as well, with similar emphasis.
-
both were portable, relatively small
sizes, with places of creation unknown.
-
While the feline-headed figure was
somewhat large for the era, it is relatively small, under 1 foot high
-
The feline headed figure was found in Germany, and the composite form may
show an imagined type or the use of costume or mask for play or ritual
purposes. Later images of such hybrid forms lead scholars to
suggest these may have been early examples of sorcerers or shamans.
-
For neither is there any
written
record to substantiate interpretation, but the female venus figure apparently used as good luck
fertility fetish figure for humans, animals, crops. "Venus" designation borrowed from Greek art
probably inappropriate name, not really a deity/goddess.
-
For each
figure, a good measure of care was taken to create the carved form, so
they had some importance to their makers and/or users.
-
"construction",
"building" not appropriate terms for describing process of
creating subtractive sculpture
|
 |
 |
12.
-
Prehistoric/Neolithic. Stonehenge Salisbury Plain, England
2550-1600 BCE.
-
Prehistoric/Neolithic. Great Stone Tower, Jericho.
8000-7000BCE
-
each is typical of
Neolithic in showing evidence of communal living and ritual, and cooperative
efforts.
-
For Stonehenge, the use of megaliths to create post-and-lintel structure
(with lintel-and-tenon method).
Purpose unknown, but clearly demonstrates some knowledge of astronomical
events and passing of seasons. Stones partly from distant sites.
That, and apparent attention to development of site over many centuries show
its importance to people overtime and apparent use as ritual site.
-
For Jericho, the
tower is the remnant of a settlement that shows early interest in
protection for communal living, as it is part of a precinct wall
for a town on a plateau in the Jordan River valley. Houses were of
mud brick on stone foundations, but fortifications were of stacked
shaped stone, assembled without mortar -- this was a
33' diameter/28' high tower with stairs inside, which may have been only
of several, along a 5' thick stone wall that was at least 13' high, and
surrounded by a moat.
-
Early evidence of monumental stone
architecture. Both works show cooperation among Neolithic
settling people to provide for communal needs.
|
 |
|