Art History 102 Final Exam Study Guide

Art History 102 Final Exam Study Guide

Wednesday December 21st

* Please complete your graded blog post by December 14th.

Part 1: Slide ID - (25%)

These 25 Slides must be memorized:

Fragonard The Swing Date 1766 

Caravaggio Doubting Thomas c. 1600

Velazquez Las Meninas (Maids of Honor) 1656

Theodore Gericault The Raft of the Medusa 1818-1819

Gustave Courbet The Stone Breakers 1849

Peter Paul Rubens The Disembarkment of Marie de Medici at Port of Marseilles, 3 Nov1600 1622 -1626 

Manet Olympia 1863

RembrandtThe Nightwatch 1642 

Paul Cezanne Mont Sainte-Victorie ca. 1885-1887

Seurat A Sunday Afternoon on the Island of La Grande Jatte 1884-1886

Rodin The Gates of Hell 1880-1900

Henri Matisse The Red Studio 1911

Pablo Picasso Les Demoiselles d’Avignon 1907

GoyaThe Third of May,1808 The Execution of the Defenders of Madrid 1814 

Oskar Kokoschka The Bride of the Wind 1914

Constantin Brancusi Bird in Space 1928

Meret Oppenheim Object (Luncheon in Fur) 1936

Jackson Pollock Autumn Rhythm: Number 30 1950

Marcel Duchamp The Bride Stripped Bare by Her Bachelors, Even (The Large Glass) 1915 -1923

Jacques-Louis David Oath of the Horatii 1784 

Piet Mondrian Broadway Boogie Woogie 1942-43

Willem de Kooning Woman I. 1950-52

Eva Hesse Untitled (Rope Piece) 1970

Robert Smithson Spiral Jetty 1970

Carolee Schneemann Eye Body: 36 Transformative Actions 1963

Part II: Short Comparison Essays (75% total; 25% each - 20 minutes each)

Each of these artworks, artists and their historical contexts should be extensively researched in preparation for your in class essay. Use your notes, book, and library and online research to aid in your preparation. Points will be given in each answer for:

The correct identification of the given works; a brief formal analysis of the works in themselves and in comparison to the other given; the connection of the formal aspects of the work to the historical/social context of is creation; and finally a larger analysis of what the pair says - what argument or meaning is proposed or reveal by their being brought together. 

A. Donatello, David 1425-1429; Michelangelo, David 1504; Bernini, David 1623-1624

1. Artemisia Gentileschi Self-Portrait as the Allegory of Painting 1630; Hannah Wilke S.O.S. Starification Object Series 1974 -1982 

1. GoyaThe Third of May,1808 The Execution of the Defenders of Madrid 1814; Pablo Picasso Guerinca 1937. 

BLOG ALERT

PLEASE write your name on your blog post - if you have not you will not get credit -
please comment on your blog with your name if it is not there - (I'm talking to you most recent post on
Impressionism!)

Also - please complete your blog post if you haven't (and that is quite a few of you) by December 14th.

EXAM TIME

The Exam will be given December 21st at the normal class time....

BEGIN TO STUDY NOW!

Behold! The Birth of Impressionism

The birth of Impressionism is as much as a loss as it is a win. But first, we need to begin with why impressionism was created in order to go in to detail about the pros and cons. The time period was around 1850-1900, and one of the greatest inventions was created: The camera. The camera allowed us to capture any moment of time in a matter of minutes. Which was great, except for the fact that now what were painters supposed to do? Around the birth of the camera came the birth of incredibly realistic and moving paintings, ones that if seen one would think was simply a photograph itself.

Let’s take these paintings by Marie Rosalie Bonheur; the image is simply breathtaking with its accuracy in realism. If standing at a far away distance one would think that it was a photograph.

So why are there so few paintings like these? Well we can thank the camera for that. With the birth of the camera there was no need for super realistic paintings – those who weren't artists didn't see the beauty within it, it was just a waste of time to them since they could just capture any moment with the camera.

Because of this painters needed a new way of making money; they couldn’t just lose their job entirely. And so Impressionism was born; a way for painters to continue to do what they love and what they’re best at, but in order to stabilize an income if they were one of the lucky ones of the art realm.

Painters needed something different in order for their paintings to sell, something that hasn’t been done yet. So since a camera is able to capture a moment in time down to the last detail, its only logical that the painter reversed that and took an image and reduced its accuracy to realism and made something new.

But how and why did impressionism stick? It was because impressionist artists combined two things together - realism and its opposite, in order to create a new type of art. If an impressionist painting is looked up close, the first thing you would notice is the direction of the strokes, the lines, the texture. But from far away it looks as though the image could be a realistic painting. Impressionistic paintings had their own charm that was greatly accepted into their time period at the time - though very short lived.

(Jean-Louis Ernest Meissonier - Dragon a Cheval 1870-91)

So why and how is this a win and a loss? A win is that we gave birth to a new art movement, one that was incredibly different yet still exposed raw talent. The natural artist fended for himself in order to find a way to have a sufficient income as well as stick to what they do best. But here's where the loss comes in: we lose the promotion and continuation of the realistic paintings such as the ones done by Marie Rosalie Bonheur, which were in most cases the outright determination of true talent.

-Athena Loizos

An Artist Yearns for Freedom

The inspiration for this blog post comes from the reproduction of "Manuel Osorio Manrique de Zuñiga" that hangs above my front door.

Francisco Goya was a Spanish painter of the early Romantic period (1746–1828). He was the painter for the royal Spanish court, before the French invasion of Spain. He often took commissions from the Spanish nobility to paint their portraits. Two examples of his work for the Spanish nobility are a portrait of "Manuel Osorio Manrique de Zuñiga" (c. 1790), the son of the Count and Countess of Altamira, and a painting of "Family of Charles IV" (c. 1800). These two paintings are very different, yet they are both convey similar ideas.


The portrait of "Manuel Osorio Manrique de Zuñiga" shows a young boy in bright red clothing, standing in front of a gray wall. Next to him are three cats to his right and a cage with birds to his left. He is holding a magpie on a leash, at which three cats stare hungrily. The magpie is holding Goya’s calling card in its beak. In Christian symbolism, birds represent souls, therefore the birds in the cage in this painting represent trapped or caged souls (http://www.metmuseum.org/toah/works-of-art/49.7.41). The boy looks very pale, and because of this, he does not appear to be really Spanish. The white background highlights the boy’s head, which makes it the focal point of the painting. His red clothes pop out to the eye as well, because of the sharp contrast to the subdued colors of the rest of the painting. The cats appear as a dangerous element, with their concentrated staring at the magpie. The magpie cannot fly away, since it is not free. The mood of the painting is one of depression and unease, due to the lack of much color in the painting.



The painting "Family of Charles IV" depicts Charles IV, the king of Spain, and his immediate family. Charles IV is to the right of the center of the painting and the queen is in the center. This may indicate that the queen is the power behind the throne. She is holding her grandson’s hand, who is dressed in a red outfit. One of the women is shown with her head turned, another woman is depicted as looking towards the ceiling, and a third woman, holding a child, appears to have lost focus. Many of the people depicted in the painting seem bored, and do not act like nobility. They do not seem to project great intelligence. The background shows several large paintings hanging up on a wall. This painting shows a variety of color. The males wear blue and white sashes of their coats. Their clothing is bright, even the king’s black suit. The women are dressed in golden gowns. The light source appears to come from the left shining towards the right. The shadow in the painting appears diagonally, and the line it forms continues through a line in the queen’s dress and the line on the floor, creating a right triangle on the bottom left side of the painting. Goya places himself in this painting within the shadows.

"Manuel Osorio Manrique de Zuñiga" and "Family of Charles IV" are two very different pieces, that have certain similarities. In both paintings, Goya paints the young boys in red outfits with a ruffled neckline and a belt that seems to be made of silk. This seems to be the formal clothing of young aristocratic boys in Spain during this time. The paintings were painted around a decade apart from each other, but the boys are still wearing the same fashions. This shows the viewer the conservative mind set of the aristocracy in Spain.

Goya inserts himself in both pictures, while trying to maintain separateness. In "Manuel Osorio Manrique de Zuñiga", his insertion is hidden, or symbolic, as the tethered magpie holding his calling card. The magpie represents Goya and his feelings as an artist. While the other birds, or artists, are in the cage, he has been let out but is still not entirely free. The magpie is also shown with its head bowing down to the boy. As an artist, he may feel imprisoned or trapped because he has to paint what he is told to paint by the aristocracy in order to have a livelihood. In "Family of Charles IV", Goya paints himself as the only serious figure in the painting. This can portray his feelings towards the Spanish royal family. They seem to be neither serious nor bright people. His insertion into the painting is from a political view. In this painting, it is as if he is mocking the Spanish royal family. His placement in the shadows shows that he is separate from the group. The paintings show Goya’s intellectual progression, from thinking as an individual to being concerned about his country’s political state.

By: Abby Strick

Impressionism and Zelda

The Impressionist movement of 19^th century France sought to capture “an instantaneous impression of a scene in nature.” Impressionists and Post-Impressionists like Claude Monet and Paul Cezanne provided inspiration to a wide range of people involved in the creative arts. The influence of Cezanne in particular, spans from Picasso and Matisse, naming him “the father of us all,” to the unlikely industry of modern video games.

Video game company Nintendo admitted that the art for its newest game “The Legend of Zelda: Skyward Sword” was inspired by Impressionism, as well as Post-Impressionist Paul Cezanne. This art direction can be seen as an aesthetic choice, as well technologically necessary. Nintendo’s Wii system is known for lacking the technological prowess of other consoles and personal computers; it has trouble rendering the “realistic” models of the latest graphic-intensive video games. Nintendo is well aware of this technological hurdle, thus they opt for a greater emphasis on art direction rather than high definition textures. This choice creates a parallel to the impressionist movement if we think of “high end” graphics as Realism, and Nintendo’s “art direction” as Impressionism.

Skyward Sword displays distant landscapes in a very impressionistic way; they seem painted with small brush strokes and the forms meld to create a single landscape. The characters and environments closest to the player appear comparatively solid however. Though the game isn’t exactly a moving Impressionist painting, the influence is clear.

The game utilizes a bright pallet, (not fully expressed by my personal screen shots) much like the Impressionists .The Impressionist goal of capturing “the transitory effects of light and atmosphere” is fundamentally captured in the game, because what better way to express moving light than to actually have it move? Cezanne’s concerns are also addressed: the character models are solid and durable, and they exist within the landscape, but do not melt into it. Arguably, the aesthetic of Skyward Sword is timeless compared to the graphics of other contemporary games striving for realism, since it is inevitable that they will be surpassed by future games as technology develops.

When comparing a screen shot of the game and Cezanne’s Mont Saint-Victoire from c.1885, we can see the influence in the mountain and the depiction of the sky, a similar palette is also utilized by both.

Other comparisons that show influence from Cezanne:

Promotional concept art compared to Cezanne’s Mont Sainte-Victoire seen from Bellevue.

Compared to Road Before the Mountains, Sainte-Victoire
1898–1902

Monet also lends inspiration:

Promotional art compared to Monet's The Cliffs at Etretat.

-Nick Pantelaros

Sources: The class textbook, http://www.zeldauniverse.net/zelda-news/skyward-swords-visuals-impressionistic/ , and personal play time and pictures.

I also found a video dealing with this same idea, and it shows the game in motion.