main communicative purpose: to contribute to the existing research effort in the field
secondary purposes:
instances of research papers:
the seminar paper, different papers throughout the MA and PHD programs, the graduate course thesis, the M.A. thesis/dissertation, the doctoral dissertation, the feature / scientific article (in specialized magazines, bulletins, journals, on the Internet), the lab/scientific report, the scientific lecture
standard move pattern:
expository research paper:
Move I: Introducing the present research
Step 1: Introducing the general topics and the specific content
Step 2: Introducing research findings so far
Step 3: Stating the thesis / proposing new findings/approach
Step 4: / Move II: Transition: Presenting the points of proof (at least 3)
Move III: Developing points of proof
Step 1: Developing point of proof 1
Step 2: Developing point of proof 2
Step 3: Developing point of proof 3
Move IV: Concluding by reinforcing the thesis
Move V: (not optional) Works cited
argumentative research paper:
Move I: Introducing the topics
Move II: Acknowledging opposition
Step 1: Acknowledging counterthesis
Step 2: Acknowledging counterpoint 1
Step 3: Acknowledging counterpoint 2
Step 4: Acknowledging counterpoint 3
Move III: Stating the thesis
Move IV: Transition:
Step 1: Acknowledging disagreement with counterpoints 1,2,3
Step 2: Proposing constructive arguments 1,2,3
Move V: Developing refutations and arguments:
Step 1: Developing refutations 1,2,3 (why the existing counterarguments are not valid, or why they are now superseded)
Step 2: Developing constructive arguments 1,2,3 (insisting upon why the proposed constructive arguments are valid, or why they are better, newer, a.s.o. , than the existing counterarguments)
Move VI: Concluding upon the validity of the thesis
Move VII: Works cited
Specific discourse strategies (besides those employed by the critical essay):
Task: Read the research paper Marina Abramovics--Between Art and the Extreme by Roxana Andonie.
What type of research paper is it? Which were the previous findings on this subject the author had access to and presents in her paper? What is the new insight she proposes here? What do you think about her use of sources? Are they relevant? Are they well-acknowledged?
Rhythm (series)
secondary purposes:
- to persuade readers that the proposed thesis (opinion, idea) is right (expository research paper)
- to persuade readers that the proposed thesis is the correct/better one as opposed to another thesis (argumentative research paper)
- to survey the most valid and convincing of the existing research on a subject (descriptive research paper)
instances of research papers:
the seminar paper, different papers throughout the MA and PHD programs, the graduate course thesis, the M.A. thesis/dissertation, the doctoral dissertation, the feature / scientific article (in specialized magazines, bulletins, journals, on the Internet), the lab/scientific report, the scientific lecture
standard move pattern:
expository research paper:
Move I: Introducing the present research
Step 1: Introducing the general topics and the specific content
Step 2: Introducing research findings so far
Step 3: Stating the thesis / proposing new findings/approach
Step 4: / Move II: Transition: Presenting the points of proof (at least 3)
Move III: Developing points of proof
Step 1: Developing point of proof 1
Step 2: Developing point of proof 2
Step 3: Developing point of proof 3
Move IV: Concluding by reinforcing the thesis
Move V: (not optional) Works cited
argumentative research paper:
Move I: Introducing the topics
Move II: Acknowledging opposition
Step 1: Acknowledging counterthesis
Step 2: Acknowledging counterpoint 1
Step 3: Acknowledging counterpoint 2
Step 4: Acknowledging counterpoint 3
Move III: Stating the thesis
Move IV: Transition:
Step 1: Acknowledging disagreement with counterpoints 1,2,3
Step 2: Proposing constructive arguments 1,2,3
Move V: Developing refutations and arguments:
Step 1: Developing refutations 1,2,3 (why the existing counterarguments are not valid, or why they are now superseded)
Step 2: Developing constructive arguments 1,2,3 (insisting upon why the proposed constructive arguments are valid, or why they are better, newer, a.s.o. , than the existing counterarguments)
Move VI: Concluding upon the validity of the thesis
Move VII: Works cited
Specific discourse strategies (besides those employed by the critical essay):
- inserting other opinions (other authors) on the same subject
- synthesizing previous research
- assuming the voice of authority (with rights and obligations)
- commenting upon sources (by agreeing or disagreeing with them)
- paraphrasing
- quoting
- acknowledging to sources (notes + bibliography)
Task: Read the research paper Marina Abramovics--Between Art and the Extreme by Roxana Andonie.
What type of research paper is it? Which were the previous findings on this subject the author had access to and presents in her paper? What is the new insight she proposes here? What do you think about her use of sources? Are they relevant? Are they well-acknowledged?
Rhythm 0
Rhythm (series)
Deadline: April 27
Părăuan Francesca - Design - 2nd year
ReplyDeleteI think this is an expository research paper. I say this because the author presents her main idea and then gives three clear examples to prove it, exactly like the steps in our lesson. From what I read, the older research the author had access to showed that the artist made ritualistic art where she put herself in danger to explore themes like trust and endurance. However, the new idea the author proposes is that the artist does not just do these harmful things to shock the audience. Instead, she uses her own body to test her mental limits and find emotional freedom and a new state of mind. Finally, I think the author uses her sources very well. They are very relevant because she uses direct interviews and recognized art websites. She also acknowledges them correctly by adding the names and dates right next to the quotes and by putting a complete list of all the sources at the very end of the paper.
The paper Marina Abramovich—Between Art and the Extreme by Roxana Andonie is an expository research paper, as its main purpose is to present and explain an artist’s work while supporting a central thesis rather than directly opposing another viewpoint. The author builds on previous findings drawn from sources such as ArtFactsNet, interviews (PBS Newshour), and critical texts (Kaplan, Hagiwara), which describe Marina Abramović’s performances as ritualistic, physically extreme, and focused on endurance, pain, and the performer-audience relationship. Based on this existing research, Andonie proposes the insight that Abramović not only engages in shocking or dangerous acts, but uses her body as a medium to explore deeper psychological and transformative processes, pushing both herself and the audience toward emotional and conscious change. Regarding the use of sources, they are generally relevant, as they include interviews, critical essays, and reputable art platforms; however, they are not always consistently or correctly acknowledged (missing years, incomplete citations, and reliance on Wikipedia), which weakens the academic rigor of the paper despite its otherwise appropriate integration of quotations and paraphrased material.
ReplyDeleteDracea Luca-Vlad
ReplyDeleteAnul 2, licenta
Foto-Video
Marina Abramović – Art at the Extreme
Introduction
Marina Abramović is known as the “grandmother of performance art.” In her works, her body becomes the main tool of expression, and she tests physical and mental limits to create a powerful experience for both herself and the audience. This research aims to show that the extremes in her art have a much deeper meaning than just shocking viewers.
Previous Research
Scholars and critics have discussed:
Body as medium: her body is the central instrument of expression.
Endurance art: testing physical and psychological limits.
Audience participation: spectators become part of the artwork.
Famous works studied include:
Rhythm 0 (1974) – the audience could use 72 objects on her body, including dangerous ones.
The Artist Is Present (2010) – she sat silently while visitors engaged in direct eye contact.
New Insight / Thesis
The main argument of this research is that Abramović’s extreme performances are not only provocative but deeply meaningful artistic explorations:
They explore trust, vulnerability, and human responsibility.
The audience becomes part of the artwork, making each performance unique and unrepeatable.
Her works challenge people to confront their own limits and emotions.
Analysis of Key Works
Rhythm 0
The audience could use 72 objects on her body.
Showed the capacity of humans for care and violence.
Highlighted the ethical responsibility of spectators.
The Artist Is Present Sat silently in front of visitors, making eye contact. Created an intense emotional moment without any words.
Focus on endurance, presence, and audience engagement.
Reflect Abramović’s philosophy: art exists in the shared experience between artist and spectators.
Sources and Documentation Sources include art theory, performance studies, and critical reviews. Proper citation of sources shows respect for other authors’ work and gives credibility to the research.
Marina Abramović shows us that art can be extreme, challenging, and profoundly human. The audience is not just a spectator but part of the experience, and the limits of the body and mind become artistic material. Her performances teach us about vulnerability, responsibility, and the power of emotions—reminding us that art is not only for the eyes but for the soul.
Maftei Larisa Daniela grafică anul 2
ReplyDeleteThis is an expository research paper. Its primary purpose is to inform the reader by explaining the methods and philosophies behind Abramović’s performances.
Previous Findings
The author utilizes established biographical and critical data, including:
Abramović’s upbringing in Yugoslavia, which influenced her disciplined, "warrior-like" approach. Her reputation as the "Grandmother of Performance Art." Existing critiques of her work that focus on physical danger, endurance, and the body as a medium.
The New Insight
Andonie moves beyond simple biography to explain how Abramović uses the "Rhythm" series to reach a state of liminality. She proposes that these performances are a systematic exploration of the unconscious, where the artist acts as a bridge between physical pain and a higher state of mental awareness, involving the audience as an active component of the art.
Use of Sources Relevance: High. The author uses a mix of primary interviews (direct quotes from the artist) and secondary critical reviews to provide a balanced view. Acknowledgment: The sources are well-acknowledged. The paper uses consistent in-text citations and a detailed bibliography, including digital access dates, which demonstrates strong academic rigor for an expository work.
Chindriș Bianca- design- second year
ReplyDeleteThis paper is an analytical and interpretative research paper in the field of art theory. It combines elements of expository writing, where information about Marina Abramović is presented, with interpretation and some argumentation. Rather than being based on original research, it relies on existing literature and documented performances to analyze her work.The author builds on previous findings from art criticism and interviews, presenting Abramović’s work as part of ritualistic performance art that explores pain, endurance, and transformation. She uses both secondary sources, art websites and articles, and primary sources,interviews with Abramović, to show that her performances function as acts of physical and psychological testing, often involving risk and sacrifice.The main insight proposed in the paper is that Abramović’s extreme performances are not only shocking but are meant to create a form of transformation for both the artist and the audience. The author emphasizes that the body becomes a medium through which limits are tested, and that the audience plays an active role in shaping the meaning of the performance.Regarding sources, they are generally relevant and appropriate for the topic, especially the interviews and art analysis platforms. However, the use of sources is not entirely consistent or academically rigorous. Some citations are incomplete or poorly formatted, and there is limited use of strong academic references. Overall, while the sources support the discussion, they could be better acknowledged and more carefully integrated.