8. The Art Review

Media:

• art magazines, newspapers of regional, national, international circulation
• journals devoted to different art forms
• radio + television broadcasts
• the Internet (including blogs)

Audience:

• the general public; educated, experienced readers, not necessarily art connoisseurs; people who are interested in art and possess some knowledge and/or intuition about art; people who expect to learn something new about art, or just see art from different perspectives
• the members of the artistic discourse community
• undecided people (as to whether to visit or not an exhibition)
• people who missed the exhibition, or are unable to visit it, because of its distant location or lack of time and who are counting on the intelligent writing of the art reviewer to get an idea about a specific art event

Communicative purposes:

• to inform the public about a current, or a just-concluded artistic event
• to promote an artist, an exhibition (gallery or museum, why not?)
• to offer the audience an evaluation of the show/exhibition (as personal, but expert opinion)
• to competently describe the most representative works
• to competently interpret the meanings of the works, by offering the necessary evidence to support interpretation (from within and outside the work; iconographic + iconological interpretations) -- the previous purposes are those of art critique
• to convince/persuade the public that the effort of visiting the exhibition is worthwhile, or, on the contrary -- similar to advertorials
• to persuade the readers to become art exhibition goers/expand the art public
• to educate oneself and the audience; develop artistic taste; fight against bad taste -- the last two purposes coincide with art education' purposes

Authors:

• art critics, art historians, professional writers, journalists, philosophers (aestheticians, art theorists), authors of TV and radio series and programs, bloggers, church people, etc.
• must have(s): enough experience to offer reliable evaluations; honesty; analytical, open mind; writing experience (offer that amount of information the audience needs; provide the right amount of scholarly insights without getting into too many boring details; maintain the reader's interest by varied rhetorical devices and discourse strategies); knowledge of the different (artistic) ideologies; knowledge of the art market.

Size: rather short, concise (500-600 words)

Move pattern and discourse strategies:

Move I (WHO + WHEN + WHERE)

1. catching the reader's attention by using the appropriate rhetorical devices (e.g. a rhetorical question, a paradox, a figure of speech)
2. offering specific information about the exhibition (when - the period; where - country, town, gallery, museum)
3. offering some information about the artist(s) (a very short biography)

Move II (WHAT; developing a controlling idea about the exhibition)

1. offering a general picture of the show and a first evaluation
2. different discourse strategies:

• the historical approach of the works (chronological)
• an unpopular opinion
• an analogy
• what one expected vs. what one got
• a comparison (between works of the same artist, of different artists, between styles)
• the first impression (initial impact on the viewer)
• the strength/originality of the artist
• a question (either rhetorical or one that will be answered in the following move)

Move III (transition)

• ensuring the coherence of the text
• relating the previous information to the following

Move IV (reviewing works)

• analyzing artworks
• offering partial evaluations

1. describing + interpreting +/- evaluating work 1
2. describing + interpreting +/- evaluating work 2, a.s.o.

Note: only the most appealing works are to be taken into consideration (the most representative of the artist/for the show; the ones that the critic liked best, or, on the contrary, disliked)

• partial evaluations of the works are made according to some aesthetic criteria (implicit or explicit)
• are usually positive, or holding some reservations; when the lack of value is quite obvious, evaluations are negative
• rhetorical strategies include: avoiding ambiguity and clearly stating the value (using qualifiers and quantifiers- e.g. overstatements -hyperboles), or, on the contrary, cultivating ambiguity for the sake of politeness (e.g. understatements - litotes = saying too little); irony and rarely sarcasm.

Move V (concluding)

• offering a final, on-the-whole evaluation of the exhibition
• convincing the audience of the value of the show
• persuading the audience to visit the exhibition
• trying to predict the future development of an artist's work, based on the current show (speculating about future developments)
• implicitly persuading collectors to buy/or not some works

Tasks:


1. Find an art review. Give its title. Do you consider it a positive or negative review overall? Why? Which are the positive aspects, and which are the negative ones? Do you have a clear image of that exhibition based on this art review? Do the interpretations given to the analyzed works help you understand the artist's themes?

2. Choose an exhibition you have recently seen and try to write your own art review of that exhibition.  

 Deadline: APRIL 30

7.1. Using (Bibliographical) Sources

When writing a research paper (and not only that kind of paper) you are supposed to survey a lot of materials - books, specialized magazines, broadcasts, museum and art gallery publications, the Internet,a.s.o. All the pieces of information belonging to those sources that you may want to use in your own paper must be correctly acknowledged. This can be done in several ways; there are many models you can use. First, ask your teacher/publisher-editor which style to adopt. If you do not have to stick to one requirement  you may consider the following two most widely used styles:

The MLA (Modern Language Association) Style

also called "in-text"/parenthetical documentation - the bibliographical information is supplied in the text, in brackets, where that piece of information is used; however, the bibliography ("works cited") is yet to be given at the end of the paper.

• Peter Johnson claims that Raphael's works are ......(21), where 21 is the number of the page in the book you had previously mentioned, written by Peter Johnson.
• Raphael's works are ... (Johnson: 21)
• Turner's magnificent brushwork style can be considered a precursor of Impressionism (Johnson, Turner's Art: 38) -- this is another book by the same author, so you have to mention this other title.
• Pratt mentions that Picasso met Matisse in Paris,1906...(qt. in Johnson: 99) -- this is to acknowledge the fact that you used an indirect piece of information; you didn't actually read Pratt, but you found him quoted in Johnson; apud is another term for this)

IDEM / IBIDEM: there are different opinions about how to use these Latin terms when acknowledging sources; mainly, idem (id.) means "the same person who had been cited before", while ibidem (ibid.) means "at the same place" as cited before; some people use "op cit" (Latin opere citato) for "in the work cited before"

Works Cited (the bibliography in the MLA style)

• Johnson, Peter. Raphael's Art. Washington, Thomson University Press, c. 2006. (a book published by a university publishing house)
• Johnson, Peter. "Turner's Art." Art of the World Monthly, September 2008: 29-41. (an article in a monthly magazine)
• Johnson, Peter. "Impressions." 21 Apr. 2010, http://www.blogger.com/post-create.g?blogeu#3456_top>. (Internet, blog post)
• Johnson, Peter. "The Book Illustration Art." The Art Bulletin 98 (2005): 201-203 (volume no. 98 of an art journal, pages 201-203)
• Johnson, Peter et al. "The New Realism", Ann Arbor UP, 2010 (there are other authors, besides Johnson)

The Chicago Style

- the bibliographical information appearing in the text is documented as numbered footnotes (at the bottom of the page) or as endnotes (a numbered list at the end of the paper; their content is more or less the same as in MLA style; use p. or pp. for the number/s of the page(s) where you took information from); notes are not exclusively used for bibliographical information; you may also add some extra information on your own, or personal interpretations and comments on the cited/mentioned ideas.


1. Johnson, Peter.Raphael's Art (Washington, Thomson University Press, c. 2006), 21 (this can be a footnote or an endnoWorks Cited (Chicago)

Johnson, Peter.Raphael's Art. Washington, Thomson University Press, c. 2006

Johnson, Peter. "Turner's Art." Art of the World Monthly, September 2008, 29-41

Johnson, Peter."Impressions" [21 Apr. 2010]. Available from http://www.bloger.com-post-create.g/?blogeu#3456_top.

Johnson, Peter. "The Book Illustration Art". The Art Bulletin 98 (2005), 201-203



Note 1: All the above names and titles are construed. They cannot be found in reality. They were meant only as examples.

Some publishers have very strict rules as to how the documentation should be given. Personally, I consider only the correct, truthful acknowledgment of the sources to be important, and not so much the style, which should be the writer's choice. Either way, do not forget to always mention where you have taken your information from, no matter if you quote it exactly or you paraphrase it, you summarize it, e.t.c.

Note 2: However, notice that such "works cited" entries as the following cannot be accepted at all:

• album arta 'Mari personalitati- Leonardo da Vinci (quoted exactly)
• Sabrina Laurnt, "Was Dali a Genius" (quoted exactly)    

AVOIDING PLAGIARISM

7. The Research Paper

main communicative purpose: to contribute to the existing research effort in the field
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)

main differences between the critical essay and the research paper: the research paper is not merely a personal opinion about a subject (like in the case of the critical essay); it is the result of thorough scientific investigation, of many readings on the researched subject; it is the result of conscious and objective choices of the previous findings; it is longer in size; it requires the correct documentation of all the sources used for investigating the subject.

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

Rhytm 0

Rhythm (series)

Deadline: April 9

6. The Compare and Contrast Essay

general term - comparison

more specific meanings - showing similarities = comparing

- showing differences = contrasting

communicative purpose(s): depending on the specific intention of the writer, we can speak about:

• descriptive comparison - to show similarities and differences between two artworks
• expository comparison - to show similarities and differences between two issues in order to support a personal thesis
• argumentative comparison - to show similarities and differences between two issues in order to support a personal thesis that is expected to encounter considerable opposition

standard move-pattern(s): two patterns: the "block" pattern and the "point by point" pattern

the "block" pattern

Move I: Introducing the theme and the compared artists
Step 1: Setting the stage (the general context in which the two terms intended for comparison belong)
Step 2: Introducing the artists + works + theme(s)
Step 3: Stating the thesis and points of proof (if they exist in the writer's intention)
Move II: Transition: announcing intended organization (the block pattern)
Move III: Developing description/analysis/points of proof/constructive arguments
Step 1: artist/artwork A: elements 1,2,3 / points of proof 1,2,3 / constructive arguments 1,2,3
Step 2: artist/artwork B: elements 1,2,3 / points of proof 1,2,3 / constructive arguments 1,2,3
Move IV: Concluding upon the basic differences and/or similarities (by showing to what extent these have served the intended communicative purpose of the essay)
Move V (optional) Works cited


the "point by point" pattern


Move I: Introducing the theme and compared artists (see above)
Move II: Transition (announces the "point by point" pattern)
Move III: Developing description/analysis/points of proof/constructive arguments


Step 1: Describing/analyzing element 1 / elaborating on point of proof 1 / offering constructive argument 1 for work/artist A

Step 2: Describing/analyzing element 1 / elaborating on point of proof 1 / offering constructive argument 1 for work B

Step 3: element 2 / point of proof 2 / constructive argument 2 for work A

Step 4: element 2 / point of proof 2 / constructive argument 2 for work B

Move IV: Concluding

Move V (optional) Works cited


Task 1:

Read the text Two Edges of the Subconscious Reality in the Twentieth-Century Art by Olga Bersan.

 What pattern is there used? Which are the elements being compared? What discourse strategies are employed by the writer?

Task 2:

Read the essay
Uniform Pigment and Abstract Paintings, by Laura Oprea. What move pattern is here employed and how exactly does it work? Which are the compared elements?

 Deadline: March 28

5. The Argumentative Essay

keywords:

"to argue"= to present reasons for or against a thing; to dispute; to debate.

"to persuade" = to convince; to induce somebody to believe.


communicative purpose:

- to present, explain, clarify, and illustrate a viewpoint (the author's) (so far, the goals are identical with those of the expository essay) + to persuade the reader that personal views are more valid than another person's viewpoints

move pattern:

Move I: Introducing the issue in contention.

Step 1: introductory remarks to identify work + artist + issue in contention

Step 2: acknowledging counterthesis and counterpoints (the other person's viewpoints)

Step 3: providing specific details (who, what, when, where)

Step 4: stating the thesis (personal viewpoints - in one complete, unified statement about the issue in contention, precise enough to limit the issue, but general enough to ask for support, not too obvious, and showing the changes proposed to the counterthesis)



Move II: Presenting counterthesis and counterpoints

Step 1: Restating the counterthesis and enlarging upon it (in the introductory move, we have just formulated it; now we have to show the reader that we bothered to understand what the other person's thesis really claims; therefore, we use our own words to explain what we understood and to convince our reader that we know exactly what the other opinion is)


Step 2: Presenting/restating counterpoint 1 (using our own words to show what the first point of proof used by the other person was)

Step 3: Presenting/restating counterpoint 2

Step 4: Presenting/restating counterpoint 3



Move III: Arguing thesis and providing evidence/proof

Step 1: Restating our own thesis and enlarging upon it (we have to make sure the reader fully understands what we claim)

Step 2: Providing constructive argument 1 and evidence/proof to support it (the weakest) to fight against counterpoint 1

Step 3: Providing constructive argument 2 and evidence to support it (stronger) to fight against counterpoint 2

Step 4: Providing constructive argument 3 and evidence to support it (the strongest) to fight against counterpoint 3

Step 5: Disagreeing with counterpoint 1 (refutation 1)

Step 6: Disagreeing with counterpoint 2 (refutation2)

Step 7: Disagreeing with counterpoint 3 (refutation 3)



Note: We can place side by side (mirror) our constructive argument and our disagreement with the other person's counterpoint in the same step by convincing the reader that our argument and evidence to support it are correct and are better than the other's.

Move IV: Concluding by enhancing the validity of the thesis

We conclude by reminding our reader (in other words) what we claimed and by suggesting that our arguments were (far) more convincing than the other person's. We must always remember to be polite! We must always remember that our simple claim of truth (our truth) is not convincing without providing proper arguments and evidence. After all, it is the reader who decides who is more effective!

Move V: (optional) Works cited.

Tasks:

Task 1: Read the text Fashion Art: To BE or Not to Be, by Maria Hritcu. Pay attention to the thesis, to the counterpoints and constructive arguments; which of them convinces you most? Which side do you tend to take? Why? Express your own viewpoints on these matters (provide your own thesis, arguments, and evidence). 

DEADLINE March 15