Affection stemming from looking at art

"Two characteristics seem crucial when [affection] is used in connection with art: magnetism - the force of fascination - and intimacy - the sense of being engaged in an especially personal and private way.  And to speak of affection for a work of art is to make the salutary reminder that paintings and buildings can provoke intimate fascination.  Salutary because the language of art historical scholarship and the often grand public setting of art can encourage an impersonal attitude."                                     -  J. Armstrong in  Move Closer: an intimate philosophy of art.

As I mentioned in a recent post, a couple weeks ago I had the pleasure of attending a training session at MCASD  related to engaging museum visitors that was lead by MoMA educators Ardina Greco and Mark Dzula.  They did a great job of helping those of us who give tours at the museum explore innovative techniques to engage museum visitors.

Besides being inspired to approach my tours with new perspective,  I also felt much of what was discussed could translate into classroom teaching. For example, during one session we explored three different ways to tour visitors:  giving mini-lectures in front of an artwork,  facilitating conversations with open discussion time for visitors to comment on works, and asking visitors to pick an artwork in the gallery and to look at the piece on their own for about 15 minutes, writing their perceptions for the first ten minutes, and looking at the label at some point in the last few minutes to see how additional information affected perception. 

I was struck by the last technique listed, as were many of the other gallery guides involved in the session. We all spend a great deal of time in the museum, yet none of us had really spent that much time in silence in front of a work before. Ardina mentioned she often integrates moments of silence into her teaching and touring, allowing students/museum visitors time to explore artworks individually. I couldn't help but wonder if this technique could/should be integrated into a course like mine.

I was in the midst of teaching about Roman art when I first attempted a looking activity in my class.  I realized I give my students little time to look at works that don't particularly relate to the content I feel is important to cover (historical events, stylistic qualities, important personages, society, etc).  To expand upon the selected items viewed in class, I devised a looking activity in which I would pass out images of artworks from Rome that were not used in my lecture, give students time to look at the works and write down their observations, and then allow students to flip their image over to read a bit about the work to see how additional information affected their perception of the piece.

My first step was locating images of Roman art objects I found particularly striking, and preparing them as such:

Fronts

Backs

I created more of these than the number of students in my class (I prepared about 15 for a class of 10) as I wanted to provide students a choice of images to select from.  This related to a reading on the topic of affection that struck me (I included a quote at the beginning of this post).  J. Armstrong discusses how affection often stems from the magnetism we feel with particular works, our fascination that is unique to each of us, and as such I felt it important to allow students to select a work to which they are inexplicably drawn.

I was somewhat anxious in the first ten minutes I gave students to examine their selected works. It is very uncommon for there to be even a minute of silence in my classroom! However, I was encouraged when I saw them squinting at particular details, scribbling down notes, and thoughtfully gazing at the overall composition. When I told them they could turn their images over to gain more perspective from some selected facts, I was pleased with hearing their exclamations as they could not keep their interest silent when they discovered when and where their pieces were created and particular details about the objects.

I decided to have students discuss their findings with a partner, and I was thrilled to hear their observations and appreciation for the work of the ancient artists. The students were highly engaged throughout the activity  - no random flipping through books, furtive glances at cell phones, whispering with others during the silent time, or scribbling on notepaper. They seemed genuinely excited to share what they learned with their partners, and all in all I was quite pleased with the activity and think I'll incorporate it into other classes from time to time!

Let me know if you try this out and how it works for you!

Dewey - Perceiving/appreciating vs. recognizing

I went to a particularly inspiring gallery guide training workshop a few weeks ago at the Museum of Contemporary Art San Diego, and I've been mulling through some of what I gleaned from the teaching and assigned readings and trying to appropriately integrate some of the philosophy discussed into my classroom teaching.

There's too much swimming around in my head to cover in one post, so for now I'm just going to concentrate on one topic from a reading out of John Dewey's "Art as Experience" - derived from a series of lectures on aesthetics he gave at Harvard in 1932.

I was particularly struck by a passage in the book in which Dewey comments on the difference between perceiving & appreciating art versus merely recognizing. Dewey discussed how when we recognize, we fall back on some sort of previously formed scheme relating to arrangements of details as a cue for identification.  We begin to perceive the work, but arrest using our senses to experience the work, and instead focus on clinical analysis. By contrast, Dewey speaks of perceiving and appreciating art as a process of responsive acts that accumulate through our surrendering to the experience and putting forth energy in order to receive it back from the work.  Dewey felt the beholder must perceive and order elements of the whole, much as the artist conceptualized and ordered them, so we in a sense emulate the process of the artist.

When reading this passage, I immediately realized that portions of the way I test students (and by extension imply importance) is linked to students being able to recognize particular works, however, recognition had nothing to do with my most profound experiences with music and art ....the time my dad played Bartok's Music for Strings, Percussion, and Celesta  for me the first time and I was floored by its sublime eerieness, my first visit to Europe when I wandering about the ruins of a medieval church in England running my hand along the carefully wrought stonework, even visiting LACMA a few weeks ago and sitting in front of a Rothko piece for 20 minutes, where I first tested out what I read in Dewey about surrendering to a work.  These are all incredibly vivid memories of experiences where I was not totally in control...where something outside of me affected me in a way that was intense and difficult to express, and that had great personal meaning.

So now my question becomes, to what extent can/should the idea of experiencing art be a part of an art history survey course? Is mere recognition enough? Or perhaps a blend of recognition and historical context?  Is it up to the individual to seek out art experiences? If we are going to attempt to engage our students in experiencing art, how can we go about making it fit with the goals of an art history survey course?

I'd love to hear your view on this, and any ways you might be integrating art experiences into your classroom!

Collaborative Art Making - Exquisite Corpses Inspired by the Surrealists

René Magritte. Je ne vois pas la [femme] cachée dans la forêt, in La Révolution surréaliste, Paris, no.12, December 15th 1929

When discussing the Surrealist artists with my students, I feel it is important to begin the conversation by discussing the artists' identity as a group, their shared interests, and some of their innovative methods.  I start our class discussion by sharing some quotes from Andre Bretón's Manifesto of Surrealism (I choose to use quotes directly related to Freud). The Surrealists were profoundly inspired by the work of Sigmund Freud and his investigations of dreams and unconscious desire.  The work of the Surrealists tended to focus less on control over the creation of an end product, and more on the creative process and liberation from the rational.

Drawing by Yves Tanguy, Man Ray, Max Morise, Joan Miró, c. 1926.

The Surrealists often experimented with techniques to help them relinquish control over the creation of an artwork and to encourage spur-of-the-moment creativity.  One such activity was a game called "Exquisite Copse" in which a piece of paper would be folded and each person would draw in one section, starting from the tail end of the last person's drawing (with the rest of the image covered as the paper would be folded over before it would be passed to the next participant so they would not know what the rest of the piece looked like), to create a unified image.

After leading a class discussing the manifesto excerpts and the Freudian revolution with students, I then briefly introduce the idea of the "Exquisite Corpse" and hand out a sheet of blank paper to each student. I ask them to fold the paper into thirds.  It is especially important at this point to reinforce the execution of the game, making sure that students understand that they need to draw slightly over their third of the sheet to provide a starting point for the next student. I then put on some music that aligns with Surrealist thought (typically I use some Varese, but I recently found a great article from the American Symphony Orchestra where they describe their rationale for selecting particular repertoire for a concert that was created in conjunction with a René Magritte exhibition that lists some other composers you might want to consider). I give students a few minutes to work on the first section, give them a minute warning, and ask them to fold their section over, leaving just a slight bit extending past to fold and to trade with someone else. They then work on the second section in a similar manner, and then, after passing again, complete the "Exquisite Corpse" without having any idea of what is in the first two sections. I then let students take a look at what they have created and encourage them to pass the papers around the room, and allow some time for discussion of how they felt during the process, what surprised them, and how it helps them better understand some facets of Surrealism. 

This has proven to be a highly engaging activity with my students, and one which does not seem to intimidate those who have less artistic experience than others. I've found it to be a great way to introduce students to Surrealism and help them better identify with some Surrealist artists.

Have you done something similar in your class? Do you have another method for engaging students during discussions of Surrealism? I'd love to hear your input!!!

Class debate: Elgin Marbles

A couple years ago I was looking for a way to spice up my lectures about Greek art and architecture and I came up with the idea to have an in-class debate regarding the Elgin Marbles.  This has become my absolute favorite class session of all of the courses I teach and has been very engaging, participatory, and meaningful for my students.

You are probably familiar with the basics of the debate - in the early 1800s, Lord Elgin, the British ambassador to the Ottoman Empire (who were occupying Greece at the time), removed sections of friezes and sculptures from the Parthenon and additional buildings at the Acropolis at his own expense. He sold the pieces to the British Museum and the legality of their ownership has been questioned ever since. 

Elgin Marbles in the British Museum

This topic is easy to set up with a general art history class. First off, I direct the students to look at a few pages in their textbook (we use  Gardner's Art Through the Ages) that feature images of various sculpture from the Acropolis.  I ask them to read the identifying caption information to see if they can find anything that strikes them as odd. Eventually, someone will notice that most of the objects are strewn about in European museums. I then ask them how they think the objects ended up there - generally leading to a discussion of imperialism.  

I then tell them the basic information related to the removal of the objects, not going into too much detail, and let them know that we will be having an in-class debate on this topic. I assign teams randomly, and hand out an article put out by BBC news a few years ago that does a decent job of laying out some of the basic principles and arguments for both sides. Students are instructed that the article should not be their only source material - I encourage them to look up news articles, similar situations with other contested objects, etc. I give students some time in their next class session to meet as a team and discuss their individual findings and to formulate a plan of attack for the debate.

I've found that the debate works best with around 5 people on each side, 10 per debate. I have small classes so this is easy for me to manage, but when my classes have been in the 20s, I generally have two debate sessions, with the other students having a small assignment to work on in the library when they are not debating.  I set up the classroom to have tables opposite each other with the teams arranged so they are looking straight across at the other team. I sit off to the side so they direct their statements to the opposite team rather than to me.

I structure the debate to have opening statements (which I encourage them to have prepared ahead of time) where each team member has a chance to speak, uninterrupted, for 1-2 minutes about one of their team's arguments - that way each member isn't saying the same thing.  I encourage students to take notes on the other team's opening statements so they can specifically address people with particular challenges in the general debate time. After both sides have made their opening statements, I open it up for general debate, and generally I allow that to go on for 20-30 minutes. Usually, I don't need to step in much at all -the dialogue tends to be lively and to flow well.  Once I feel general debate has gone on long enough, I ask each side to meet as a team for about 5-10 minutes to formulate any final closing thoughts, and then we have closing statements, where each team member has a minute or so to make any final comments without being interrupted. Some students save really fantastic quotes or prepared statements for this section to end with a zinger:)

After the general debate, I bring up some general topics - should there be encyclopedic museums, or should objects stay near their place of origin? does the debate change if we are talking about human remains like mummies? what about objects of religious significance, like Native American objects? 

Sometimes I ask the students to try to act as if they are committees from each side who need to come up with a compromise.  Usually this gives me the opportunity to tell them about issues related to the cost of transporting objects, insurance, issues related to replicas, and so on. 

I feel this debate is a really phenomenal way to not only teach students about a particular debate in the history of art, but also to talk about issues of repatriation, cultural patrimony, provenance research, and museum ethics.  It provides a way to bring ancient objects into contemporary times, fosters critical thinking, sharpens students research skills, gives students the opportunity to work in teams, and lets me take a break from lecturing!  I've found that students get really passionate about this topic, and often change their minds from their initial assessment of the situation. 

All in all, it's a really fun class session, and if you try it out, please let me know how it works for you!  I wrote a little article for Yahoo a while ago that briefly mentions this idea as well as some others that you might want to integrate into your class discussion of Greek art. 

Why not start at the beginning??? Teaching about cave art

I'm ashamed to admit that when I took art history in high school and college, I basically thought of the first class or two as relatively unimportant in light of what was to come. As a result, I felt a bit uninspired when I started thinking of how to approach teaching my very first Art History course a few years ago. I knew some of the main points I wanted to get across, one of which being the idea of profile, and how most cave paintings use this view to provide the most information about the shape of the animal as possible, but I wanted to find a way to introduce this idea without simply stating it.

So, in an attempt to get my students to come to the same realization, I now start off my first class with them by asking them to get out a piece of paper and draw a horse. I don't give them any other instructions, and I just let them draw for a few minutes. As soon as most people have at least an outline, I ask them all to hold up their drawings and look for similarities. In a class of 10, I usually will get 9 who draw their horses in profile, and 1 from a frontal view....and usually one or two that bear NO resemblance to a horse whatsoever!

I then facilitate a discussion, asking them why so many of them drew their horses in profile, and I try to help them feel a kinship of sorts with the early cave painters who approached the task of representing a horse in quite the same manner. 


From there we go on to discuss the idea of views (frontal, profile, composite) and I move on from there to a standard lecture on cave paintings, along with some excerpts of first hand accounts of cave art discoveries (Lescaux). Sometimes, I try to do a compare and contrast between Cave Art and graffiti to try to get students feel a bit less removed from the seemingly remote and anonymous artists being studied. We talk about materials (quite different, obviously), location (often difficult to reach in both situations), challenges (cave artists - getting enough light to work, being chased off by scary animals lurking in the caves; graffiti writers - light as well, being chased off by cops!), motivation (to make your mark, to express personal views of the world, to represent what is around them.....note that unlike MOST art, monetary gain is not a motivation for these groups of artists..well at least not for most of those involved in graffiti). I'm not totally sold on this discussion section yet....it sometimes works, sometimes does not...if you have any suggestions for discussion points, please let me know!


Last year I wrote a Yahoo article regarding teaching about Cave Art and it features some helpful resources and a  few more ideas I have explored. Check it out for even more class ideas!

So, anyways....there's my first blog....let me know what you think! Do you have special techniques you use in your art history courses? Please share! I will be writing blog posts I hope you will find helpful and that will express my passion for this topic and my interest in sharing with colleagues! I work at a small media arts college, and don't get to interact with other art history educators. I look forward to hearing from you!!!