Unit 1 Summary

 

When we say the word “art” we are describing any form of human activity ranging from music to sculptures and paintings. Some of the various forms of art are: music, paintings, dance, architecture, drawing, photography and ceramics.  Individuals connect with a piece of art using their thoughts, emotions, beliefs and ideas. This course has allowed me to find different ways to acknowledge numerous forms of art. Whether it be paintings, sculptures, graffiti, music or architecture artists use different techniques to create a work of art and their work should be recognized. Through this first unit of this class I have learned about formal analysis, pedology and the key aspects that make art significant. Before taking this class, I thought that art was made up of the different paintings and ancient artifacts presented in museums. Now that we’ve finished the first unit I have learned a significant amount about the different ways we analyze art and the different characteristics used by artists to make their artwork impactful. This new analytical way of analyzing has allowed me to recognize the different skills artists use in their work. The different designs and key elements that shapes their work.

Formal Analysis is an assessment of visual elements that construct sculptures or any given art work. It is important to use formal analysis to describe a piece of art work because it pin-points each element illustrated and expresses the meaning of each element. The components of formal analysis are: line, shape and form, space, color. texture. Lines can be horizontal, vertical, diagonal, thick, thin, curved, and thick or thin. These lines allow artists to compose pieces that communicate to the viewer by creating various images using different techniques. Shapes and forms of objects bring life to a two dimensional object and allow viewers to better interpret the work. Space in art brings a two dimensional object to a three dimensional state through a feeling of depth and use of shadowing techniques. The three main characteristics of color are hue (red, blue, green, etc.), value (how light or dark it is) and intensity (how bright or dull it is). Color allows artists to depict emotions or playful meaning through their work. Texture brings surface value to art work. If the art work is two dimensional texture allows artists to illustrate how the object would feel in reality. All of these elements define art work and allow us to fully understand a piece of art work.

Pedology and Power was another topic covered in this Unit. To Freire, the banking model is described as a knowledge holder sharing knowledge to a knowledge receiver without any feedback from the receiver. This is known as the standard classroom model in which a teacher shares his or her knowledge with students as they feed off that given information.  This allows the teachers (knowledge holders) to be empowered because they hold the knowledge that is being given or distributed to the knowledge receivers.

Unit 1 Summary

When deciding to take the course of Art History & it’s Meaning, I wasn’t sure where one would even begin in learning about a subject that seemed so broad and substantial. In looking at the syllabus and taking in what would be discussed in Unit 1, I was still lost. What is Formal Analysis? What is Critical Pedagogy? How do both of these fit into art history and it’s meaning? Despite being unsure, I was open to learning about both. All it could do for me is unlock the door to a subject that always intrigued me and further help me understand what it is I’ll be learning this semester.

It turns out that formal analysis is where one must start before delving further into art history and it’s meaning. Without learning about formal analysis, we wouldn’t be able to analyze or depict the artwork we’d evidently be exposed to further along in the semester. All formal analysis is asking us, as viewers, to do is simply take note of what the artist has done visually in his or her work. In formal analysis it is important to hone in on visuals such as color, line, space, mass/scale, material, contrast, position, composition, and illusionism. Taking note of each of these components works to conceptualize the artwork at hand and form an idea of what it is the artist is trying to express. An artist’s use of a certain range of color, their emphasis of line and linear contours and the space they create within their work are integral to the message the artist is trying to convey. Other vital components to pay attention to when using formal analysis is subject matter and historical context. While subject matter is more blatantly obvious to analyze in artwork, it still aids us in understanding the artwork at hand, what or rather who’s important. Historical context, however, requires some outside research. Once this outside research is conducted, we can understand the artists choices much better and it becomes clearer why certain elements were incorporated.

I enjoyed learning about critical pedagogy because my own beliefs were finally being firmly relayed before my eyes. My opinions in relation to the education system that we subject our children to have never been formed in an honorary degree. I have always believed it to be corrupt and degrading, and Paulo Friere’s Pedagogy and Power reaffirmed this for me. In his famous novel, Friere ridicules the education system by constructing the banking model of education. In doing so, he argues that the relationship between teacher and students is an oppressive one. The teacher is assigned all of the power and knowledge and all of the student’s previous knowledge before entering the school system is completely dismissed. Instead students become “empty vessels” in which the teachers simply deposit knowledge in them. In this kind of relationship, not only is knowledge limited but creativity is stunted. The teacher’s intelligence and authority can never be questioned, even if it should be, and the student can never pass along any information or intelligence of their own, because it’d be deemed unworthy and illogical. The students simply receive and memorize the knowledge bestowed upon them and spit it back out when taking standardized testing.

In learning about formal analysis, art history and it’s meaning is prescribed a meaning. Without taking formal analysis into consideration, without using it, we’d be looking at art but we wouldn’t be seeing it. Formal analysis is integral to art history, without it one can argue that the study of art history and it’s meaning would be rendered useless. In also learning about Paulo Friere’s critical pedagogy, I’m even more aware of the faultiness of our education system. It helps me  appreciate the open and creative environment that I’m privileged with in attending college, where students thoughts and opinions are heard and valued. I believe unit one will prepare me immensely for the units that lie ahead and I’m interested in seeing how they aid me in my further understanding of art history.

Unit One Summary

In Unit One, there were many things that I’ve learned. First, I learned about formal analysis. In formal analysis, the viewer looks at the visual components of the work of art. Some components of formal analysis includes color, line, scale, and space/mass. In color, I would examine how the artist uses the range of colors (from warm to cool) in the work of art. In line, I would examine how the artist uses smooth continuous lines or broken lines in a painting. In scale, I learned that an artist uses this component to indicate the importance of a figure. In space and mass, I learned that these two components mainly refers three dimensional works of art and to the weight of the artwork.

I also learned about the banking model/concept. This model was created by Paulo Freire. The model was created for educational purposes and it basically stated that teachers knew everything and that students didn’t know anything except what the teachers told them. In my opinion, the model was created to lift up teachers and degrade students. The model stripped students in expressing themselves and their creativity. I believe many people has experienced this model at least once in their years of schooling. The teacher would know the material but not know how to teach it. This caused students to then space out or fall behind and possibly fail the class.

Lastly, I learned about art in the Ancient World. In the Ancient World, I learned that in most works of art, the king was always the biggest figure in the entire piece. My favorite work of art was the “Standard of Ur”. It was cool to see the various layers in which the work was portrayed. Seeing both sides that told two different stories was also nice to see. It was also great that it has many colors instead of one specific color. One side of piece was about social class and status. You could easily distinguish the different classes from laborers (who were at the bottom) to the king and his wise men (who were at the top). On the other side, it showed a battle scene in where there were enemies who trampled by chariots and people who were taken into prison.

Overall, I learned a lot in Unit One. I learned the various ways to view a piece of art. The many components that goes into evaluating a work of art is important because not all artworks are the same even if they were in the same time period. I then learned about the banking model which really empowers teachers and students have a disadvantage in showing their capabilities. From the banking model, we finally moved on to the Ancient World. I saw the different works of art that the people of Mesopotamia and Egypt did. It was interesting to see how the pieces of art flowed as time went on.

 

Unit 1 Summary

In this unit, we focused on Pablo Freire, the banking model and how to do formal analysis of piece of art. Formal analysis and critical pedagogy are essential because they help the audience analyze and understand the work more in depth. From this unit I have also learned that art is a form of communication. It’s meaning is whatever the artist intends it to be as well as how it’s audience perceives it. Art is influenced by the materials, techniques, and forms it makes use of, as well as the ideas and feelings it can create in its viewers. 

Works of art are always crafted, never natural or choice free. Formal analysis is an attempt to describe physical entity such as a piece of art. For formal analysis, our vision is our primary source thus making formal analysis subjective. We look at a piece of art’s formal properties, subject matter, and historical context for a formal analysis. Formal properties refers to looking at the line, color, composition, size, scale, modeling, and etc. Subject matter would be what the artist has chosen to paint, draw or sculpt. If something is analyzed “in historical context,” it means the historical circumstances in which it was produced affected the work and it’s meaning or message. Without an understanding of the era, a full understanding of the piece will be impossible. Historical context can play into artists’ influences, intentions and state of mind. 

Freire calls traditional pedagogy the “banking model of education” because it treats the student as an empty vessel to be filled with knowledge. However, he argues the learner should be treated as a co-creator of knowledge. Freire rejects the banking approach, claiming it results in the dehumanization of both the students and the teachers. He also argues that the banking approach stimulates oppressive attitudes and practices in society. Instead, Freire advocates for a more world-mediated, mutual approach to education that encourages the co-creation of knowledge. According to Freire, this “authentic” approach to education must allow people to be aware of their incompleteness and strive to be more fully human. I agree with Freire, I think that the only way to be successful in current academic settings is simply memorization and not actually learning. That’s we we forget everything when classes end. 

Rudolf Adis Unit 1 Summary

So far, in ART 1010, I have garnered a significant amount of knowledge in the history of art, the conceptual side of art, and even theories by other artists/philosophical thinkers of art. Nevertheless, one of the concepts we were introduced to so far is the Banking Model. The Banking Model is a theory/term created by Pablo Friere, a 20th century educator and philosophical thinker. This term, seen depicted in Friere’s work, “Pedagogy of the Oppressed”, basically envisions students as containers in which knowledge is stored by the teachers in the classroom. Friere uses the Banking Model in order to critique the approach used in the educational system, in that students should be able to express themselves within a classroom just as much as the teacher should, being that they would be able to use the knowledge attained from the teacher and mix it with their own knowledge in order to gather a better understanding of a certain concept. That brings us to Friere’s concept of Critical Pedagogy.

Critical Pedagogy is a concept that builds itself hand-in-hand with the Banking Model. However, the slight difference is that Critical Pedagogy critiques classrooms and pushes for students to have a tenfold increase in their own independence within a classroom. Furthermore, Critical Pedagogy inspires students to question and challenge “domination” within the classroom. The reason for this is because Friere believed that students do not have freedom of thinking, and are even oppressed within the classroom. So much so, that in “Pedagogy of the Oppressed”, Paulo Friere stated, “Education is suffering from narration sickness…”.

Formal Analysis is a type of visual description of Art that we learned about in class. Specifically, formal analysis is not only about describing what one sees in and of the artwork, but it is also about getting down to the nitty and gritty parts of the artwork, and describing specific traits within it. To elaborate, there are 7 traits we look for when using Formal Analysis: historical context, line, space, mass, scale, color, and composition. The last mentioned trait, composition, deals with how the artist combines all aforementioned traits within their artwork and then produces a beautiful, finalized version of it. In fact, Formal Analysis is what I used when visualizing the works of art that were spoken about in class.

In specific, when analyzing Manet, Olympia, 1863/5, I noticed that a lot of dark and warm colors were used. Furthermore I have noticed that in terms of historical context, the older, black woman seems to be the maid of the younger, white woman. This is synchronous with the time period (1863) at that time. Finally, based on how eminent and bright the lights in the painting were, as well as the texture of the painting, it is easy for me to come to the conclusion that this must have been an oil painting. Nevertheless, Unit 1 has taught me a plethora of knowledge concerning art and its history, and has truly broadened my perspective/horizons when it comes to the philosophical eminence of art, as well.

Unit summary

 

In this unit, we learned about how Pablo Freire views the banking model and how to do formal analysis of an art piece. This unit has taught me that the way we are taught is seen as correct by Freire so he would be happy that it is this way, but I disagree with this banking model as it excludes certain types of people and formal analysis is something that can be done to find meaning in an art piece even if it isn’t immediately noticeable.

    Freire says that the banking model is where an audience sits front of an individual and learns from the said individual. The single teacher is water pitcher of knowledge pouring water into the students like little cups. This only works in theory because people are not cups to pour water in. The only action for the students is to be passively accepting the knowledge and the teacher actively gives it, giving him the dominant role. It limits the chance to engage with and understand the knowledge. I honestly have forgotten many things that my past classes have taught me because they were only telling me to remember, so I did. The reason why we remember other basic skills like language and manners is that we engage with it in our daily lives

    Formal analysis has you looking at specific traits. These traits are color, line, space, mass, and scale. You can even look at something that looks like trash by using formal analysis, make a case for it being art because all art is subject. An example we can look at is a crumpled up piece of paper on the floor. What is the color of the crumpled paper? Was it colored before it was crumpled up? How complex was the coloring? Was it just a white unaltered paper before the crumple? All of this can possible mean something. Lines might be a bit more difficult to see in the crumpled paper, but it’s possible. How was it crumpled? Was it compressed as hard as possible being more ball like, making lines harder to see? Was it it lightly compresses giving it more define jagged lines that stick out? Was it folded part way but crumpled at the end making it less ball like but more square like? Does the silhouette look like something specific? This can be infused with meaning.

    Space indicate whether the image conveys a sense of 3D space. It is already 3D so I can’t apply it because it is already 3D. Unless it is an actual sketching that looks hyper realistic. Mass is the space created by the art piece. I can apply this nor easily. Mass can be conveyed to the crumpled paper based on its environment. Is it surrounded by a lot of smaller items like paper clips and pins? Is it surrounded by crowds of people, giving the paper a sense of insignificance? Scale is the presentation of size portrayed in the work or in relation to the viewer. Is the crumpled piece of paper comically huge, towering over people? Or is it comically small dwarfing insects? This huge size can reference the power of trash and the destruction it causes and the small size can be the opposite. All of this is mere deep speculation of a crumpled paper. Some may ask, why did you waste all that time? I would say, “it is for the sake of art, because everything is potentially art”.

 

Unit 1 Summary

 

Paolo Freire, writer of the “Pedagogy of the Oppressed,” believes there is a fundamental flaw in the current education system. The flaw lying predominantly in the relationship between the student and the teacher, and how the student is conveyed the information from the teacher. Freire writes, “Education is suffering from narration sickness…” What Freire is trying to express is this idea that students are stuck listening to a “narration” by the instructor, and because of this bland re-telling of facts or ideas, the students have a complicated relationship with the idea of learning. Freire believes this is style of education is not conducive to learning, instead, all it “accomplishes” is a strained relationship between instructor and student. Because of this style of education, Freire believes that students are less inclined to learn new material, and instead, are forced  to cram their memory for the upcoming test, and once the test is finished, students tend to forget most, if not all of what they had just studied. Freire writes, “education is reduced to an act of depositing, students are depositories and teachers and depositors, this is the banking model.”

 

“The Banking Model” according to Freire, forces students into memorizing mechanically without ever really understanding what they are learning. He also writes that the banking model takes away a student’s individuality and autonomy.  Freire offers loose advice on possible solutions to fix this deeply engraved problem he sees with the education system. He believes we must transform the structure of education so that students can become, “beings for themselves.” As a student stuck in the education system, I cannot help but agree with Freire and his ideas. Throughout high school and for most of college I feel like most of the classes I have taken follow this rigid structure of forced memorization to meet a deadline and once the deadline passes I find myself forgetting most of what I had just studied. Like Freire, I believe there needs to be a fundamental change to the entire current system of education.

 

When viewing any piece of visual art, it is important to remember formal analysis. Formal analysis, according to Anne D’Alleva, are the “methods and questions that mostly concern the visual and physical aspects of a work of art.” This includes the line, shape, color, scale, and composition of a piece of art. Formal analysis concerns itself with how all these elements come together and work with one another for a piece of art. How did the artist make the lines, are they loose and soft, adding a blended element or are they rigid and unforgiving, making your eye separate the lines from the rest of the work? It is questions like these that help give the viewer a better understanding of what they are looking at, and it could potentially help the viewer understand why the artist made what they did.

 

D’Alleva suggests a three-part process when trying to understand formal analysis. Those three steps are “interpret, decipher, evaluate.” These steps will help structure a more complete analysis for the viewer, even if they are entirely unfamiliar with art. As someone who greatly appreciates art but often has difficulty understanding the entire scope of the artist’s work, formal analysis is a great tool to utilize. Sometimes when looking at a new piece of art, whether it be a painting or a sculpture, I tend to become overwhelmed with everything I am taking in, which at times, leaves me hesitant to explore the work beyond a surface layer. Formal analysis offers me a pattern and certain steps to follow so I can have a greater appreciation for a work of art, which will only come with a better understanding of the work.

Unit 1 Summary

Unit 1 was about the pedagogy and power, banking model, and formal analysis. The Banking Model is described as teachers simply passing on an idea to the students. The teachers talk and lecture while the students are quiet and receive the information. I have experienced this type of model many times in high school. Some teachers I had would not care to listen to anything the students had to say. They would think everything that they said was correct. I think this model has more negative aspects rather than positive. You might be able to learn something but it’s not the most effective and long-term method of teaching. I think its very important for teachers to engage and encourage their students to speak up in class. This helps a lot of students learn better. The pedagogical approach to any subject must be important when you want someone to learn. For example, if you’re teaching drawing you shouldn’t just put a fruits basket in front of the students and expect them to know how to draw. You would have to teach them the basics first.

Another thing we learned is formal analysis. Formal analysis is not only describing the art but also showing and understanding what the artist is trying to convey, visually. Everybody has different ways of looking at things so our own interpretation of art will have a play in what we think it means. When focusing on formal analysis, there are some characteristics we use: color, line, space and mass, scale. We also look at the composition of the art. Composition means how the artist combines all these factors in their work of art. We also use the historical context of an artwork. It relates to the things that happen during the time the art was made. It serves to give us a better understanding of the art and show why the artist decided to make this artwork.

It’s very interesting that you can learn so much about an artwork from its historical background. I never knew how to analyze an artwork before but after learning some basics on formal analysis it has become easier. When looking at the Titian Venus of Urbino, I noticed that a lot of warmer colors were used as opposed to cool or neutral colors. Colors like pink and red were used a lot. Another technique that was cool was looking at the way the artist catches your eye from the direction of lines. They guide your eyes intentionally from left to right. I personally thought that was interesting and cool how an artist can make you do that. Also, learning of the historical background of the painting really put it into a perspective of why the art was made.

Summary of Unit 1

Throughout Unit 1 we spoke about Formal Analysis.  We discussed the physical look of a piece of art and searched for the clues of a deeper understanding.  Formal Analysis is actually taking a piece and looking at the physical color, line, shape, material, etc.  We took the knowledge about the formal analysis and was able to decipher a whole new meaning to the piece.

We also discussed that because of formal analysis two painters might draw the same muse but the outcome of the two pieces of art would be completely different.  Each artist places items and lines into their works of art for a specific reason.

In the “Standard of Ur” there is a specific reason for each scratch.  Nothing is just a coincidence, everything is shown because the artist wants it to be.  The king is larger on purpose, and the outfits are different on purpose.  We see this and see the deeper meaning because of formal analysis.

Many works of art cause change and enlightenment in the world.  Some are obvious within the art and some you need to have an understanding about art and the reasons behind it.