Art History

ThrownAway

I've allot to do. I don't have a single day off either. At this stage I'll just make out 4/5 different essays and try to learn them.

tinka

oh and the teacher i had is a joke. we never did impressionism, cubism, surrealism, fauvism, dada.. who knows what else. you name it, we probably haven't done it. he wouldn't even do romanesque/gothic sculpture, saying it's not very important. that question came up in the mocks.

ThrownAway

tinka wrote:

impressionism, cubism, surrealism, fauvism, dada..

We didn't cover them either. You don't really need them since after all there's allot of choice in the exam.

HoboJesus

yeah we only covered Impressionism, seems more reliable to focus on the older stuff here. Plus I'd be sooo angry if I studied a bunch of Impressionists and a bunch of OTHER Impressionists came up. There's only one Newgrange

Bakharwaldog

Glazun wrote:

the most important thing is to learn what era these things happened in, so if it asks "18th century art movement" you know its impessionism..

.

shouldnt that be 19th century...;)

Glazun

ah.. I was think 1800... -erm-

Funkstard

No it was the late 19th century....the first exhibition they had in Nadar's studio was in 1874....(I think, around then anyway)

Setun

Is anyone else studying Cezanne seeing as though it's the centenary of his death this year?

For appreciation I'm hoping for a decent design Q, I'll probs prepare a film though. Does anyone think they'll be specific about the film we'll have to talk about?

Funkstard

Last year they asked about Shrek didn't they? Or Lord of the Rings...the two of them have come up recently anyway, which tells you that they do ask film-specific questions.

I'm hoping for a house design question, or organising an exhibition. Anything else will be off the top of my head.

I can't honestly remember if I wrote out notes on Cezanne...quite worrying as I only did them last week! Since it's his centenary it could be a good bet...examiners usually love that kind of stuff

ThrownAway

Yeah there was an option between the two.

I just got a couple of hours of Art done. That'll probably be it.

I've generally covered Da Vinci, Massicco and Donatello with Romanesque and Gothic

Hoping Neolithic comes up since that's all I'm going to revise
I'll have to look over the gallery question the night before :eek:

Glazun

I'm going to learn an essay a day. I have 4 essays that my teacher reckons will come up.. o_o Bronze age / Metalwork , Impressionism and Newgrange, and Gallery.

>_> I've never been to the gallery, its a completely fictional question.. er- the paintings are real. Although I still need to see grief..

ThrownAway

I hope your teachers right about the Newgrange and Gallery question.

Glazun

Yup, so do I, and the rest of my class. I'm worried, that if the paper has been so predicatable so far, there's chances that they could just decide to make it unpredictable for a change...

GrumPy

Does anyone think they may have already passed art on what we have already done? I reckon at worst I got at least 35%, out of a possible 62.5% on the practicals.

the Shades

Art History is 37.5% of the entire exam without doing well in it you won't get an A, fail it completely and even if you're Picasso in your practical the best you can get is a C. When I did my Leaving Cert I knew a guy who never paid any attention to his AH, never worked on it and although he was quite talented only got a D in the exam, something that didn't look too impressive when he wanted to start art college.

GrumPy

the Shades wrote:

Art History is 37.5% of the entire exam without doing well in it you won't get an A, fail it completely and even if you're Picasso in your practical the best you can get is a C. When I did my Leaving Cert I knew a guy who never paid any attention to his AH, never worked on it and although he was quite talented only got a D in the exam, something that didn't look too impressive when he wanted to start art college.

That's not my point though, I reckon I can get a high C, even a high B, If I do in any way decent in the written exam, Cause I'm pretty confident of my practical work. Obivously you cant overlook history like you friend stupidly did, but it's nice to know for people who are dreading the history part and think they might fail, At least they wont have to break their backs studying just to pass.

Sawa

Yeah that happened to me in the mock. I only got 40% in Art History but I got a C2 overall. So I dunno, im maths retarded and i cant work that out but i think it shows my practical went well.
Its really annoying! :mad:

the Shades

It's not annoying it's to show that there's more to the subject than practical work. Art history is an integral part of the subject and you learn more from it than from any practical work, if it wasn't for art history you wouldn't really be studying art at all.

smemon

got a solid c in the mocks in art history doing basically nothing

give me a B in the real thing this week and i'll take it now. i was well pleased with my practical, reckon i got at least 40% out of 62.5%. (probably 45%)

add that to about 26 in the history and i'll weigh in at just around the 70%, meaning i should get a B.

that's a modest estimate aswell

HoboJesus

the Shades wrote:

It's not annoying it's to show that there's more to the subject than practical work. Art history is an integral part of the subject and you learn more from it than from any practical work, if it wasn't for art history you wouldn't really be studying art at all.

If that were even close to true then why do they call Art for junior cert (fully practical) Art, and not "Art practical". Of course the history is important (...sometimes), but well.. art history is art history, and art is art. :P. I find it annoying when they decide to combine two somewhat-related subjects. Like English language and literature, and art practical and history. Some artists need never know anything about the history and be breathtaking at their craft, and art historians don't need to know how to hold a paintbrush .

the Shades

Actually having studied both and worked in galleries I've found that the artists who know and are interested in the history of art produce far more interesting work than those that go to college and then hit the galleries spouting the nonsense they were brain washed with by some art college teacher.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

A someone who very nearly failed art in the leaving some years ago, never went to art college and is not a semi-profeesional artist, can I give you some advice...?

Learn about the histroy of art. Even if you just skim over it, learn it. Then find artists you truly like and STUDY them. Not because you have to, because you like them. Learn from them. Any art or craft is always enhanced by learning from those who went before. Before you start breaking rules, you have to know what the rules are.

ThrownAway

The only artist I'm remotley intrested in is Van Gogh solely because of his intrest in eclipses but that's not even on the course and my teacher didn't cover him.

HoboJesus

My point was in response to:

"if it wasn't for art history you wouldn't really be studying art at all."

I don't dislike art history, I've caught myself ogling the works in my textbook when I should be studying numerous times. And I did say it was sometimes important, but I just dislike that in LC "Art" automatically includes "Art history". Also, if you need to study past artists to study art at all, then how did art even start in the first place? Finally, I used the word "some" intentionally, I know art history can have positive effects on a person's work, I just don't think it should be forced on all art students (at LC level).

This is a really boring point, and it's off-topic. There's an art history test on thursday whether I want it to be there or not. I'm glad the practical side is at least worth more .

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

HoboJesus wrote:

My point was in response to:

"if it wasn't for art history you wouldn't really be studying art at all."

I don't dislike art history, I've caught myself ogling the works in my textbook when I should be studying numerous times. And I did say it was sometimes important, but I just dislike that in LC "Art" automatically includes "Art history". Also, if you need to study past artists to study art at all, then how did art even start in the first place? Finally, I used the word "some" intentionally, I know art history can have positive effects on a person's work, I just don't think it should be forced on all art students (at LC level).

This is a really boring point, and it's off-topic. There's an art history test on thursday whether I want it to be there or not. I'm glad the practical side is at least worth more .

In all fairness, you could be talking about almost anything on the leaving!! How would you feel if the Art History had a bit more variety? More contempoary artists as well as past masters to choose from?

the Shades

HoboJesus wrote:

My point was in response to:
I'm glad the practical side is at least worth more .

but it's not, it's three seperate papers that combined are worth more, individually none of them carry as much weight.

annettemc

our teacher never did ANY art history with us so i have to cram it all in tomorrow basically and thursday morning. where can i get information on visit to art gallery? anyone know???

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

annettemc wrote:

our teacher never did ANY art history with us so i have to cram it all in tomorrow basically and thursday morning. where can i get information on visit to art gallery? anyone know???

www.artrenewal.org
www.artcyclopedia.com

Be warned, they're big

Zeuz

Art history, hmmm .....




yep im screwd... although we did a bit of history in school we had 4 differnet teachers in our 2 years of Art, and it didnt go exactly to plan.

For one When the Art gallary visit was on, I was not aloowd to go As I was wearing BLACK runners, the principal, (F***ker) siad i must get off bus pr**k.

so I am cluless abou that but I will use ur links "Ikky" so thanks,

So what I would like to know, is What is the minimum every one is studying?

TiM_rEAPeR

You guys are making me so god dam mad, e-gad! learning off 5 6 essays is joke. I can draw pretty dam good and at the moment im sureto be sitting on a high C, history of art Is a cake and the english flows so im determined that im ONLY going to have to be learning newgrange and impressionism (maybe cubism/surrealism).
The appreciation is also hilarious, make a sculpture, re-design a cat.. this is only 35.5%, preparing 7 essays like its an entire course is not what this test was designed for, you have to talk with meaning and understanding and not heaving a leart off scribe.