Art history, what did you think?

Agri_trust

I ****ed up that paper something rotten.

Hello European art , good bye A1.

DeBeere

Yup I found it pretty tricky,

Answered Q1(jewelry) and Q3(shop front) pretty well, but my Q2 was basically nothing...

Agri_trust

Yeah, I did the question on the Bronze age and Iron age. That one was grand

I did the shop front as well. That went good to.


I wrote an essay on Caravaggio and pointilism. Didnt relise I could have done the Puda Chapel for the Romanesqe church. Complete made a balls of it.

SamHamilton

I thought Section 1 Q1 on pre-Christian jewellery would have caught a lot of people out. It was mean the way they mixed Bronze Age and Iron Age. Personally I had no problem with that question but it's just something that I think might have caught a lot of people out, those mean paper setters!

I did the question on Romanesque sculpture in Section 2. The first part of the question was fine but the second part was a bit harder. Plus, even though it was 1 question, they asked you about 4 things! They asked to talk about the decorative aspect of the scultpure, the narrative aspect of it, the way figures are represented and the relationship between architecture and sculpture. It was a bit all over the place really, wasn't it?

Appreciation - I never looked at the gallery question before because it just seemed so weird and full of nonsensical buzzwords so I was hoping for a painting that I could write nonsense about! Freaked out a little when I saw there was none there. I did the question on the shop front. It was stupid! "Clean the windows, paint the gate, take down the Christmas lights!":D

I thought the time was very tight. I was writing up until the last moment and would have taken an extra 20 mins gladly.

All in all, it was okay. Nothing nice but nothing nasty.

boundary

Agri_trust wrote:

Hello European art , good bye A1.

Same, ended up doing the High Ren question and totlly bluffed my way through the supplied picture, didn't know anything about it.

[QJ]Serideth

Ughh, I found it horrible, I honestly got raped.

I was hoping for a nice good question on the impressionists... Did the Romanesque one, but not too well.

Also, on the Art Gallery question, I made up an artist and made up two paintings, will I get away with that?

Agri_trust

They should give marks for just pure cleaverness of fitting an artist into a movment they didnt belong to and it looking good to the untrained eye or something.

Why the **** didnt I just learn monet

Patricide

What the **** was that!!!?? Mixing bronze age with iron age. For **** sake bronze age by itself has come up every year since art came into the sylabus so we just skipped the iron age altogether, had to make up bul**** for the sculpture question.

Then european art was gay, none of the headings related to any artist i covered so i had to wing the question on raphael(at least i got a bit about leonardo in there).

At least question 3 was grand, goodbye b2 hello c3.

lennykravitz

i was REALLY desperate, so i did masaccio's tribute money for the "renaissance building" and ****ed on about linear perspective and all that ****e?
should i say goodbye to any marks for that section?????????

Guinea

The fact that there was no mention of Caravaggio in section 2 pissed me off, but the fact that in Section 1 there was a picture question which required no knowledge at all was awesome (the two statues). And as usual, the 3rd Setion was just enjoyable and broad. A fairly fair test, even though I think art shouldn't have a written aspect to it at all.

Guinea

Agri_trust wrote:

I wrote an essay on Caravaggio and pointilism.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pointillism

Sorry...

Jayeire

Did any1 actually like the paper? I didn't think it was bad at all, I did Bewick for Irish, Surrealism for European nd da Gallery Q

Burgo

I didnt think it was too bad, did the jewelry Q from section 1, and the Q on donatello... but i messed up section 3...oh well you cant win em all:o

[QJ]Serideth

Burgo wrote:

I didnt think it was too bad, did the jewelry Q from section 1, and the Q on donatello... but i messed up section 3...oh well you cant win em all:o

So you did fine in the hard sections and messed up on the easy one?

Hahaha, trust me, you probably did fine in the third one.

boundary

On the 3rd section I did the 100 designs book thing, ended up talking for a page and a half about the marvels of your average school chair, its functioality and sheer (though unappreciated) beauty, in other words absolute waffle in its purest form.

SamHamilton

On the 3rd section I did the 100 designs book thing, ended up talking for a page and a half about the marvels of your average school chair, its functioality and sheer (though unappreciated) beauty, in other words absolute waffle in its purest form.

I was going to do that question but I blanked! I couldn't think of any everday item. I was like fork, no! Spoon, no! eeh eeh mmm Kettle! no! iPod? yeah sleek and stuff. That'll do. Oh wait I need two more. Never mind. Find another question!

Agri_trust

Guinea wrote:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pointillism

Sorry...

Oh well done, did you enjoy looking that up to make me feel more **** than I already do?



Dickhead.

originalcupcake

all my predictions were right but i have two points to make on this subject:

1. not enough time to complete the paper if theyre going to be asking questions with all those parts...(ie.) section1, q1, section2, romanesque q...

2. on hindsight i probably would have been better off doing the q on donatello in section 2, that was pure meanness that q.

ok and my opinion on the paper (i guess point 3??:) )I thought i did very well on section one the bronze age/ la tene q, and then the museum q for section3, which i was running out of time for still went ok..i thought my romanesque question was good enough like, but i dont think i had enough 'illustrations' in my answer...:rolleyes: only had two, and one was just a brief one as it was....

Splinkk

Im so annoyed. Totally messed up question one. Didnt look at iron age, so one of those neck pieces caught me out big time.

For the romanesque one, I talked about the Cathedral of Autun alll the way through.

Hope you didnt have to talk about a different church in the second part of the question! :P

I had an A standard practical. Now Ill be getting somewhere in the Low B's =(

kisaragi

Splinkk wrote:

Im so annoyed. Totally messed up question one. Didnt look at iron age, so one of those neck pieces caught me out big time.

For the romanesque one, I talked about the Cathedral of Autun alll the way through.

Hope you didnt have to talk about a different church in the second part of the question! :P

I had an A standard practical. Now Ill be getting somewhere in the Low B's =(

I did the exact same! To be honest that paper was my worst exam so far... NOTHING I studied for came up! I did the entire question 3 about the paten and the crosier from memory of a few months ago and analysing the pictures...

Did the romanesque question from memory... talked about Autun the whole way through

Gallery question was good, babbled on about 2 of Ballagh's painting and then the exhibition thing was fine...

My exam goes... 6 pages... 4 pages... 2 and a half pages of answers getting progressivly worse haha...

Splinkk

I did the Gallery Question. Talked about putting works of art up in the cafeteria in school. Such a waffly question. Im hoping to god I get decent marks on it.

Arg. Art History really makes me wonder if I want to do art after school

Agri_trust

One thing that annoys me about art history is that if you are a C grade drawer but an A1 art history student your going to get the same grade as some one who is an A grade drawer but isnt book smart at all.

Thats not fair, my ego's going to take a very very big blow when I come back with a B, because all ive been hearing for ages is "oh I heard your an A1 drawer". People who know **** all about the art system in school will think the whole exam is judged on ****ing drawing , that my drawing is less that what its been said to be. Sorry if that sounds really up my own hole but jesus im **** at everything else, only thing I can do is draw.

SamHamilton

Sorry if that sounds really up my own hole but jesus im **** at everything else, only thing I can do is draw

Drawing is more than 60% of the exam. An A in Art History is attainable if you put the work in. I don't believe in this "I just don't have the aptitude" attitude (I'm not saying this is your attitude, I'm talking about general observations). If someone wants an A in Art History, they will work for it and get it. Full stop. I got a D in Art History at Christmas. Then I worked a bit more for the Mocks and got a B.

I'm glad there is an Art History side to the course. For one, the day tests can go horribly wrong - even if you are brilliant at drawing - because they're all about what you do on the day. Also, not everyone who chooses to do art is exceptional at the practical side i.e. their style doesn't cater to the style that will gain marks, but they enjoy it nonetheless. The art history part of the course lets them catch up a bit. Plus, if you're doing Art in college you'll be studying Art History as part of the course so it's needed to prepare you for it.

People who know **** all about the art system in school will think the whole exam is judged on ****ing drawing , that my drawing is less that what its been said to be.

Why care about what others think? You know yourself that your skills are worth an A so why do the opinions of others matter?

sunflowerz

Ick.....what a crappy paper!!! I was almost in tears when i got the paper (sad, I know, but I usually do good in art history)
i had impressionism, fauvism, expressionism, cubism, dadism and pop art learnt off back to front...and nothing came up! i knew cezanne and van gogh really well aswell and then they **** threw gaugin into the question too!!!I went through the papers the night before and I was able to do at least 3 questions on each european section for the past years....and this year i could barely do one! i only realised near the end that i could of done 'Violin and Jug' for the musical instrument but.........ahhhhhh

1) impressionism has being on the paper in some shape or form for the past 6 years
2) they usually never put three artists together in a question...its usually just one or two...or else they name one and say name another similar artist
3) what were those theme questions about...there usually more open and adaptable to anything

grrr....im so annoyed at it

and then of course my blue pen ran out half way through the exam and I went to my pencil case to get another blue pn and realised i had left all three back up pens at home, so i had to write it in green....ahhhh

there goes my B1

why oh why didnt I learn surrealism seeing how i have a big mad ass poster of Dali's on my wall...could of bluffed it , but didnt know the terminology and stuff

SamHamilton

I don't understand why people study topics like

impressionism, fauvism, expressionism, cubism, dadism and pop art

and stuff when there are guaranteed topics on the paper.

Bronze Age, Iron Age or Stone Age WILL come up in Section 1 no matter what.

Romanesque and/or Gothic WILL come up in Section 2.

No need to study anything else.

Cipriana

Well if most of the country found it awful, won't they grade it easier? I heard that you are graded (on drawing anyway) with relation to the bundle of exams your one is in with. They have a quota of 'A's to give out, so it kinda helps if your class are artistically challenged. Can anybody confirm this?? Though it would probably work to my disadvantage since my class are deadly at art.

I did the Casino at Marino for the first Q! Almost hugged the page when I saw it, being a gambler I hadn't actually learnt Bronze Age. Then I ranted for Surrealism, I didn't expect to be stuck on that Q, I can usually make the general question relate back to Manet in some way. So that was pretty crap. Then gallery was class A waffle again.

kisaragi

Cipriana wrote:

Well if most of the country found it awful, won't they grade it easier? I heard that you are graded (on drawing anyway) with relation to the bundle of exams your one is in with. They have a quota of 'A's to give out, so it kinda helps if your class are artistically challenged. Can anybody confirm this?? Though it would probably work to my disadvantage since my class are deadly at art.

I did the Casino at Marino for the first Q! Almost hugged the page when I saw it, being a gambler I hadn't actually learnt Bronze Age. Then I ranted for Surrealism, I didn't expect to be stuck on that Q, I can usually make the general question relate back to Manet in some way. So that was pretty crap. Then gallery was class A waffle again.

Manet? Isn't Manet impressionism not surrealism? I never studied surrealism though so I only know his name from impressionism

Oh and it's a rumour that they have a quota of As to give out.. otherwise it would stay the same every year... only 1% of the whole country gets A1s anyway haha.. Art is crap for points...

Of course you will be judged in relation cause it's a completely subjective exam... if you come after someone brilliant you'll look crap and if you go after someone crap you'll look brilliant (assuming that you're average hehe, I've no idea how you draw...) you know? But they don't SPECIFICALLY mark a to a certain quota... I mean in that case terrible people would be getting As if everyone in the group was terrible...

Cipriana

Yeh he's Impressionist, see I only learnt Manet well and was expecting to be able to fit him into the general Q, except they had really specific things like a painting by some named random artist etc. Since I couldn't do him I had to do Surrealism that's Dali and Magritte

looloo27

I found the paper pretty ok but my class could only do donatello in sect2. we had covered so many earky renaissance as well as some high renaissance. there was absolutely no choice. even the cop out question 13 was difficult. tuogh gettin all the questions done in time my hand nearly seized up. I only wrote 1/2 page on each of donatellos 3 sculptures but had 2 more pages on intro and innovations hope thatll be ok.

LilyPool

I quite liked the paper, I just found some of the questions kind of tricky. Like the question on Romanesque architecture and sculpture asked about 6 questions in 1! I did find that that I was rushing my answers though because I was afraid of running out of time:(But overall I was happy with it:)

Cousin it

Agri_trust wrote:

Oh well done, did you enjoy looking that up to make me feel more **** than I already do?



Dickhead.

No, many of our class were in the same position as you and he was just putting you out of your misery by informing you that you didn;t get lucky and thus eliminating the questions you'd have had when you got your art result of why you may not have done as well as you thought.

Might want to calm down with the knee-jerk name calling seeing as he was informing you and other posters and didn;t outwardly express any joy in deflating people after an otherwise alright exam.

One thing that annoys me about art history is that if you are a C grade drawer but an A1 art history student your going to get the same grade as some one who is an A grade drawer but isnt book smart at all.

That's the nature of the subject as a whole and your choice was made in the full knowledge of what was required of you.

Thats not fair, my ego's going to take a very very big blow when I come back with a B, because all ive been hearing for ages is "oh I heard your an A1 drawer". People who know **** all about the art system in school will think the whole exam is judged on ****ing drawing , that my drawing is less that what its been said to be. Sorry if that sounds really up my own hole but jesus im **** at everything else, only thing I can do is draw.

You might want to try some humility and take stock of the fact that two well answered questions on your art history paper combined with one mediocre/rubbish answer as well as your practical exams can still get you an a.
If you're as good at drawing as both you and other people say you are then it begs the question, did you apply for art college and seek validation there, or are you just making excuses for not studying?