Midterm Guide (Art Analysis)

Alberti:

It wasn't necessary to write in the first person as your character, though some did. Most of you did quite well with Alberti, identifying certain elements of Botticelli's Primavera that he would like and arguing that Grosz's X would somehow degrade them. (Giving the title/artist of the original helped!) Some argued that Alberti would find some fault in the original painting, which I hadn't considered.

15 of 18 answered this question for an average score of 12.5 out of 14. The following answer is by no means flawless, but it received 13 out of 14.

Alberti would not like this "revised" work of art. The painting itself was good as it follows every criteria that Alberti believes good paintings have; there is a clear istoria, the figures are depicted as nature gives, and the colors have been properly used. The black tape that has crossed over Botticelli's Primavera would be, to Alberti, classified as rape. There certainly is a message - one that indicates the artist's wish to tear down traditional aesthetic values - but this message completely goes against Alberti's own aesthetic values. He would spit on Grosz's attack on his philosophy of art.

Kokoschka:

This one was difficult for many of you. K clearly appreciates variations on traditional art, but to call Grosz's "X" an example of "expressionism" is using that term much too loosely. This is dada, a conceptual experiment. Had Grosz wanted to make an expressionist painting, he would have used his own earlier style and repainted the scene with contorted poses, darker colors, or what have you. On the other hand, some made Kokoschka out to be a strict traditionalist, which he was not... his main objection was to the politicization of art.

6 of 18 answered this question for an average score of 11.5 out of 14. The following answer is by no means flawless, but it received 12 out of 14.

Oskar Kokoschka would agree with Alberti that the painting by Grosz would not be aesthetically pleasing. Kokoschka had voiced that paintings should be "untouched" and untainted by things like "bullet-holes." As an artist, he believes in expressionist [but still upholds the museum/gallery ideal of art]. He would not appreciate the tape which has "ruined" the artistic value of what is under it.

Gropius:

Those who bothered to read Gropius and study Moeller's lecture carefully referred to concepts of "building," geometric lines, functionality, the unification of the arts, etc. Though G isn't quite an expressionist or a communist, as some made him out to be.

9 of 18 answered this question for an average score of 10.1 out of 14. The following answer is by no means flawless, but it received 14 out of 14.

Walter Gropius would not even care about the painting or the original idea behind it. He is an architect. As far as he is concerned, the painting is just eye-candy. What really matters to him is the frame and how effective the placement of the black tape is. Is the tape perfectly covering the center? If not, where is the focal point and why? Is it structurally stable? The only thing he might approve of in the painting is the legs of the fairies and the forest behind them. The legs are not completely realistic because of the use of many straight lines to represent a woman's usually curvy figure, and the forest also incorporates sharp and fine lines. Other than that, he would not care about the meaning of the painting.

Plato:

Most understood Plato's aesthetics, but some gave it generically rather than referring to the Grosz painting in particular. Some saw it as a kind of Platonic concept. Perhaps, though it is probably a sub-philosophical one. I'm not quite sure how Plato turned out to be a Marxist revolutionary in some of your answers.

7 of 18 answered this question for an average score of 11.6 out of 14. The following answer is by no means flawless, but it received 12 out of 14.

Both of you are idiots. Who cares about "art"? It does nothing but fool the masses and give them something pretty to look at. If it's truth you're seeking then listen to your philosophers. How can you look for truth by presenting a distortion of reality? In my opinion Grosz did the world a favor in destroying the painting.

Hoch:

Successful answers found ways to connect her feminism, her dadaism, and/or her communism.

8 of 18 answered this question for an average score of 12.0 out of 14. The following answer is by no means flawless, but it received 14 out of 14.

As a feminist-dadaist, Hannah Hoch would like this revised version of a Renaissance masterpiece. Although the message is quite clear in this image, an aspect of art that is vastly different from dada, she would appreciate the black "x" over the images of women that are drawn with feminine garments and long hair, an image of women she would despise. The painting is very busy, and the black "x" could be considered a form of collage - aspects of art that Hoch would value. Furthermore, Hoch would particularly dislike the first scene as it implies that the girl became a woman because of a man's grasp. She would argue that womanhood comes from a sense of self, not from a man's interest in her.

Heartfield:

This was one of the easier options on the test, as it related directly to one of Moeller's lectures. Heartfield is an anti-traditionalist, but might consider Grosz's version of dada unsuitable for communist propaganda.

6 of 18 answered this question for an average score of 11.4 out of 14. The following answer is by no means flawless, but it received 12 out of 14.

This is definitely a piece of art because of its obvious political message - the rejection of the traditional views of art that were invented by the bourgeoisie. This painting by itself - without the electrical tape - does not represent the current world we live in and therefore Grosz was clever to reject it.