ART 100

EVERYONE’S A CRITIC!

VIRTUAL MUSEUM PROJECT

Hindu Spiritual Sculpture Seattle Art Museum

Purpose: Create a digital museum collection of four artworks. Each of your selections will correspond to a particular critical perspective explored in class.

Context: Understanding content in works of art depends on many things: 

• How much do you know about the artist and any context surrounding their work?
• What biases – cultural or social bias, do you bring to the table when you look at art?
• How do you respond to modern art?
• Is there symbolic subject matter? 
• Can you translate the symbolism?

You can’t offer credible criticism of art until you understand what you’re looking at. To help you in your search for meaning, we’ve explored some critical perspectives in class that you can apply to your selected artworks. Each one offers meaning from a unique perspective and not all artworks can be fairly examined under all the perspectives. It requires some research and creativity to find the most significant meaning in a work of art. 

For example, the formalist approach to criticism is a relatively new one, developed by critic Clement Greenberg in his 1960 essay Modernist Painting as a way to explain – and champion, the work of the Abstract Expressionists. Feminist art criticism can be applied to hundreds of years of art history but gained the most traction in the 1970’s as many female artists challenged the status quo and created works whose subject matter is born of women’s lives and experiences. 

Nancy Spero, Notes in Time, 1979

Museum of Modern Art, New York

Process: 

• Review the four critical perspectives we explored in module 5: Meaning.
• Find one digital image that fits each of the four perspectives. You should have a total of four images when your virtual museum is complete. Three of the four selections must come from the external links provided on the Canvas course website in the module this assignment is created in.
• Document each of your selections with the artist’s name, the work’s title and the year it was created. Be sure to cite your image’s source. Supply a link to the gallery, museum or collection where you found it. 
• Create a media file to display your museum collection. Use Power Point, Prezi, digital video or other presentation media that works for you. Just make sure I can open it for viewing. Confirm this with me before you upload it to the CANVAS course website through the drop box created for this project. Take time to arrange your presentation well. Presentation is an important part of this project.
• formal
• ideological
• psychoanalytic
• feminist.

Use the following critical perspectives for analysis: 

• Formal
• Ideological
• Psychoanalytic
• Feminist

For your analysis, include a short description of the artwork, then explain why you chose the work and what significance it holds within the critical perspective you place it in. 

Grant Wood, American Gothic, 1930, oil on canvas

Rubric for Critical Perspectives Virtual Museum

Rubric for Critical Perspectives Virtual Museum

CriteriaRatingsPts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeSubject Knowledge

25.0 to >23.0 pts

Exemplary

Subject knowledge is evident throughout the project. All information is clear, appropriate, and correct. There is a close and clear fit between the question that drives the project and the collection of exhibits chosen to explore the question

23.0 to >13.0 pts

Good

Subject knowledge is evident in much of the project. Most information is clear, appropriate, and correct. Most of the collection clearly fits and is shaped by the question that drives the project

13.0 to >10.0 pts

Satisfactory

Some subject knowledge is evident. Some Information is confusing, incorrect, or flawed. The collection is driven by a question but the fit between the question and the collection is very loose.

10.0 to >0.0 pts

Weak

Subject knowledge is not evident. Information is confusing, incorrect, or flawed. The collection is not driven by a question.

0.0 pts

No Marks

25.0 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeUse of non-texual enhancements

5.0 pts

Exemplary

All graphics, video, audio or other enhancements are used effectively to enrich the learning experience. Enhancements contribute significantly to convey the intended meaning.

5.0 pts

Good

Most graphics, video, audio or other enhancements are used appropriately to enrich the experience. For example, clips are either too long or too short to be meaningful.

5.0 pts

Satisfactory

Limited graphics, video, audio or other enhancements are present but do not always enrich the learning experience. In some instances, use of these enhancements is inappropriate.

5.0 to >0 pts

Weak

No graphics, video, audio or other enhancements are present or use of these tools is inappropriate.

5.0 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeSlide Design

5.0 to >4.0 pts

Exemplary

The combination of multimedia elements and content takes communication to a superior level. There is clear attention given to balance, proportion, harmony, and restraint. The synergy reaches the intended audience with style and finesse.

4.0 to >3.0 pts

Good

Multimedia elements and content combine to adequately deliver a high impact message with the elements and words reinforcing each other.

3.0 to >2.0 pts

Satisfactory

Multimedia elements accompany content but there is little sign of mutual reinforcement. There is no attention to visual design criteria such as balance, proportion, harmony and restraint. There is some tendency toward random use of graphical elements that do not reinforce message.

2.0 to >0 pts

Weak

Slides are either barren and stark or confusing and cluttered. Exaggerated emphasis on graphics and special effects weakens the message and interferes with the communication of content and ideas.

5.0 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeOriginality

10.0 to >7.0 pts

Exemplary

The project shows significant evidence of originality and inventiveness. The majority of the content and many of the ideas are fresh, original, and inventive.

7.0 to >4.0 pts

Good

The project shows some evidence of originality and inventiveness. While based on an extensive collection of other people’s ideas, products, images and inventions, the work extends beyond that collection to offer new insights.

4.0 to >2.0 pts

Satisfactory

The work is an extensive collection and rehash of other people’s ideas, products, images and inventions. There is little evidence of new thought or inventiveness.

2.0 to >0.0 pts

Weak

The work is a minimal collection or rehash of other people’s ideas, products, images and inventions. There is no evidence of new thought.

0.0 pts

No Marks

10.0 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeOrganization

5.0 to >3.0 pts

Exemplary

The sequence of information is logical and clearly expressed. All slides contain language referring back to a previous slide and/or pointing forward to the next slide.

3.0 to >2.0 pts

Good

The sequence of information is logical. Transitional language is missing in some slides.

2.0 to >1.0 pts

Satisfactory

The sequence of information is somewhat logical. Some circular or choppy elements in the organization. OR Many slides lack transitional language.

1.0 to >0.0 pts

Weak

The sequence of information is not logical. For instance, there is no principle such as chronology or theme behind the arrangement of the items. OR Transitional language is missing.

0.0 pts

No Marks

5.0 pts

Total Points: 50.0