PART ONE: HOMEWORK
• Read Chapter 10: In the Nature of Materials: The Later Sixties
• Complete the Homework COMPREHENSION QUESTIONS
Please answer these questions in paragraph format, including at least four sentences, per question!
Please cite Fineberg's textbook pg.,( within the content, not on separate citation page, and/or a lecture in support of your response.Present each question above the intended answer in Q & A format.
1. How would you describe the relationship between the paintings of Robert Ryman and Frank Stella? What are important similarities and differences we should note?
2. Eva Hesse has been claimed by many later feminists as an important contributor to a more "feminine" approach to Minimal aesthetics. "Google" her work and see if you see any reason to make such a claim on her behalf.
3. Explain what Donald Judd means by "specific objects." Find an artwork online that would meet his criteria and explain how this is the case.
4. In the literature on contemporary art, scholars identify a close relationship between Minimalism and Pop art. How would you characterize these similarities? Please discuss two or three, and note any differences you should be brought to attention.
5. Describe major differences between the work and ideas of Donald Judd and Robert Smithson.
6. How would you characterize the relationship between the work of Robert Rauschenberg and the Minimalists and Post-Minimalists?
PART TWO: DISCUSSION QUESTION, Please Elaborate?
This chapter #10, presents a number of examples of what are typically considered political artworks. This can be construed many ways.
What exactly is politics or "the political," aside from party politics, voting, and practical matters of governance? I can think of many ways to address that question, based on political theory, popular protest, activism, critical theories of power, and so on.
I want to focus this question on the work of Christo and Jeanne-Claude discussed in your book. Their public art projects--such as the Central Park (NYC) piece--are always hugely controversial. Do you see this work as political in effect?
Some possibilities to initially consider:
1) Yes, it helps transform and activate a public space and get people talking about how public space is carved up and controlled
2) No, it's not political at all. Their work doesn't reference specific proposals or suggestions in the style of official political discourse.
3) Yes, it's political. It's oppressive and arrogates public space to itself, trampling on the rights of the ordinary person.