WRITING IN THE DISCIPLINES: ART HISTORY

Producing an art history paper involves, for many students, a modification not only in
their way of writing, but also in their way of seeing. This realization may cause a certain
amount of anxiety at first, but you will likely find yourself more prepared than you
realized.
Remember that the visual arts are physical things; the elements that constitute them are
designed to be understood, implicitly or explicitly, by your body. So should a moment of
exasperation or despair strike you anywhere in the writing process, go back to whats
physical: the work of art itself the canvas, the sculpture, the bell tower and your
body. Art exists for your eyes, for your senses, your brain and your heart. When in
doubt, go back to the art, and look quietly, thoroughly, and without any expectation
or agenda until you cant see anything new, and then turn it upside down and look at it
again.
Write down everything, no matter how minor it may seem; your notes should be copious,
and theres no such thing as redundancy at this stage. Make sure you know what you
think about the work before you read what anyone else has to say.

THE ART HISTORY PAPER

Introduction
Art history introductions do not differ radically from history or comparative literature
introductions.
Mention which works youll be discussing, including the name of the artist, the title of
the work (italicized; if the original title is not in English, you may include it in
parentheses), the year(s) in which it was made, and, if you want to include illustrations,
the figure number.
For example: Degass Ballet Rehearsal on Stage (Rptition sur la scne, 1874; fig.1).
For a ten-page paper, two or three works are usually plenty.
Your thesis statement might be the answer to a question or a statement of your
argument. In either case, make sure that your thesis suits the assignment and that it will
support a coherent argument or examination. Remember that, depending on the particular
assignment, your thesis may be fairly broad (simply stating that Van Gogh and Gauguin
may both be considered Post-Impressionists, for instance) or argumentative (stating that
Van Goghs work directly influenced Gauguin). In the latter case, you may want to
outline briefly in the introduction what you will be using for evidence to support this
argument, and how you intend to interpret this evidence.
N.B. You do not need to cite the works of art themselves in your bibliography.

The body of the paper: types of discussions

In the body of your paper, each paragraph should deal with a specific topic and/or
component of your argument. Some common discussions (though NOT necessarily
paragraph topics!) are as follows:
A straightforward, detailed description of the work(s). Imagine you are describing the
work to someone who has never seen it, or to someone who is blind. A thorough
description not only lets your reader know what there is to be seen in the work, but also
which elements you feel are most significant. For this reason, you may want to
emphasize certain formal elements over others, drawing your readers particular
attention to color, composition, or handling, if these elements will later constitute an
especially salient part of your argument.
A formal analysis. In art history, formal refers to form that is, how the work
looks, how it was made, what its made of, etc. This includes, but is not necessarily
limited to: color, line, composition, light, handling (also known as brush stroke or
facture), scale, proportion, balance, rhythm, and various techniques which may be
present, such as chiaroscuro, structural color, pentimento, etc. In this portion of your
paper you examine how the work manages to say what it does, how composition or
lighting helps you to understand certain portions of its meaning. Also, if the work
formally recalls another work (Manets Olympia, for example, makes reference to
Titians Venus of Urbino), you most likely want to mention this in your formal
discussion.
An historical analysis. Art history scholarship is, naturally, a combination of historical
and aesthetic considerations. In an historical analysis you consider such questions as:
where was the work made? For whom was it made? At which point in the artists life
and/or career was it made? What was happening politically, socially, culturally,
intellectually, when the work was made? In essence, you situate the work in its time;
make sure you have done fairly extensive historical research before beginning this
section, so that you can determine which or how much historical background is relevant
to your topic or argument. Though it may be tempting to include excessive historical
information in your paper (because its usually interesting and fills up your word
count), try to avoid this! You wont be fooling anyone, and youll weaken your own
argument.
Iconograhical and iconological analysis. These two terms were made famous by the
art historian Erwin Panofsky; even if you dont make specific reference to him in your
paper, you will likely be employing his methods to some extent. First, to distinguish the
two terms:
Iconography refers to the recognizable symbols in a work, and how those disparate
symbols add up to a scene with a comprehensible meaning. For example: nude
woman + apple + snake = temptation of Eve. Iconography may also, in some

circumstances, refer to the representation of a given subject (the temptation of Eve)

throughout history.
Iconology is essentially what the iconography means; it is the process of
dismantling the sign of art into its signifying components. In other words, it
examines the relationship between form and content; it attempts to determine and
describe how and why the work manages to say what it does. An iconological
analysis of a Temptation of Eve would determine what that particular version of the
scene conveys or implies. (Keep in mind that these implications may or may not
have been conscious on the part of the artist or patron.) Consider both the original
function of the work and how this may differ from its current function; a work that
was at the time of its production considered dangerous and radical may now be
regarded as the standard of tradition and artistic conservatism.
Theory and criticism. Art theory and criticism refers to reading a work or an artist
through a certain intellectual lens, e.g. a psychoanalytic reading of Munch, or a feminist
reading of Ingres La Grande Odalisque. Another kind of theoretical discussion might
examine the effect of a non-artistic phenomenon on art, eg. Jackson Pollocks work in
the context of a post-war American need to create a culture of masculinity and
superiority (an example drawn from
http://www.unc.edu/depts/wcweb/handouts/arthistory.html). Theory is exciting, useful,
volatile, and tricky; if you are doing theory yourself, make sure that your theories are
grounded in the art. If the theoretical approach doesnt fit the work, it will be obvious.
If you want someone elses theory to lend weight or depth to your own observations,
remember: you dont need to accept every theory you read! If it sounds ridiculous, it
very well may be. If you do accept the theory, however, you may use that critics words
to support your own interpretations. (Remember to cite their influence on your
argument; plagiarism is not tolerated at AUP, nor anywhere else.) If you disagree with
a critic and want to draw him or her into a polemic, make sure that this will actually
advance your own argument.

In conclusion ...
As you engage with the art in any or all of the ways detailed above, remember to always
keep your thesis statement in mind. After you draw attention to a particular feature of
the work, whether formal or historical, ask yourself, So what? Explain what that
feature means in the context of your argument.
And of course: when in doubt, go back to the work of art!
Enjoy yourself, be honest, thoughtful, rigorous, and unpretentious. Good luck! Now go
write! :-)

Madeleine LaRue, Art History 09

P.S. Further (and very helpful resources):

[hyperlink to handout]
AUPs Writing Art History Papers handout
http://www.skidmore.edu/academics/arthistory/paperpg/index.html
General tips on art history research, paper formatting, etc.
http://www.wesleyan.edu/writing/workshop/departments/arha.html
Includes Questions to ask of Painting/Sculpture/Architecture, and great
information on how to organize your paper
http://www.unc.edu/depts/wcweb/handouts/arthistory.html
Good overview on art history writing, plus more on iconography/iconology,
patronage study, theory & criticism, and citation. Includes a bibliography of even
more resources!