Museum paper: Formal Analysis of Art Object
Alsuwailem
rubric_museum_paper_5.docxMuseum paper: Formal Analysis of Art Object
Points: 25
Minimum 3 pages, maximum 5 pages
You may go to such museums as the Norton Simon in Pasadena, The J. Paul Getty Museum (also the Getty Villa), L.A. County Museum of Art on Wilshire Blvd (LAMA), The Bowers Museum, Santa Ana. Visit one of the suggested museums and pick an art object of interest. Attach the museum ticket stub and picture of the object to your paper.
7 pts. : Include the title of the object, production date, and artist’s name within the body of the paper. Good description of the artwork and media used (media: marble, wood, etc.…), color, shape(s), etc.:________
*10 pts. : A well thought out analysis and persuasive paper will get full points in this area: ________
Address the following in your paper:
-What is the Art movement or culture (Greek, Abstract Expressionism, Chinese-Ming Dynasty)?
- Did the choices in design enhance the visual experience? Why was the piece successful or not in your opinion? (*Use terminology and concepts from Elements and Principles of design to create your argument. Please review the analysis tips on Titanium).
-The motivation(s) in creating the artwork (education, religious, self-expression, explore new artistic avenues)?
- Why did you choose this art piece? How does it make you feel?
*5 pts. : Spelling, grammar, and organization of paper:_______
*3 pts. : Need at least 3 sources (e.g. reputable text books, on-line source- university lib., museum website, museum literature) to research background of the object. You can either use MLA or Chicago style citation and bibliography. (Do not cite from Wikipedia). Bibliography is on a separate page and is not included in the 3-page minimum: ___________
Excellent: original and thoughtful work that is professionally executed; no typographical or grammatical errors; strong, clear, coherent, and compelling arguments; addresses or acknowledges obvious objections to the arguments; scrupulous attention to crediting sources of ideas and facts that are not the author’s own
Good: Well done work, but not particularly original or thoughtful; a few typographical or grammatical errors are present; work lacks some clarity or coherence in thought; fails to address some seemingly obvious objections to the argumentation; some crediting of sources missing; sources of facts are weak (e.g., cursory web searches).
Average: Average work; numerous typographical and grammatical errors present; fails to address or ignores any objections to the argumentation; few sources credited or poorly done, particularly for factual claims when clearly needed
Below Average: Careless work with no attention to detail and failure to follow assignment guidelines; few and or poorly done citation
Failure : plagiarism or other academic misconduct; zero effort expended to meet academic standards
