Reviewing the Arts Class Blog – Spring, 2008

Hi folks, click here for guidelines about the Review and its proposal.

Proposal is due next class (you can add your proposal to your blog response); final review is due March 17th.

Reading/Viewing for next week:

• Emlinger Roberts, Rebecca. (2005) The Stripper: Victim Art and the Art of Suffering, Antioch Review, Winter, Vol. 63 Issue 1, p23-39 (sign into library with your username and password to get access).

• Minx, Trixie. (2007) Burlesque: The Art of Tease, The Perspective from a Dancer, Root Magazine.

Questions for consideration:

1. Considering some of the points that Emlinger brings up in her article, as well as those made by Minx, where is the boundary line between what can be considered art, erotic art, and/or porn?
2. At what point, if any, does a particular piece of art move into “victim art”? Is there such a thing as victim art? Under what circumstances might someone become a victim under the auspice of art? Back up your discussion with textual evidence.
3. Emerlinger suggests at one point early on that it can be near impossible separating art from morality; what does she mean by that? And how does that play out in the context of this particular performance?
4. Describe the differences in approach between Emlinger and Minx. Are each talking about the same kind of performance art? Why or why not? What is different about their discussions of this type of performance, and what kind of arguments do each make about it?
5. How does Emlinger represent the stripper in her article? As a pioneering transgressive artist? a victim? something in between?
6. The video that you watched – is it stripper art, victim art, or burlesque? Explain your reasoning, and be sure to back up your thoughts with a thoughtful discussion that includes reference to the readings.
7. Reflecting upon Emlinger’s article, how might social context change the meaning of art? And must we know or understand a performance or art piece’s background, history, and other implications in order to appreciate it as art? How might we understand the stripper performance in Emlinger’s article before versus after she speaks to the dancer and learns of her HIV status?

Feel free to write about any other issue, concern, or interesting point that you noticed; just be sure to connect it to the readings.

Blog assignment for next class is below this post — but just FYI:

The Office of Multicultural Affairs is in the midst of accepting applications for their Diversity Award, worth $5,000 and is renewable for continuing students.  They are trying to encourage as many students to apply for this award as possible. Applications are online or can be found at the Office of Multicultural Affairs, which is located in the 623 S. Wabash Building, on the third floor.

Blog Response DUE by Monday, Feb. 25th:

Reading Due:

• Croce, Arlene. “Introduction” and “Discussing the Undiscussable,” Crisis of Criticism.
• “Confronting Head on the Face of the Afflicted,” Crisis of Criticism.

You must address BOTH readings in your blog response. Your response must also be thoughtful and critical, not merely a restatement of what you read. Also, when you provide textual evidence (quotes or summarizations), be sure to explain HOW that quote or reference further illuminates the point you are trying to make. DO NOT let the quote speak for you!

• In Croce’s essay, she says that she has not seen Bill T. Jones’s “Still/Here” and doesn’t plan to review it. According to Croce, why will she not review the dance performance? What is your response?
• Croce brings up the term “victim art” within her (non)review of Jones’s dance performance. What exactly do you think Croce means by the term “victim art”? Do you agree or disagree with Croce’s term “victim art” and why?
• Croce’s essay brought on a slew of critical responses, some suggested that while Croce’s essay was understandably controversial, Croce also had some good arguments. What might those be? What did Croce argue about art and/or our ways of perceiving it that actually have logical merit?
• Discuss Oates response to Croce with a focus on the term “victim art.” Does Oates take primary offense at the use of the term “victim art” or Croce’s claim that such art is “beyond criticism”? Why? Explain your response and provide textual evidence (quotes, paraphrases and/or examples from the text) to back up your conclusion.
• In what ways are Oates’ arguments both convincing AND unconvincing? Where are the strengths in her arguments? Where are the flaws? Again, explain your response and provide textual evidence (quotes, paraphrases and/or examples from the text) to back up your conclusion.
• Oates utilizes multiple examples in an attempt to argue that history is full of art that points to painful and authentic experience, but we do not render it “beyond criticism” as did Croce with the Bill T. Jones’ dance. However, what is the primary (and perhaps the most significant) difference between Oates’ examples and the Bill T. Jones’ dance (not)reviewed by Croce?

EXTRA CREDIT question (you must answer this along with one above to receive extra credit): In Croce’s essay, she argues a certain point of view in regards to what she believes constitutes art or makes it valuable as art. In what ways does each author reflect (however explicit or subtle) one of the main arguments of either Bell, Tolstoy, Sontag or Winterson?

** Always, always back up your thoughts with some example, quote, or explanation.

FOR NEXT CLASS!

I’ll give you a little extra time on the one page reviews of the C-Spaces gallery exhibit (please email your review to me by this coming Friday – Feb. 22), but your blog response to the readings must still be posted by Monday (I’ll give you till noon on Monday to complete).

Below is the response assignment for this week, and I will be posting the next readings/response assignment by Monday evening, so please be sure to check back to see what’s due for the next time we meet (Feb. 25th). If you have any questions, please email me.

Please read/view the following:

• Art Objects | extract by Jeanette Winterson
• The Guardian | 2002 | What is art for? by Jeanette Winterson
• View: Jeanette on a thing called art.

Then, answer any one set of questions below, incorporating your understanding of at least two of the four readings/viewings into your response:

• According to Winterson, what makes art valuable? Must art carry a message? Must it demonstrate technical expertise? Or must it simply be aesthetically pleasing? How do we, as a society, typically place value on certain art items?
• According to Winterson, must art do something to be worthy of being called art? And if so, what must it do? Elaborate and explain your response.
• If Winterson had a conversation with Susan Sontag on art and interpretation, on what might they agree and/or disagree? Be sure to explain why.
• How does Winterson seem to view the relationship between art and its audience? Does art have a greater responsibility to its audience than the audience to art? And in what ways does this either directly contradict or support some of the authors we’ve read up to this point?
• When considering the value and/or significance of art, do you think a piece of art stands alone (or should stand alone)? Or do you think knowing something about the artist is important and/or necessary? What do our readings thus far suggest?
• Winterson suggests that art is not a luxury, but rather a need. How does she support this idea? Why, according to Winterson, do we need art?
• Discuss Winterson’s view of art as a commodity. Be sure to reference at least two of the readings/viewings.