Unit Two—Art and Creativity: I know, I know, not all people consider themselves to be “artists.” But I bet most
people feel they use some form of creativity --- finding ways to transform the utilitarian materials of everyday life
in ways that can be funny, attractive, appealing, meaningful—or even disturbing or challenging. In this unit, we’ll
be focused on the creative process and some of the ways we define what counts as “artistic.” For most of us, the
process of making meaning is subjective (based on our experiences, values and beliefs) and, in some ways, very
personal. Yet to simply claim that “everyone has their own interpretation” elides the means through which some
subjects, contexts, practices, and genres are privileged as “artistic” while others are marginalized or discredited
(why are some public drawings considered “murals” and others considered “graffiti”?). In this unit, I want you to
start thinking about how culture(s) both local and global define art and then how you, as a creative citizen, seek to
engage art and subjective meaning in your lives and in your professions.
As a group we’ll focus on a series of photographs from 19th and 20th century American photographers—Jacob Riis,
Arthur “Weegee” Felig, Diane Arbus, Gordon Parks, William Eggleston, Nan Goldin, and Paul D’Amato . All of the
photographers we’ll look at work to capture images in different contexts and in different time periods. They
produce work that uses different methods (color vs. B&W, posed vs. candid shots, etc). When they write about
their processes, they value different ideologies and senses of “truth.” Their work has been received, or their style
imitated, in a number of contexts-- galleries, tabloid newspapers, museums—and has been reviewed according to
differing standards of what should be considered beautiful, meaningful, or thought-provoking. Some thought
themselves to be artists, others did not. The thing all of these photos have in common is the device that creates
them—the camera—and an ethnographic desire that all these artists share in showing un-idealized or “real”
people and places. Few of these photos we will view are of “perfect” subjects; few were created as fashion or
commercial photography. In class we’ll look at photos and explore the indexical relationship that these photo
representations have to their subjects and how (or if) the various artists transform these images.
Your rough draft will be an aesthetic analysis of one of the photos (or another photo if you choose). You might
pick a photo you enjoy or you might pick a photo you find unappealing or problematic in some way. You might
pick a photo you both enjoy and find disturbing. In your analysis, you’ll describe the photo in detail and then argue
how the artist uses (or how viewers might consider) techniques like framing, contrast, composition, etc. to make a
subjective statement. Your analysis might describe the historical context of the photo and the critical reception of
the photograph. You might explore the relationship the photographer seems to have with his/her subject. What
is legitimately “there” in the photo and what does the artist (and/or the viewer) bring to the photo that gives it
meaning? Is the photo “art”? Ultimately, this draft will help you consider the process by which aesthetic or
subjective meaning is attached to, arguably, objective images.
In your final draft you will take on the role of artist or designer. In this paper, you’ll detail a project that might
require some subjective “style.” For some of you, this might be a project traditionally understood to be art. You
might put together a photo-essay of your own photography that explores some theme or issue you deem
important. You might showcase some songs you’ve written and describe the context you might distribute and/or
perform your music (how might your music impact specific spaces and audiences?). If you don’t consider yourself
an “artist” per se, you might describe a plan to re-design a space of worship or a play room in children’s hospital
and detail the impact these changed might have. You might describe a design to make a specific product (an MP3
player, a phone) more aesthetically pleasing to consumers. You might describe how an economically-depressed
neighborhood might be made more beautiful and detail how this beautification might impact the community. You
might suggest how office spaces might be made better and more appealing to workers. In all cases, whether you
conceive of your “creative” project as art or not, I want you to consider how aspects other than simple function or
use impact our behavior, mood, activities, and thoughts. Your project will include both:
1.
2.
A detailed description (if you are offering your own art, you might look to the artist statements of Goldin
or Arbus for inspiration). If you are designing a space or object, you can use drawings, blueprints, etc. to
help your reader envision your project.
A justification of how/why you think it would work in the context for which you are creating it. If you are
using your own art, then how might you hope that audiences would approach your project? Why is “your
take” important to audiences other than yourself? If you are designing a space or object, why is style
important? How might art or creativity impact issues like productivity, morale, etc. in your project? You
might think about Doctorow’s article here on the importance of art.
Sources: (other than the Parks photos and the Doctorow article, these photos and corresponding
notes/narrative will be available on the 250 )
Arbus, Diane. Selections from .Diane Arbus. (1972) with notes by the photographer.**
D’Amato, Paul. Selections from Barrio: Photographs from Chicago’s Pilsen and Little Village (2006) with forward by
Stuart Dybek.
Eggleston, William. Selections from William Eggleston’s Guide (1976) with notes from John Szarkowski.**
Felig, Arthur “Weegee.” Selections from Naked City (1945) with narrative by the artist.
Goldin, Nan. Selections from The Ballad of Sexual Dependency (1986) with notes from the artist.**
Riis, Jacob. Selections from How The Other Half Lives (1980) with notes from Luc Sante.
Doctorow, E.L. “A Calamity of Heart.” The Nation. (August 30-Sept. 7, 2010). Available at:
http://www.thenation.com/article/154005/calamity-heart
Parks, Gordon. Online Gallery available at: http://pdngallery.com/legends/parks/intro_set.shtml
**Note on content: Some photos by the artists I’ve indicated include nudity and evidence of violence. Some of the
photos show people engaging in behaviors that don’t correspond with your value system. Some show persons with
disabilities. While we will likely discuss how representations of violence, nudity/ sexuality and/or subjects deemed
outside of “normal” culture influence what “art” means, in class I’ll try not to show photos that might make you feel
too uncomfortable. I want you to feel very free to discuss the ethics of some of these photos we view. While I think
issues of violence, sexuality and difference in representations are important for college students to address and that
these discussions can be respectful and progressive, I realize that some of you might not choose to engage these
questions at this time or in this classroom context. While I hope that you’ll engage photos we look at in class, I
want you to feel free to find other photographs to write about if you wish to do so.
Unit Schedule:
Feb. 8-10
T: In class we will begin to draft Aesthetic Statements. Look at the Riis, Weegee, Eggleston, and D’Amato photos
on Blackboard before class. Have a list of photos you found either interesting or curious. Have a short write-up
about the photo you find most interesting for Thursday.
R: We’ll discuss the photos and some tools for analysis for you to use in your First Draft in class. Look at the
Arbus, Goldin, and Parks photos on Blackboard before class. Have a short write up in which you, again, pick a
photograph you find interesting—in your write up differentiate what is in the photo (what are the indexical
elements) and what is the “sense” that the photo gives you above and beyond these indexical elements. What
story might you tell about the subject(s) of the photo and how do you think you get this subjective
interpretation?
Feb. 15-17
T: We’ll continue to discuss these photos and the ways that people tend to perceive various elements of
photography and how it determines a photos genre.
R: Unit 2 First Draft Due, Peer Response in Class (Peer Response and Peer Review Summary will be due). Read the
notes/narrative that accompany the artist you find most interesting or provocative (this may not be the artist
you “like” the most) for Tuesday. How does he/she define the work? If the accompanying narrative is by
another writer, what does he/she think is most important about the work?
Feb. 22-24
T: R: In class, you will revise your Aesthetic Statement based on what you’ve thought about over the course of the
unit.
March 1-3
T: Unit 2 Final Draft Due with supplementary documents. (as this is usually your midterm exam week, you can
hand in your project on Thursday if it helps your schedule) You will write your reflective summary in class.
R: Thursday will be an attendance optional day. If you have projects for which you have been offered extension,
this is the time to hand in your work. You might use this day to conference with me about your grade and discuss
revisions you might do to raise your grade (if need be).
Unit Documents:
First Draft (5-10 pages)
Final Draft (5-10 pages)
Aesthetic Statement (1-2 pages)
Aesthetic Statement Revision (1-2 pages)
Peer Response (1-2 pages)
Peer Review Summary (1-2 pages)
(2) Photo Homework Write Ups (1-2 pages each)
Write up on Artist Writing (1/2 to 1 page)
Reflective Summary (1-2 pages)
Unit Two Grading Criteria: These represent goals that I have for your writing over the course of this unit; You will
note that some of these categories are holistic—representing the effect of the whole paper and not the
“correctness” of individual parts—and may, to some degree, be open to interpretation. While I base these criteria
both on the larger Writing Program outcomes and my own twenty years of experience as a teacher and
professional writer, at times you may feel that one or more of these categories doesn’t really apply to your paper.
You might feel you’ve focused on different important outcomes that aren’t listed below. I’m happy to talk in
reasonable ways with you about assessment. Granted, the university has authorized me to make decisions
regarding grading. However, I want the process of assessment to feel both transparent and collaborative. Grades
are supposed to empower you as learner, not me as a teacher.
First Draft:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
Does the document indicate a clearly articulated aesthetic or does the paper simply rely on “personal”
aesthetics that are unacknowledged or assumed to be “normal”?
Does the writer accurately describe the photo? Does the writer accurately attribute a title, artist, and
date of photograph? Does the writer include the photo in the paper in a way that is reasonable?
Does the writer have an understanding of the differences between objective documenting – noting
indexical details-- and subjective interpreting? Does the writer treat the interpretations of the
artist/commentator with respect—even if he/she disagrees with it? Does the writer distinguish between
his/her own interpretation and the interpretations offered by the artist or commentator or possible
interpretations that others might hold?
Does the document suggest an understanding of the historical and cultural context in which the
photograph was (and/or continues to be) displayed? Doe the author address conflicts that might arise in
how different audiences might interpret the photograph?
Is the document thoughtful about how the photo might resonate with other viewers?
Is the document generally free of errors?
Is the document organized in a way that makes the argument clear and easy to follow?
Does the document use sources effectively? Does the writer accurately cite the photograph according to
MLA, APA, or Chicago citation style?
Final Draft: (note that I will NOT be evaluating the artistic merit of any creative choices in this draft)
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Has the aesthetic described in the first draft continued into the second or does it feel like a different
writer wrote each draft? What elements has the writer taken forward? Are these aesthetics argued for
in a persuasive manner?
Does the document articulate a public use of the project or a public issue that is being interrogated? Or
does the justification of the project seem capricious?
Is the paper organized in a way that encourages readers to engage the material or does it seem like
something that the reader “has to” or “should” read?
Does the paper seem to have an audience that is specific—or does it feel like the audience is “everyone”?
What specific modes of address, language, images, expectations does this campaign use that are
audience-specific?
Is it clear the writer has “trouble-shot” the document—imagining possible misuses or misunderstandings
of the creative project? If the creative project detailed is controversial (and it doesn’t have to be), does it
imagine how this controversy might be productive?
Does the writer envision and describe a reasonable context in which he/she might display or distribute
this art?
7.
8.
9.
Is the document polished and relatively error-free?
Does the final draft have a relationship to the first draft? Does it look entirely different? Does it look the
same, but with “corrections”? Or does the final draft look like it takes information from the first draft (as
well as feedback offered by classmates and instructor) and uses it to good purpose in the second draft?
Does the draft use sources and are they cited accurately?
Related Documents (How your Contract Grade moves from a B to an A)**:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Does the student seem to be reading and engaging assigned classroom material to the best of his/her
ability?
Do “meta” documents like the writing goals, conference memo, reflective response, etc. convey a
willingness to think critically, to engage problems (not simply take the easiest way out), to make changes
to the major drafts, to risk trying new types of writing/thinking?
Do responses to assigned texts attempt to draw connections between ideas we discuss as a group to
possible opportunities in individual writing projects?
Do responses to assigned texts suggest an understanding of different academic, artistic, and professional
genres?
Do the peer review/peer summary documents indicate respect for classmate’s work and for suggestions
that classmates make?
Are at least some of these documents generally substantive or do they indicate a writer who wants to do
only the minimum of work? Do all abruptly end at the page limit?
Do any of the documents make reference to the larger course goals, goals discussed in class, or goals from
the writer’s own goals statement?
** Note that I do not focus specifically on grammar and typos on smaller documents (although I expect all writing
to be at least legible to other humans). Also, page limits are more open-ended. You may find that sometimes you
have a lot to say about a specific assignment, sometimes you don’t have much to say. This is fine as long as you
sometimes have something to say.