Comparison paper in art history
Paper Instruction:
You will choose two works of art or architecture to compare in this paper. Both works must be of Western origin (i.e. European, North American) and fall within the timeframe we are studying this semester (c. 1300 CE – present). One work must be from the textbook (see the list on the last section), the other must be from an outside source (search museum websites, or check out ArtStor for ideas).
Provide a formal analysis (description) of each work, discuss the subject matter, situate each work within its cultural/historical context, and provide a comparison of the two works you have selected. Your paper should be well organized, with an introduction, thesis, body paragraphs, and a conclusion. You must use at least three sources in your research. Appropriate sources include books, journal articles, and legitimate websites (such as Oxford Art Online and major museum websites)—Wikipedia is not an acceptable source for an academic paper, and you will be subject to a 5 point grade deduction if you use it or other dubious resources.
What is a formal analysis?
A formal analysis is in part a description of what the work looks like in terms of the elements and principles of art, such as line, color, form, and compositional ideas like balance and symmetry (refer to pp. XXI-XXV in your textbook). However, your description should not be a detached, rambling list of the work’s characteristics. Instead, you should strive to actually analyze the work through your description. A good formal analysis not only helps the reader envision the object, but also tells them how the work’s formal qualities produce a certain effect. For example, one of the most arresting aspects of Picasso’s Old Guitarist (pictured at left) is the fact that the artist has limited himself to a monochromatic color palette. What effect does this have on our interpretation of the piece? You might say that Picasso’s use of blue tones underscore the inner sadness of the blind, old musician and convey his tragic plight. NOTE: There is a difference between providing a formal analysis and discussing the subject matter of the piece. Both are important to a full description of the work, but they should not be confused with each other. In Picasso’s Old Guitarist, the subject matter is the guitarist. The formal elements of the work include the artist’s use of color, line, form, balance, etc.
Another aspect of formal analysis is the style of the work. A work’s form is often dictated by certain characteristics that adhere to a more general artistic style (for example, the Baroque style).
Historical/Cultural Context
Art is not created in a vacuum. It is often to some degree a reflection of the time and place in which it was created. To attempt to fully understand a work, we must interpret its relationship to the social, political, religious, and/or philosophical currents during the era it was made. Considering these historical factors helps us to better interpret the work’s form and subject matter. For example, Michelangelo’s David (pictured at right) represents the biblical hero David, who killed the giant Goliath; however, within Renaissance Florence, David became a popular symbol for the city of Florence itself, which had maintained its independence from outside aggressors.
Additionally, it is essential to think about the object’s function in its original context—where was it, what was it used for, and what was its importance? David, for example, was originally sculpted to be placed very high up on a buttress of Florence Cathedral, so the proportions of the upper half of David’s body are enlarged to account for the upward viewing angle (of course, once David was completed, it was so loved that it was placed in the main city square instead).
We might also consider a work’s style and how it fits in with the stylistic movements of the time. When the artist of a work is known, it can be worthwhile to explore whether the artist’s biography has any bearing on the piece. You don’t have to broach all of these topics in your writing, but remember that it is essential to any art history paper to supplement your description of a piece with a relevant historical analysis.
How to write a good comparison
A comparison of two works of art can be an effective method of uncovering meaning that may not have been evident at first. As the poet Howard Nemerov has said, “If you really want to see something, look at something else” (quoted in Sylvan Barnet, A Short Guide to Writing About Art, tenth edition, 135). The first step in writing a successful comparison is choosing two works that facilitate a meaningful comparison. It helps to pick two pieces that have at least one thing in common (although it should be noted that if you pick two works that are too similar, you might not have enough to talk about). They might be from the same culture, or from the same period. They might both be sculptures, or they might both be paintings. They could depict the same subject, or they could be two works from the same artist. Whatever common ground they share provides a jumping off point for discussing their similarities, and from there uncovering their differences. You don’t need to compare every similarity and difference you can find, but focus on the key points that support your thesis. Your goal should be to write a comparison that enhances your interpretation and understanding of the works you have chosen to discuss. Because this is a relatively short paper, if you’re planning to compare two architectural works, it helps to choose similar features of each building to compare. For example, you may want to compare the façades of the buildings, or perhaps even their ground plans.
