A-level History of Art

Transcription

1 A-level History of Art HART2 Themes in History of Art Report on the Examination 2250 June 2013 Version: 1.0

2 Further copies of this Report are available from aqa.org.uk Copyright 2013 AQA and its licensors. All rights reserved. AQA retains the copyright on all its publications. However, registered schools/colleges for AQA are permitted to copy material from this booklet for their own internal use, with the following important exception: AQA cannot give permission to schools/colleges to photocopy any material that is acknowledged to a third party even for internal use within the centre.

3 History of Art HART2 Themes in History of Art General Comments All six questions were attempted. Questions 4 and 5 were the least popular, while questions 1 and 3 were by far the most popular. Questions 4 and 5 also frequently produced the least well-articulated answers. AO1 was generally sound and secure. Sometimes artworks were imprecisely or incorrectly identified, with generic titles such as The Deposition used which sometimes led to difficulties in identifying the work discussed, especially when the artist s name was omitted. There were fewer incorrect dates and misspellings of artists and architects names. Erroneous information or misrepresented theory occasionally formed parts of students responses. On rare occasions, examples were cited outside the date range of the specification or failed to take full account of the parameters of the question, rendering the discussion invalid and consequently leading to lower marks. These examples frequently presented examiners with challenging decisions, since it was clearly indicative of a misunderstanding of the requirements of the question. AO2 was usually clearly demonstrated with substantiated judgements and sustained discussion. However, there were cases of subjective and unsubstantiated judgements, usually based on partial understanding of complex theories only partially applied. Sometimes students failed to address the question, resorting to writing everything they had learned about the work, which frequently led to irrelevance and digression. This was particularly evident in responses which foregrounded formal analysis, but did not address the central tenet of the question. AO3 was evidenced to a consistently high level, with the majority of students presenting a clear and coherent response. However, a small number of students displayed a lack of clarity and organisation, which led to vague and repetitious writing, inhibiting and sometimes marring the response. Less successful students frequently employed irrelevant material occasionally citing examples outside the scope of the question. On the whole, the quality of written communication was generally improved with handwriting, spelling and grammar presenting less of a barrier to clear and coherent responses. Question 1 Subject and Genres Analyse how narrative is conveyed in two works of art, each by a different artist. This was a popular question and on the whole successfully addressed. Gentile da Fabriano s Adoration of the Magi and Masaccio s The Tribute Money were common, and successfully considered examples often presented a detailed understanding of the narrative content of the work. Successful students were able to demonstrate the way in which narrative functioned through both formal and iconographical features. However, a significant number of students were unclear about the meaning of narrative and selected inappropriate examples, with little or no narrative content. Frequently students took symbolic content to be synonymous with narrative. Examples of this included Manet s Olympia and Holman-Hunt s The Awakening Conscience. This frequently inhibited a coherent response, with students typically focusing on the symbolism rather than any potential narrative that may or may not exist within the work. Where students identified a coherent sequential story the responses tended to be better crafted. 3 of 5

4 Question 2 Form and function Examine how function is expressed in two non-religious buildings. There were some interesting responses to this question which drew on a wide range of examples including industrial constructions, palaces and domestic dwellings. On the whole, this question elicited some good responses, especially from students who chose to discuss the Medici Palace and Villa Savoye. Other examples included the Crystal Palace, the Colosseum, the Pompidou Centre and the Bauhaus at Dessau. A few students used examples like the Millennium Bridge and the Eiffel Tower as examples of non-religious buildings. Unfortunately some students selected buildings that clearly had a religious function such as the Parthenon and the Pantheon, which were invalid in the context of this question. Similarly many students focused on the formal qualities of the building and failed to relate these to the function, leading to much irrelevant discussion. The students that successfully integrated aspects of form to elucidate the functional elements of their chosen examples produced more successful responses. Question 3 Historical and social contexts Examine two works of art, each by a different artist, which engage with an historical event. This was a popular question which produced some excellent responses from some centres. The most popular examples were Liberty Leading the People, the Raft of the Medusa, the Third of May 1808 and Marat s Last Breath, all of which received excellent formal and iconographical analysis. The majority of students responses were focussed and fully addressed the historical context of the work. In some cases students used historical Biblical examples like the Last Supper, but these often concentrated on formal qualities and religious iconography, which led to partial or under-developed discussions. Occasionally, parables were also selected and these were not acceptable. Other examples that presented difficulties were works like Napoleon crossing the Alps where the historical context was only partially addressed and this was particularly evident where the example was an official portrait, where there were few visual clues to help locate the work historically. Question 4 Patronage Discuss how private patronage contributed to the appearance and meaning of two sculptures. Donatello s David was one of the most popular examples cited and the majority of students were able to link appearance and meaning with the needs of the patron. The majority selected valid examples, but it was still evident that there was some confusion between public and private patronage, leading to the selection of inappropriate examples. However, some students described the formal and iconographical content of the work and failed to identify the commissioner or discuss the context of the commission. Since meaning and appearance are frequently attached to the intent of the patron, this led to irrelevant discussions that failed to address the question. Question 5 Social and cultural status Discuss how two works of art and/or architecture express the social and/or cultural status of the artist. 4 of 5

5 Some students were able to produce a knowledgeable account of the contributions of artists such as Rubens, David, Michelangelo and Pollock and architects such as Le Corbusier. Where this was successfully related to the chosen examples, the discussion of social and cultural status was significantly enhanced. However, many students failed to address the question, simple describing two works of art which were not related as signifiers of the artists or architects personal and professional career and thus their social/cultural status. Students who enhanced their discussion by placing the work in the context of other works and were able to recount significant events in the artists or architects career, better addressed the question. Frequently the formal analyses of the examples were better articulated than the achievements or career of the artists or architects. In some cases students tried to identify the social and cultural status of the artist through the work. Examples that led to this kind of response were works such as Manet s Olympia and Courbet s Bonjour Monsieur Courbet where students tried to read out of the work the social and cultural status of the artist without relating the work to the artist s or architect s broader career. Question 6 Gender, nationality and ethnicity Compare and contrast two sculptures, each of which represent a single male figure. On the whole, the skills of comparing and contrasting works of art were significantly better developed than in previous examinations and this led to some good responses. Donatello s David and Michelangelo s David were the most frequently identified examples and this led to responses that demonstrated a thorough understanding of the formal and iconographical aspects of the chosen works. Less successful students frequently struggled with the instruction to compare and contrast which led to a two-part essay structure that amounted to a description of two works of art without any noted connection. The most successful responses were those where the student sustained a rendering of the similarities and differences throughout. Some interesting responses were produced from students who selected and juxtaposed examples that spanned the historical continuum like Giacometti s Walking Man and Michelangelo s David or Rodin s Balzac and Boccioni s Unique Forms of Continuity in Space. Particular examples that featured frequently in responses were Donatello s and Michelangelo s David, Géricault s Raft of the Medusa, Delacroix s Liberty Leading the People and David s Marat s Last Breath were all pressed into service for several of the questions offered. A small number of students used an example twice in two different responses which led to a rubric infringement. Mark Ranges and Award of Grades Grade boundaries and cumulative percentage grades are available on the Results Statistics page of the AQA Website. Converting Marks into UMS marks Convert raw marks into Uniform Mark Scale (UMS) marks by using the link below. UMS conversion calculator 5 of 5