A-LEVEL HISTORY OF ART

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "A-LEVEL HISTORY OF ART"

Lucy Holland
5 years ago
Views:

1 A-LEVEL HISTORY OF ART Unit 2 Themes in History of Art Report on the Examination 2250 June 2017 Version: 1.0

2 Further copies of this Report are available from aqa.org.uk Copyright 2017 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 General Comments This paper performed well with all six questions attempted, allowing for differentiation between excellent, good, competent, limited and basic responses. Questions 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 were almost equally spread across centres. Unfortunately, Question 5 and Question 6 attracted a significant number of inappropriate or invalid examples. This led to responses being allocated to the lower mark bands. There was occasionally a mismatch between the question number and the answer, and some students failed to identify which question they were answering; while this was invariably dealt with in a sympathetic way, this did cause some difficulties for examiners. There were few rubric infringements. AO1 was generally sound and secure. Sometimes artworks were incorrectly identified, although there were fewer incorrect dates and misspellings of artists and architects names than in previous years. There was less reliance on theoretical texts, but these were generally better understood and used with greater care than in previous years, especially amongst more able students. Examples were occasionally cited outside of the date range of the specification or were wholly unrelated to the requirements of the question and mark scheme. These examples, although few, presented difficult decisions, since it was indicative of a misunderstanding of the requirements of both the specification and of the question. It was especially problematic when one of the two examples was legitimate, or when a work was produced after 2000AD. AO2 was usually clearly demonstrated with substantiated judgements and sustained discussion, particularly in the upper mark ranges. Sometimes students wrote everything they had learned in the form of a prepared answer, which frequently led to irrelevance and digression that did not directly address the question. However, there was a noticeable depreciation in the quality of formal analysis with some responses consisting of wholly descriptive writing. Frequently students used sources that were self-limiting, ignoring the central requirement of the question, eg the female nude, leading to irrelevant and shallow discussion that was outside the requirements of the mark scheme. AO3 was evidenced to a consistently high level, with the majority of students presenting a clear and coherent response, although spelling and grammar was still a noticeable barrier for less able students. Vague and repetitious writing was more infrequent in this series, but less able students still employed irrelevant material outside the scope of the exam. On the whole, the quality of written communication was satisfactory. However, poor handwriting sometimes made it difficult to credit aspects of these scripts. Question 1 Subjects and genre Analyse two paintings, each by a different artist, that depict human figures and/or animals. This question was chosen by a wide range of students and was generally answered successfully. Most students chose to analyse figure compositions rather than those that were concerned with depicting animals. When animals were used as subject matter it was usually where they featured as part of a larger composition, eg Gentile da Fabriano s Adoration of the Magi. Portraiture was often chosen to represent the figure, which although allowed in the mark scheme, frequently led to students sourcing material that was self-limiting since it represented only a head and shoulders, not allowing a full discussion of the figure as subject. Examples included Leonardo da Vinci s Mona Lisa, but more successfully Jan Van Eyck s Arnolfini s Betrothal and David Hockney s Mr and Mrs Clark and Percy, which include full figures and offered more scope for analysis. Donatello s David 3 of 6

4 and Michelangelo s David were frequently used and well-rehearsed examples, as were Manet s Olympia and Titian s Venus of Urbino. Students frequently used this question for a discussion of the nude, a response that may have been more appropriate for Question 6, especially when the subject was female. Occasionally students chose larger compositions, giving a formal analysis of the whole work with well-chosen examples like Masaccio s Tribute Money and Raphael s School of Athens. The more successful responses were generally well crafted with well-chosen examples and addressed the component of figures or animals from the outset. Question 2 Materials, techniques and processes Analyse the ways in which materials and techniques contribute to the form and appearance of two buildings, each by a different architect. This was a popular choice, producing responses that combined a range of knowledge and understanding of materials and techniques with an analysis of architectural form and appearance. The focus on materials and technique was sound, with students able to relate these to the chosen examples. However, some students chose examples that both used the same material or technique and this often limited the scope for discussion and analysis, for example, Rietveld s Schröder House and Le Corbusier s Villa Savoye. Other examples included Lincoln Cathedral, Notre Dame de Paris, the Chrysler Building and Frank Lloyd Wright s Fallingwater. In most scripts architects were identified and architectural terms were accurately applied, often with extensive detail, particularly where examples came from the classical world, eg the Parthenon or the Colosseum. In larger, more complex buildings, stylistic features were frequently muddled and responses focused only on the exterior of the building. Examinations of the interior of the building, particularly in modern examples like the Villa Savoye, were far less developed. The students that successfully integrated discussion of materials and techniques and the form and appearance of their chosen examples generally produced better responses. Question 3 Form and style Discuss the formal features and appearance of two works of art that demonstrate the style of two different artists. Examples may be taken from painting and/or sculpture. A wide range of examples associated with a wide range of styles were used for this question, although the majority of students chose paintings rather than sculptures as the basis of their response. Most tried to position their source material inside a stylistic label, eg Fauvism or Cubism. Personal style was a concept that students found more difficult to explain, particularly when it was not easily categorised in works like Giacometti s Pointing Man or Picasso s Guernica. Sometimes style labels like Post-Impressionism and Abstract Expressionism, in which the artists that are grouped together do not have a unified style, led to sweeping generalisation in describing an artist s technique or presenting formal analysis. Description was frequently substituted for formal analysis and some responses failed to address any concept of style. Donatello s David and Michelangelo s David were again used for this question, but students were often unable to distinguish between stylistic qualities that could be considered Early or High Renaissance. More successful students were able to position and characterise their chosen examples within an established style, effectively picking out characteristics that signified the artist s personal hand. Post-Impressionist examples included Gauguin s Nevermore, Van Gogh s Starry Night, and Abstract Expressionist work included Pollock s Number 1 (Lavender Mist) and De Kooning s Woman I. Fauvist works such as Matisse s Joy of Life and Cubist works like Picasso s Portrait of Ambroise Vollard were also typical examples. 4 of 6

5 Question 4 Historical and social context Analyse two works of art, each by a different artist, that represent historical events of a political and/or military nature. This was a popular question which produced some excellent responses. It was generally well answered and students were able to relate the works to events of a political or military nature. The most popular examples were Delacroix s Liberty Leading the People, Géricault s Raft of the Medusa, Goya s Third of May 1808, David s Napoleon Crossing the Alps, Rodin s Burghers of Calais and Picasso s Guernica, all of which received excellent formal and iconographical analysis. Sometimes students selected examples where the political or military narrative was not so obviously expressed, as in David s Oath of the Horatii or (again) Michelangelo s David, and these responses tended to discuss the mythological or biblical context rather than a political or military sub-text. Formal and iconographical analysis was usually extremely competent. There were still a significant number of students who were not able to identify a historical context for the political or military event portrayed, a fundamental requirement for this question. Examples from sculpture featured less frequently. Question 5 Patronage Examine the appearance and meaning of two works of art and/or architecture that were commissioned by the state or a civic group. Each example must be by a different artist or architect. This question received significantly more attention than in previous exam series. The majority of students were able to make a tentative link between the patron and the chosen examples but could not always identify patrons motives that related to appearance and meaning. Commissioning by a state or civic group was not always fully understood, with students occasionally citing examples where the patron was unknown or not relevant to the question. Examples like Donatello s St George for Orsanmichele were frequently used as examples of civic patronage, and often successfully analysed with the role of the Guilds in Florence clearly articulated. Works commissioned by Duke Cosimo I de Medici such as Cellini s Perseus with the head of the Medusa were also cited as examples of state patronage and, given the omnipotent position of the Medici in Florence, were accepted as legitimate. Some examples produced solely for private consumption were judged invalid. Architectural examples were sparse, the most cited example being Brunelleschi s Ospedale degli Innocenti, another guild commission for the Silk Merchants. More modern commissions were notably absent. Question 6 Gender, nationality and ethnicity Analyse two paintings and/or sculptures of the female nude, each by a different artist. This was a popular question eliciting some good responses with well-chosen examples that allowed for wide ranging discussions. The sources used for this question were mostly paintings. However, sculptures like Bernini s Apollo and Daphne and The Rape of Proserpine were also discussed, but often as a whole group rather than focusing on the female nude per se. More successful students tended to choose examples where the images were more directly related to the question. Manet s Olympia, Cabanel s Birth of Venus, Botticelli s Birth of Venus and Titian s Venus of Urbino were common examples and led to full and detailed discussions of the tradition of the female nude. Examples from the modern period included Giacometti s Woman with her Throat Cut as well as Picasso s Les Demoiselles d Avignon and Jenny Saville s Branded. However, a few chosen examples precluded an examination of the female nude, either because drapery covered a 5 of 6

6 significant portion of the body or because the subject was not female. Unfortunately some good examples of the nude such as Alison Lapper s Pregnant (2005) for the fourth plinth in Trafalgar Square were invalidated by being produced after the specification s cut-off date of Use of statistics Statistics used in this report may be taken from incomplete processing data. However, this data still gives a true account on how students have performed for each question. 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 6 of 6

A-level History of Art

A-level History of Art HART2 Themes in History of Art Report on the Examination 2250 June 2016 Version: v1.0. Further copies of this Report are available from aqa.org.uk Copyright 2016 AQA and its licensors.