Showing posts with label Art and politics. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Art and politics. Show all posts

21 February 2016

Do men see art differently from women?

A gender issue...
Claire Tabouret

Read the title, look at the photo, then read the articles using the links above.

Answer the following questions:
  1. What does the photo above show (describe and comment)?
  2. What do you (dis)like about the work of Claire Tabouret?
  3. List the things YOU value in art (its art market value, its intrinsic artistic worth, the intention of the artist, the "message", the aesthetic impact, its decorative potential for your living room, its originality, etc.).
  4. Ask a friend or member of your family who is not the same gender as yourself what value THEY place on art (compare with your own list).

11 January 2015

Political cartoons... How dangerous can they be?!



To do/questions:
  1. Research who Joe Sacco is.
  2. Translate his cartoon and describe the pictures that make up the cartoon published in the Guardian (click on the link above).
  3. What are the events he is reacting to in his cartoon?
  4. Explain what "JE SUIS CHARLIE" means.
  5. What is "satire"?
  6. Summarise the point of view Sacco expresses in his cartoon.
  7. Do you agree with his opinion?
  8. Have a look at the cartoons in the following link: Charlie Hebdo tributes, article in THE DAY
  9. Draw a one-picture cartoon on the theme: "The pen is mightier than the sword".
  10. What is the point of political (also called editorial) cartoons?

To help you understand and think about and discuss the very complex issues involved in the events that took place in Paris in January 2015, click HERE!

23 November 2014

Global warning...

To do:
  1. Describe the work of art in the photo above.
  2. Comment it (what type of art is this?; do you like it?; what, if any, is the artist's "message"?; who are the "leaders" in the title and why should we follow them?; is this political art?; etc.).
  3. Click on the link under the photo and compare your interpretation with the artist's comments of his work.
  4. Define what political art is (research!).
  5. Find three examples of political art (all genres, including literary, graphic, and musical) that you find effective (send your examples as a "comment" to this blog!).
  6. Prepare a 60-second talk on the question: "Should art bother with politics?"

08 November 2014

‘The Blood Swept Lands And Seas Of Red’


The field of ceramic poppies at the Tower of London has caught the public imagination. But does such a beautiful memorial to those killed blind us to the horror of the First World War?

Contemporary art provokes many responses among the public, but overwhelming and heartfelt approval is not often among them. However, last week tens of thousands of people visited an art installation at the Tower of London. So many, in fact, that buses were diverted and the nearest underground station closed to avoid dangerous congestion.

The work is made of hundreds of thousands of ceramic poppies planted in the dry moat of the Tower. Its title is ‘The Blood Swept Lands And Seas Of Red’ and each poppy commemorates a British or colonial serviceman or woman killed in the First World War. The first of 888,246 flowers was planted on 5th August, 100 years since the first full day of Britain’s involvement in the war. The last will be installed on Armistice Day, 11th November.

Each poppy was sold online for £25 and the £15million raised will be divided between six service charities. (After Armistice Day the artwork will be dismantled and each poppy delivered to its sponsor.)

Not everyone admires it however. Jonathan Jones, the art critic of the Guardian newspaper, called it a ‘prettified and toothless war memorial. It is all dignity and grace. There is a fake nobility to it, and this seems to be what the crowds have come for – to be raised up into a shared reverence for those heroes turned frozen flowers. What a lie. The first world war was not noble. War is not noble. A meaningful mass memorial to this horror would not be dignified or pretty. It would be gory, vile and terrible to see. The moat of the Tower should be filled with barbed wire and bones. That would mean something.’

Many object to this view. A writer in the Daily Mail observed that ‘I saw the poppies back in the summer and wanted to bring my children before the whole thing disappears. I could think of no better way to impress upon them the enormity of the Great War than to show them this crimson moat and explain that every single one of the 888,246 poppies equals a real person who lived and died for this country.’

Remembering and forgetting

Some think commemorations like this simply disguise the revolting brutality of war. Dressing it up as some holy, national sacrifice hides the ignorance, selfishness and stupidity which brought about the unnecessary death of millions of young people across the world.

On the other hand, many have been deeply moved by this work and feel conscious of the link it makes to those members of their families who fought, and some of whom died, in wars over the last century. To remember them in this way is not to glorify war, but to appreciate what they did to try to ensure peace for future generations.

The above article was published in THE DAY.

To do (in pairs!):
  1. Translate into French the above article and list new words and phrases (LEARN THEM!)
  2. Research what the Tower of London is.
  3. Send a short comment to either THE DAILY MAIL or THE GUARDIAN expressing your opinion on the installation in the Tower of London (click on the links below the photo above); keep a copy of your message for your ring binder!
  4. Describe a war memorial that you know and say why you like or dislike it.
  5. Give a 60-second oral presentation on ONE of the following topics:

09 August 2014

It's a fix(ture)!


  1. Explain this post's title.
  2. Think up a title or comment for this sculpture (such as: "Strong winds with a risk of squale" or "Neighborhood watch just turned nasty..." or "Is it a fallen angel shark?" or "Squale!" or "Down with the Joneses!").
  3. Imagine a short dialogue between the owner of the house and his neighbor about the sculpture...
  4. Find other works of art that include sharks.
  5. Send a comment to this blog post explaining why you love or hate sharks!
  6. How effective is the Headington Shark as public art?

24 May 2014

This world is but a canvas to our imagination...


  1. Describe the watercolour above and explain why you like (or do not like) it.
  2. Who was Romanin?
  3. What did Jacques Martel mean by: "ce qui est le plus voyant demeure le plus invisible..."?
  4. What other World War II leaders were also amateur artists?

Banquet dƩmocratique
"C’est le buste de Platon, celui qui a fait Le Banquet."
"Vous faites bien de m’en parler, je dirai quelques mots dans mon discours pour le fĆ©liciter. Son canard aux navets est vraiment rĆ©ussi."

  1. Translate the dialogue of the (1920s?) editorial cartoon by Romanin above.
  2. Describe and comment the cartoon.
  3. Translate the dialogue of the 1917 editorial cartoon by Romanin below.
  4. Describe and comment the cartoon.

ƀ la curĆ©e
Aigle: « Au secours, ma chĆØre colombe ! »
Colombe: « Ouais ? Et qui m’a coupĆ© les ailes il y a trois ans ?! »

12 April 2014

Our Nation's Sons...

Drawing on Trinity College, Dublin, by Joe Caslin



Cette oeuvre a ƩtƩ crƩƩ par Joe Caslin, jeune artiste irlandais acclamƩ, Ơ l'occasion du One Young World Summit, que l'Irlande accueillera en Octobre 2014.

Joe considĆØre que, en tant que nation, nous avons marginalisĆ© nos jeunes hommes et crƩƩ chez eux des sentiments d'abandon et d'apathie. Il est temps de redonner confiance Ć  ces jeunes gars et de leur donner un sentiment d'appartenir. C'est une gĆ©nĆ©ration qui cherche l'espoir, qui cherche un leadership.

Une oeuvre d'art comme celle-ci a le pouvoir de résonner, de perturber le paysage visuel de la ville. C'est l'idéologie de One Young World que d'encourager les jeunes à bouleverser la façon habituelle de penser et d'apporter des solutions qu'ils pourront appliquer aux problèmes dans leurs propres pays.

01 May 2013

Cocky!

Another Fourth Plinth Cock-up?

In its fifteen year history as a site for temporary contemporary sculptures, the Fourth Plinth in London’s Trafalgar Square has been the cause of much fuss and bother. The empty plinth in front of the National Gallery has hosted, among others: the marble sculpture of a disabled woman, a mock equestrian sculpture, and the members of the public themselves who, for an hour each, were able to become living statues.

Katharina Fritsch's sculpture of a big blue cockerel has also ruffled feathers. Some have said it is nothing but a feeble distraction, totally inappropriate in a square which honours Britain's greatest naval victory of the Napoleonic wars (the cockerel is the national symbol of France!). The Düsseldorf-based artist’s unnerving sculptures seem indeed to arrive from another world. There is no logic about her elephants, outsized apples, mice, and men in bright suits; her creatures are fanciful and dramatic and unrelated to their contexts. But is art not also meant to disrupt?

In the end, though, it's just a weird, oversized, royal blue barnyard bird, and it's been cheering us all up!

Questions/to do:
  1. Translate the text above.
  2. Do you agree that art is "meant to disrupt"?
  3. What should the purpose of a public sculpture be?
  4. What do you think of Fritsch's art?
  5. Describe your favourite Fourth Plinth shortlisted sculpture, and say why you like it so much.
  6. Take part in the vote!
Assignement:
  1. Get the children from a Primary school to vote on their favourite Fourth Plinth shortlisted sculpture.
  2. Run a workshop for the Primary school children: they have to imagine their own sculpture for the Fourth Plinth (they have to draw it on an A3 piece of paper).