So far, we've been closely looking and analyzing the formal elements of art objects. Now we will explore the historical aspects of the object and consider how we can conduct research about such an object.
The video below, by Youtuber BadEmpanada, offers some excellent general considerations for conducting history research. Important moments of the video are listed below. You might find it helpful to use some of the questions presented in the video to guide your evaluation of research sources.
Key points (Click the buttons below to reload the video at these points)
While formal analysis through careful looking is one of the two basic tools of art history, the other basic tool of art history is contextual analysis through research. When you undertake a contextual analysis, you’re trying to understand the work of art in a particular cultural moment. A focus on context gradually enlarges our view and expands what our scholarship should encompass. This can mean focusing on the work of art as it exists today, or on the work of art in its own time or at another point in history. It can also mean looking at the social, political, spiritual, and/or economic significance of the work.
People often talk about art “in context,” but that isn’t a very satisfactory approach in some ways. It suggests that context (culture) is already all set without the work of art as if the work of art has no effect on individuals or society. Of course, if it were true that visual images don’t have any effect on people, then there wouldn’t be any advertising on TV or in magazines!
To think of a work of art “as” social context rather than “in” social context means recognizing it as something that has an effect on people, on how they think and feel and act, and on larger social processes-how groups of people think and feel and act. Works of art and social context are often thought of as mutually constituting, that is, having an effect on each other. Works of art are shaped by historical processes, which are in turn shaped by works of art in continual interaction.
The following are some basic questions to ask in developing a contextual analysis. Not every question is applicable to every object. For example, if you don’t know the artist’s identity, for whatever reason, then there are a number of questions that you can’t ask about the creation of the work. You can also use Professor Cohen's SIAPFAR (style, iconography, artist, patron, function, audience, reception) method (explored in the first tutorial) for brainstorming questions.
For me, the process of interpreting a work of art from another culture or from the past is like speaking a foreign language. I may not speak a language well, and may not fully understand what native speakers are saying, but a great deal of successful communication is still possible, despite my imperfect grammar and vocabulary. So, too, with a work of art. You may not grasp all of its meaning—if that’s even possible, given the variable understandings and interpretations of the very people who made and used the work—but there is much that you can know and understand. Your tools are contextual and formal analysis.
Now that you have drafted some research questions, you can begin to identify relevant research sources. Below are four types of sources often used in art history research. Research is a skill that requires patience and practice to develop.
Note: Reference librarians, especially those who specialize in art history, are excellent resources. At the University of Toronto, Margaret English is the subject-specialist librarian for Art History and Visual Studies. If you ever need to write an art history research paper, bring an outline of your paper or your ideas along with a list of the bibliographic references you already have, and ask for suggestions.
Adapted from the University of Toronto Libraries' "What counts as a scholarly source?".
Scholarly sources are written by academics and other experts and contribute to knowledge in a particular field by sharing new research findings, theories, analyses, insights, news, or summaries of current knowledge.
Scholarly sources can be either primary or secondary research. They can also come in many different formats. Books, articles, and websites can all be scholarly. Remember, there is sometimes a difference between scholarly and peer-reviewed articles; all peer-reviewed sources are scholarly, but not all scholarly sources are peer-reviewed.
When evaluating scholarly sources, consider the following:
If you have not done so already, review BadEmpanda's "How to Research History: A Guide to Doing It Properly" video (38:26) and pay particular to the "Analyzing sources" section (starting at 06:53) to help you evaluate primary and secondary sources.
A common question when engaging with scholarly sources is "How many sources should I use?" There is no simple answer to this question. Different topics will generate bibliographies of different lengths. For some topics, there are lots of sources; for others, few. Some approaches to a subject will require more sources than others. What this question is really asking is “Have I done enough research?” The answer to that question, of course, lies in the quality of the paper you produce. With experience, you will learn when you have done enough research to develop a thoughtful and original interpretation of your subject.
Instructors sometimes specify a minimum number of sources to help guide beginning researchers in their work.
Now that we've drafted research questions, identified art history research sources, and evaluated scholarly sources, it is time to cite our sources! The following information is adapted from the University of Toronto Libraries' "Citing Sources / Create Your Bibliography" page.
Although we may casually share clips of content with friends in our online world, this doesn't apply to serious academic inquiry. Giving credit at every opportunity to the work of others in academic writing is essential to show how we develop arguments and viewpoints. Because we build on the work of others in order to form new knowledge, we must cite the work that came before us to help readers understand how we reached our conclusions.
Not every statement in your writing needs to be cited. Every discipline has a generally accepted definition of what is considered "common knowledge" in that discipline, and those statements need not be attached to a citation. Below are some examples of common knowledge that do not typically need to be cited.
Of course, it's not always clear whether something counts as common knowledge, according to these criteria. If you're unsure, it's always safer to cite it:
In this course, we follow the Chicago Manual of Style (CMoS) and use the notes and bibliography system (not author-date). A Quick Guide with sample citations is available publicly online.
Purdue Online Writing Lab provides several useful guides for formatting footnotes and bibliography:
Refer to the hyperlinks below for instructions on how to insert footnotes. Footnotes come after punctuations (either a comma or a period). One footnote can refer to multiple sources. There is no need to indent the footnotes (as seen in numerous examples online). In our course, footnotes should be in Calibri font, size 10 (slightly smaller than the body text), and single-spaced. Use an en dash (–) for page ranges.
"Ibid." can be used for subsequent footnotes of the same source, although the practice is no longer recommended. Shortened note forms are accepted in place of "Ibid." because the shortened note form is more transparent for the reader. In the example below, footnote no. 2 is the recommended format for all subsequent footnotes from the same source.
1 Michael Hatt and Charlotte Klonk, Art History: A Critical Introduction to Its Methods (Manchester: Manchester University, Press, 2006), 30–60.
2 Hatt and Klonk, Art History, 90.
3 Ibid., 125–160.
The University of Minnesota's Center for Writing created an example of bibliography formatting on page two of their Quicktips Guide. The bibliography is placed at the end of the research paper. Remember to start every bibliography entry flush left and additional lines are indented 0.5 inches from the left margin (also known as hanging indent). Refer to the Sacramento City College Library Research Guide page for instructions on creating hanging indents in Word, Google Docs, and Pages.
There are subtle differences in footnotes and bibliography entries. Refer to the examples below and spot the differences.
1Michael Hatt and Charlotte Klonk, Art History: A Critical Introduction to Its Methods (Manchester: Manchester University, Press, 2006), 30–60.
Lastname, Firstname. Title of Book. City: Publishing Press, Year.
Hatt, Michael, and Charlotte Klonk. Art History: A Critical Introduction to Its Methods. Manchester: Manchester University Press, 2006.
Check out writing advice on using sources and instructions on citing images. Please remember to italicize the art object title!