Millsaps College :: Department of Art

SYLLABUS. Art 3780 (01)
Junior Art History Seminar: Dutch Baroque Genre Painting
Fall 2004: TTh 10:00-11:15, W 12:00-12:50
Dr. Elise Smith (smithel@millsaps.edu)
AC 323 - 974-1432 (o); 354-2290 (h)(not after 10:30, please)
Office Hours: MWF 10:00-10:45, T 2:00-3:00, or by appointment or happenstance

Course Description: This course is designed as an upper-level seminar for any student who has had at least one previous art history course. The modified seminar format will require considerable reading and research. Active participation through class discussions and presentations will be central to the success of the course. The subject for this year's seminar is Dutch 17th-century genre painting, including Vermeer, Steen, Maes, Dou, Van Ostade, De Hooch, and Terborch, among others. Women artists of the period, especially Leyster and Roghman, will also be important as we strengthen our understanding of the period.

Texts: Our three texts are the exhibition catalogue Johannes Vermeer (New Haven & London: Yale UP, 1995), Peter Sutton’s Masters of Seventeenth-Century Dutch Genre Painting (Philadelphia: Philadelphia Museum of Art, 1984) and Nanette Salomon’s Shifting Priorities: Gender and Genre in Seventeenth-Century Dutch Painting (Stanford: Stanford UP, 2004). I will also distribute a number of articles during the course of the semester.

Class Attendance and Participation: Regular class attendance is crucial since we'll be looking at various works of art that aren't illustrated in our texts, and we'll also be discussing points that aren't covered in either of our texts. I believe very strongly that your participation is essential to the learning process, plus it makes the class more fun for all of us, so I encourage everyone to ask questions, comment, disagree, elaborate, and otherwise join in the conversation with me.
Absences for whatever reason after the first two will adversely affect your final grade. I will count off one point from your final grade for each absence after the first two. If you are absent for an extended excused illness or family emergency or school sports, you may be able to make up those absences by doing additional writing assignments (it will be your responsibility to consult with me about this if the need arises).

Grades: Each of you will be evaluated on the basis of the following components of the course:
Participation in & leadership of discussion 20%
Reading responses 25%
Oral presentation 20%
Research paper (12-15 pp.) 35%

Oral Components of the Course:
1) You’ll be a discussion leader twice during the semester. Each time you’ll sign up for a particular article and will choose one art work illustrated in (or related to) that article on which to do some further research. You’ll then lead off the class conversation by presenting your findings about that painting or print and will be a primary leader (along with me) as we discuss the article.
2) You'll give an oral presentation (about 20 minutes in length) at the end of the semester, based on some narrowly focused topic of research related to the subject of this seminar, and will prepare a short handout (1-2 pp.) for the class.
3) You’ll be expected to participate fully in the class discussions by asking questions, pulling out relevant ideas or passages from the texts that we read, making connections with other images or issues, being an attentive listener, and helping to keep the class lively and focused.

Reading Responses: During the course of the semester you'll be reading a number of short texts (articles or book chapters) in addition to selected parts of our three books. Once a week you'll choose one text from those marked RR in the Course Calendar below and will write a short response (1-2 pages). It should be brought to the class session for which the reading has been assigned. These can be typed or hand-written (though typed is preferable - take pity on my poor eyes!). They should consist of the following:
1) Bibliographic information in correct MLA format
2) Brief statement of the author’s thesis (usually 1-3 sentences should suffice), with parenthetical notation of the page number(s) where it can be found in its clearest statement. Since in order to do justice to a complex argument it’s often necessary to pull together a couple of the major points in the article, it’s best to paraphrase the argument in your own words rather than simply quoting a particular sentence.
3) Brief outline of the major pieces of supporting evidence for that thesis (a couple of sentences for each, with parenthetical notation of the relevant page number(s).
4) A question or two (general and/or specific) derived from your close reading.

There are 13 weeks in which reading responses will be due, but you may choose three of these reading responses to miss, with no penalty. In other words, by Week 13 (Nov. 18) I should have received 10 responses from you. If you'd like you may turn in 13 responses for extra credit. Whether you write a reading response for a particular text or not, you are still expected to have read the text and be fully prepared to discuss it in class.

The primary purpose of these reading responses is to give you practice in the kind of close reading that enables you to identify the thesis and argument of scholarly texts. This should help you in your own writing as you hone your skills of analysis and persuasion.

Research Paper: Your paper for this class will go through a revision process. For more information, see the handout "Tips for Writing Art History Papers" (now available at www.millsaps.edu/art/word/PAPERS_TIPS.doc).

Key Due Dates: M, 9/6 - Paper topic & preliminary bibliography
T, 9/21 - Preliminary bibliography with ILL requests
F, 10/8 - First draft of research paper
W, 10/13 - Peer responses
F, 11/19 - Final research paper

Late Assignments: Late reading responses will not be accepted. Any other written assignment turned in late will be marked down 1/3 letter grade for each 48 hours that it's late unless prior arrangements are made (a serious, legitimate, justifiable reason is needed for me to consider granting a student extra time).

* * *
Learning Disabilities: If you have a learning disability and need special arrangements you must discuss it with Sherryl Wilburn in Student Affairs and also with each of your instructors. In order for me to be able to accommodate your needs you must inform me within the first week of the semester.

* * *
If you're having problems of any sort that are affecting your work in this course or as a student at Millsaps, please feel free to come talk to me about it, or write me an e-mail message. I would be happy to talk with you about any questions or concerns you might have.

* * *
PLAGIARISM - A Reminder

Always be careful about plagiarism, even in short writing exercises and take-home exams. Plagiarism, as you know from Liberal Studies and/or your other core courses, is the use of another person's ideas or words without proper acknowledgement.

Two of the most common forms of plagiarism are defined by Diana Hacker in The Bedford Handbook for Writers (Boston: St. Martin's, 1994) as
"(1) borrowing someone's ideas, information, or language without documenting the source and
(2) documenting the source but paraphrasing the source's language too closely, without using quotation marks to indicate that language has been borrowed" (477).

When should you document a source? In addition to citing the source of a direct quote, you should give a citation when you refer to an idea, opinion, hypothesis, or conclusion from one of your sources, or when you summarize or paraphrase a section of your source, or when you rely on one of your sources for a fact that would not be considered common knowledge for the audience of your paper (Hacker 477-78). The point of all this is to help the reader (and yourself as writer) to distinguish between your own ideas and those with whom you are entering into scholarly conversation.

What is meant by paraphrasing a source too closely? This is probably the kind of plagiarism that I most often see in student papers. It has often been considered "unintentional", but is nonetheless clearly recognizable as plagiarism. With the Honor Code now in place at Millsaps, and with a concerted effort being made by faculty and students alike to clarify the boundaries of academic dishonesty, you will no longer be able to plead lack of understanding but will be turned in to the Honor Council. If you're uncertain about plagiarism, I encourage you to read Hacker, pp. 467-79, on the process of taking notes in order to properly paraphrase your sources and on constructing and writing your essay in order to maintain a strong, clear voice.

HONOR CODE: The honor pledge signed by all students upon entering the College is as follows:
As a Millsaps College student, I hereby affirm that I understand the Honor Code and am aware of its implications and of my responsibility to the Code. In the interests of expanding the atmosphere of respect and trust in the College, I promise to uphold the Honor Code and I will not tolerate dishonest behavior in myself or in others.

Please pledge all your written work for this class with the written pledge: "I hereby certify that I have neither given nor received unauthorized aid on this assignment [Signature]." The abbreviation "Pledged" followed by your signature has the same meaning and is acceptable on assignments other than final exams.

COURSE CALENDAR:
(The readings are listed on the day they’ll be discussed)

Week 1

T, 8/24 Introduction to the course
Sign up for Discussion Leader topics before Friday (sign-up sheet on my office door)

Th, 8/26 Controversies in the field
READ: De Jongh’s “Some Notes on Interpretation” (RR) & Sutton
xiii-xxv (& read Sutton lxvii-lxxxv during the first week or two)

2

T, 8/31 Controversies in the field
READ: De Jongh’s “Realism and Seeming Realism” (read sections
marked with brackets)(RR) & Sluijter’s “Didactic and Disguised Meaning” (RR)

W, 9/1 Discussion of graduate school & careers

Th, 9/2 Controversies in the field
READ: Hecht’s “Dutch Seventeenth-Century Genre Painting” (RR) & Franits’ “Between Positivism and Nihilism” (RR)

F, 9/3 GALLERY TALK, 2:00, Lewis Art Gallery, by Jennifer Bock-
Nelson

M, 9/6 DUE: Paper topic & preliminary bibliography

T, 9/7 Jan Miense Molenaer
READ: Salomon 19-26 (RR); Sutton xxvi-xxxiv, 169-73, 260-63, 328-32, 349-52

Th, 9/9 Gerard Dou
READ: Hollander’s “Gerard Dou” (RR); Sutton xl-xliii, 181-87

T, 9/14 Nicolas Maes
READ: Hollander’s “Nicolas Maes” (RR); Sutton 192-93, 239-43

W, 9/15 Discussion of research techniques

Th, 9/16 Jan Vermeer
READ: Kahr's "Vermeer's Girl Asleep" (RR); Vermeer 15-27

T, 9/21 Vermeer
READ: Vergara’s “Perspectives on Women in the Art of Vermeer” (RR); Vermeer 128-132, 140-144; Sutton lii-lvii
DUE: Preliminary bibliography including ILL requests

Th, 9/23 Vermeer
READ: Chapman’s “Women” (RR); Vermeer 31-42, 102-12, 120- 26, 146-50, 176-79
SLIDE TALK: 7:30 pm, AC 335, by Anita Jung

6

T, 9/28 Vermeer
READ: Salomon 106-16 (RR); Nevitt’s “Vermeer on the Question of Love” (RR); Sutton 130-31; Vermeer 114-19, 134-38, 152-68, 180-89, 196-203

Th, 9/30 Vermeer
READ: Salomon 13-18 (RR); Sutton 245-47, 342-43

T, 10/5 Vermeer
READ: Donhauser, “A Key to Vermeer?” (RR); Vermeer 67-78

W, 10/6 Discussion of your resumé or CV (curriculum vitae)

Th, 10/7 Vermeer
READ: Fleischer’s “Ludolf de Jongh” (RR)

F, 10/8 DUE by noon in my office & in peer readers' P.O. boxes: First draft of research paper

T, 10/12 Gertruydt Roghman
READ: Peacock's "Gertruydt Roghman" (RR)

W, 10/13 No class
DUE: Peer responses (put papers in P.O. boxes or take to dorm
rooms)

Th, 10/14 No Class: I'll be at the Southeastern College Art Conference

T, 10/19 Fall Break

Th, 10/21 Judith Leyster
READ: Hofrichter’s “Judith Leyster’s Proposition” (RR); "Man Offering Money"; Sutton 153-54, 233-35

10

T, 10/26 Jan Steen
READ: Chapman's "Persona and Myth" (RR); Sutton xlvi-li

Th, 10/28 Jan Steen
READ: Salomon 43-50 (RR)

T, 11/2 Jan Steen
READ: Gaskell’s “Tobacco” (RR); Sutton 174-75, 197; Schama 188-218 (excerpts)

Th, 11/4 Jan Steen
READ: Dixon’s “Together in Misery” (RR); Sutton 229-30, 266- 67, 299-300, 313-14, 347

T, 11/9 Jan Steen
READ: Cheney's "The Oyster" (RR)

Th, 11/11 Adriaen Van Ostade
READ: Salomon 93-105 (RR); Sutton xxxiv-xxxvi, 161-67, 281-91

T, 11/16 Pieter De Hooch
READ: Franits’ “The Depiction of Servants” (RR); Sutton 214-22;
Schama excerpts

OPTIONAL WORKSHOP: Noon, in the Writing Center, on personal statements and cover letters for applications to graduate school or jobs response on Franits

Th, 11/18 Gerard Terborch
READ: Kettering’s “Ter Borch’s Ladies” (RR); Salomon 27-39
(RR); Sutton xliv-xlvi, 144-51

F, 11/19 FRIDAY FORUM, 12:30, AC 215, by artist Gretchen Beck

DUE by noon: Final Draft of Research Paper (including all reader responses)

T, 11/23 Oral Presentations

Th, 11/25 Thanksgiving

T, 11/30 Oral Presentations

W, 12/1 Oral Presentations

Th, 12/2 Oral Presentations

Sign-Up Sheet for Art History Seminar Discussion Leaders:

Th, 9/12 Reader: Pearce, Ch. 5: "Isabella: Sharp Differences"

Th, 9/26 Reader: Griselda Pollock, "Woman as sign in Pre-Raphaelite literature: the representation of Elizabeth Siddall," in Vision and Difference: Femininity, Feminism and the Histories of Art (London: Routledge, 1988), 91-114

T, 10/1 Reader: Pearce, Ch. 7: "Guenevere: Emergent Heroines"

T, 10/8 Reader: Pearce, Ch. 3: "Mariana: Gorgeous Surfaces"

Th, 10/10 Reader: Kate Flint, "Reading The Awakening Conscience rightly," Pre-Raphaelites re- viewed, ed. M. Pointon (Manchester: Manchester UP, 1989), 45-65

Th, 10/17 Reader: Marcia Pointon, "The artist as ethnographer: Holman Hunt and the Holy Land," Pre-Raphaelites re-viewed, 22-44

T, 10/29 Reader: Pollock, "Woman as sign: psychoanalytic readings," Vision and Difference, 120-54

Th, 10/31 Reader: Pearce, Ch. 2: "Beatrice: Hazy Outlines"

Th, 11/7 Reader: Pearce, Ch. 4: "The Lady of Shalott: Cracks in the Mirror"

T, 11/12 Reader: Pearce, Ch. 8: "Venus: Pyrrhic Victory"

Th, 11/14 Reader: Larry D. Lutchmansingh, "Fantasy and arrested desire in Edward Burne-Jones's Briar-rose series," Pre-Raphaelites re-viewed, 123-39

T, 11/19 Reader: Elise L. Smith, "Evelyn Pickering De Morgan's Allegories of Imprisonment," Victorian Literature and Culture (1997): 293-317

Th, 11/21 Reader: Elise L. Smith, "Myth as Spiritual Allegory in the Art of Evelyn De Morgan," The Journal of Pre-Raphaelite Studies (Fall 1998): 53-73