SiMON FRASER UNIVERSITY
?
S-72-35-
0 ?
MEMORANDUM
To ................SENATE
?
..From. SENATE COMMITTEE
.
ONUNDERGRADUATESTUDIES
COURSE PROPOSALS - FINE AND
?
..
Subject.,.
PERFORMING ARTS .
?
,
?
.
?
Date
?
APRIL 12, 1972
MOTION: ?
"That Senate approve the new course proposals for:-
General Studies 100-3 - Modern Art and Its Mainsprings
- The Eighteenth Century
and
General Studies 200-3 - Modern Art and Its Mainsprings
- The Nineteenth Century."
.
If approved, the following motion will be made:
"That Senate suspend its rules with regard to the
two semester time lag requirement for the offering
of new courses in order that General Studies 100
may first be offered in the Fall semester 72-3,
and General Studies 200 in the Spring semester 73-1."
SiMON FRASER UNIVERSITY
?
S
72-'.53'
MEMORANDUM
.......................Mr..
?
H.. .Evans ...........................................................
?
From ..... Senate ..Commi.t.t.e.e....o.n...Under.graduat.e....Studies
?
-
............................ Secretary ... of
?
Senate......................................
Subject ... ?
.... . ..... Course Proposals....-...F.in.e...an.d...............
?
Date........ Ap
r i l
.... l.l.th,.,,.l.9.72 ....................................... . ...... ..............
The Senate Committee on Undergraduate Studies approved the submission
of the Division of General Studies relating to course proposals in
the Fine and Performing Arts, as set forth in SCUS 72-7, and recommends
:::01a1 to Senate.
. ? .
SiMON FRASER UNIVERSITY $
C 4f
7277
MEMORANDUM
.............................
Senate
cmm.......................
From
...............................................................................................................
Undergraduate
Studies ?
A/Dean, Division of General Studies
SUbed
.... ?
Course proposals
Dat
e............March15th......
Fine & Performing Arts
I attach
the following course proposals for the consideration of the
Committee.
They have been reviewed and approved by the Dean's
Advisory
Committee.
?c
RCB/ft
I
/
TO:
?
The Dean,
. ?
Division of General Studies,
Simon Fraser University.
A.
I am pleased to submit a proposal for a series of two lecture courses
in the area of Fine Arts. The courses could be scheduled, the one
(C 1) for the Fall semester of 1972, and the other (C 21 for the Spring
semester
of 1973. They may be offered as individual courses under
the auspices of the Division of General Studies; that is to say, as
courses not attached to any academic department. However, their
nature
is such that they may be included as part of an academic
program of a historical orientation in the Department of Fine and
Performing Arts, presently in the planning stage at Simon Fraser
University. Although the course proposed as C 2 may be viewed as a
sequence to C 1, each is, nevertheless, designed complete in itself.
Both courses are designed to fill a need for history of art in the
academic framework of the general humanities program for under-
graduates.
B.
a) Title of the series of courses; b) Rationale for the series;
c)
Area covered.
a)
I propose to entitle the series, "Modern Art and Its
Mainsprings", and label Cl, Modern Art and Its
Mainsprings - The Eighteenth Century, and C2, Modern Art and
Its Mainsprings - The Nineteenth Century.
b)
The subject matter of the series is Western art - primarily
the painting, but to some extent also the sculpture and
?
-
architecture of Western Europe and North America - beginning with
the then "shocking" works of art in the first decades of the Twentieth
century
and going back to the beginning of the Eighteenth in C 1, and
to the beginning of the Nineteenth century in C 2. The hypothesis
explored
in C I and C 2 is the same, viz., that, contrary to the opinion
that "modern art begins nowhere because it begins everywhere" (Canaday,
1959 and 1962), it makes sense to view modern art as having its
mainsprings almost fully developed by the beginning of the Eighteenth
century. What I label "mainsprings" are those theoretical propositions
of a practice (such as painting) that the exploring and argumentative
practitioners - not in every instance fully self-consciously - either
accept and support, or criticize and reject by their work.
-2-
•
?
Here
is a list of some of these propositions:
I. ?
That certain arts - finally reduced to five - form the System
of Fine Arts (the "Beaux-Arts") (Abbe Batteux, 1746).
2.
That the principles that can be elucidated and proved to be
operative in, or applicable to, only this system are evaluative
principles. That is to say, they serve as criteria for selecting from
among various objects those which are of the class Art (rather than art,
or craft, or "non-art"); hence the acceptance of the notion "a work of
art". (Hutcheson, 1772).
3.
That the ancient principle of Imitation (Mimesis) is such a
principle (although the ancient Greeks recognized its importance,
they did not, however, employ it to prove the System of Fine Arts) (Abbe
Batteu.x, 1746).
4.
That, just as "reason is something invariable and fixed in the
nature of things", so "taste has likewise invariable principles"
(Sir Joshua Reynolds, 1776), and also "the imagination is ... affected
according to some invariable and certain laws", or else the canons of
art criticism and art appreciation are "mere rules for caprice . . . legislature
. ?
for whims and fancies". (Burke, 1756).
5.
That, although taste has invariable laws, this is not to imply
that art can be learnt or taught; and that those who teach art
are engaged in doing the impossible (Mendelssohn, 1757'.
6.
That art should teach a moral lesson (Diderot, 1754) and that
it should depict simple things and poor people who are
inherently noble (Rousseau, 1762; Hutcheson, 1772.
I must emphasize that the series "Modern Art and Its
Mainsprings" is designed to show that the practice of art is, and not
only theoretical writing of the period, concerned with either embracing
or rejecting these propositions.
Li
-3-
c)
?
Course content by names of artists.
In C I - Modern Art and Its Mainsprings - The Eighteenth
Century, the following artists and their work will be discussed
(in the order of listing
U
G. B. Tiepolo, Pietro Longhi, Canaletto, FrancescoGuardi,
Francesco Piranesi;
Watteau,
Boucher, Fragonard, Mengs, Greuze, Chardin;
Hogarth, Reynolds, Gainsborough, Rowlandson;
Benjamin West, Copley, Peale, Gilbert Stuart, Thomas Sully;
Romney, Raeburn, Thomas Lawrence, William Etty, George Stubbs,
Wilson, Cozens;
Constable,
Fuseli, Blake, Goya;
Gericault, Jacques Louis David.
The Text for Cl:
Michael Levey, ROCOCO TO REVOLUTION, Major
.
?
Trends
in Eighteenth Century Painting, Frederick A. Praeger,
N. Y., Washington, 1966, 252 pages, 155 illustrations
($7.
50).
In C 2 -
Modern Art and Its Mainsprings - The Nineteenth
Century, the following artists and their works will be discussed
(in the order of listing)
Delacroix, Ingres, Daumier, Courbet;
Rousseau,
Dupre, Daubigny, Millet, Corot;
Manet, Monet, Pissaro, Degas;
Rodin, Renoir, Toulouse-Lautrec;
Washington Allston, Thomas Cole, Homer, Thomas Eakins;
Turner, Bingham, Rossetti, William Morris, Hunt, Millais, Ruskin;
Seurat,
Maillol, Van Gogh, Cezanne.
-4-
The Text for C 2:
John Canaday, MAINSTREAMS OF MODERN ART, David to
Picasso, New York, Simon & Schuster, 1959/1966.
576 pages, 700 illustrations. Price $12. 95.
C.
?
LLevel of courses; b)Enrolrnentjgures ?
Method of Teaching
a)
I suggest that the level of C 1 is established as a 100-level
and the level of C 2 is established as a 200-level credit-courses
80
as to encourage those students who successfully complete the C 1 in
the Fall semester to enrol in C 2 in the next semester. I expect also
that students taking Fine Arts courses at the two-year colleges (City
College, Douglas College, etc.) in which the courses generally fall, into
the categories "survey courses", and "studio courses" will be attracted
by both C 1 and C 2. The latter fall properly into the category "history
of art", and are detailed enough to offer the student who has completed a
"survey course" an interesting sequence, whilst being general enough to
serve as "introductory courses".
b)
It seems to me that it would be overly optimistic to expect the
enrolment to exceed 250 in either of the courses C I and C 2.
That figure however, should be the cut off point, for reasons of size of
. ?
lecture theatres. As for Teaching Assistants necessary for a class of
that size, I have been assured co-operation by the Fine Arts Department
of the University of British Columbia, to allow its graduate students to
apply for T. A. ships with us.
c)
I propose both C 1 and C 2 to consist of three contact hours
every week for the duration of the course, distributed as follows:
One 2-hour lecture, and
One 1-hour tutorial per student.
A 2-hour lecture would make it easier to show a number of slides while
arguing a point of pictorial history.
D. ?
Materials for the Courses C and C2.
I must mention that I was pleasantly surprized to find a sizeable Fine Arts
section in the SFU Library, even in the absence of any Fine Arts courses.
Some books, however, will have to be purchased for the purpose of the
proposed courses. Also, the slide collections of the Library and the
Communications Centre are quite good. Again, 'a small number of slides
would have to be purchased to fill out the few gaps for the purpose of the
two proposed courses. There is sufficient time to attend to these tasks.
-5-
D.
?
Some final remarks on the content of the proposed courses.
One of the most important aspects of C 1 and C 2 has not yet been
mentioned. This is -- making the student conscious of the various
methods of art history whilst discussing the pictorial content of the
courses.
Here I offer a few remarks on that aspect. It is trivial to say that art
history relates art and history, or that the methods of art history
undergo certain changes from time to time. There is, for example,
a now generally discredited method of art history, that of describing
the cultural and economic background, and the personal character of
each artist. Then there is also a formalistic method in opposition to
the biographical. In using the formalistic method, one is primarily
concerned with analysis of the pictorial composition, style and with
what is called "perceptual schemata", and thus one generally attempts
at classification of artists into "periods" and "themes", e. g. the late
antique, mannerism, baroque, romantic, neo-classical. Finally,
the most recently employed method associated with the Warburg-
Courtauld Institute in London consists of examining in each case, the
inter-dependence between the pictorial and literary evidence, thus
discouraging the formalist method with its emphasis on "boundaries
,. of periods". It is pointed out that it is very often the case that when
one examines a pictur,e neglecting independent evidence, as a result
the picture gets praised for the very qualities it is intended to mock.
Arvid J. Grants,
February 10th, 1972
DIVISION
OF GENERAL STUDIES
?
*0 ?
NEW COURSE PROPOSAL
1.
CALENDAR INFORMATION
Number:
100 ?
Title:
?
Art and Its
Program. ' ?
""A_117ise
?
Mainsprings - The Fighteent
Sub-title or Description:
?
Century
Introduction to the History of Modern Western Painting
Credit Hours: 3
?
Vector Description: (2-1-01
Pre-Requisite(s):
No pre-requisites
2.
ENROLlNT
AND SCHEDULING
Estimated Enrolment: 250
Semester Offered (e.g. yearly, every Spring, twice yearly, Fall and
Spring):
Yearly
When will course first be offered? Fall 1972
3.
.JUSTIFICArION
A.
What is the detailed description of the course including
differentiation from lower level courses, from similar courses
in the same department, and from courses in other departments
in
the University?
This course may be described as a traditional art history course of an
introductory nature. It attempts to do two things: develop an awareness of
the methods of art history, and develop such visual skills as are used by
art historians. There are presently no similar courses offered in the
university.
B.
What is the range of topics that may be dealt with in the course?
The topics will be the work of the following 18th century artists:
G. B. Tiepolo, Pietro Longhi, Canaletto, Francesco Guardi, Franceco
Piranesi, Watteau, Boucher, Fragonard, Magnasco, Mengs, Greuze,
,. Chardin, Hogarth, Reynolds, Gainsborough, Rowlandson, Benjamin West,
Copley, Peale, Gilbert Stuart, Sully, Romney, flaeburn, Lawrence, Etty,
Stubbs, Wilson, Cozens, Constable, Fuseli, Blake, Goya, Gericault, David
2.
SC. How does this course fit the goals of the program?
This is a traditional course in art history and is being offered as an
elective in response to student demand. It is not part of a degree
program.
D.
How does this course affect degree requirements?
No effect
E.
What are the calendar changes necessary to reflect the addition
of this course?
New course, addition.
F.
What course, if any, is being dropped from the calendar if
this course is approved?
None
C. What
is the nature of student demand for this course?
Petitions circulated by students indicates their-broad interest
in Fine Arts. This course would be a partial fulfillment of that demand.
H. Other reasons for
introducing the course.
. ?
3.
4. BUDGETARY AND SPACE FACTORS
A.
Which faculty will be available to teach this course?
A. J. Grants
B.
What are the special space and/or equipment requirements
for this course?
Lecture Theatre equiped with slide projector and screen
C.
Any other budgetary implications of mounting this course:
Addition of a' one-half faculty position to present university commitments.
Approval:
Dean of Division:
Senate:
\
DIVISION OF GENERAL STUDIES
0 ?
NEW COURSE PROPOSAL
1.
CALENDAR
INFORNATION
c,.
erfo-rniing--A-rts ?
200 ?
Modern Art and its
Program.
?
Course Number:
?
Title:
Mainsprings - the NtneteenL
Sub-title or Description:
?
Century
Introduction to the History of Modern Western Painting
Credit Hours:
?
Vector Description:
Pre-Requisite(s):
No pre-requisites
2.
ENROLI•NT AND SCHEDULING
Estimated Enrolment:
?
250
Semester Offered (e.g.
yearly, every Spring, twice yearly, Fall and
Spring):
Yearly
.
When will course first be
offered? Spring 1973
3.
JUSTIFICAfION
A.
What is the detailed description of the course including
differentiation from lower level courses, from similar courses
in
the same department, and from courses in other departments
in
the University?
This
course
may be described as a traditional art history course of an
introductory nature. It attempts to do two things: develop an awareness of
the methods of art history, and develop such visual skills as are used by
art historians. There are presently no similar courses offered in the
university.
B.
What is the range of topics that may be dealt with in the course?
The topics will be the work of the following 19th Century artists:
Delacroix, Ingres, Daurnier, Courbet, Rousseau, Dupre, Daubigny, Millet,
Corot, Manet Monet, Pissaro, Degas, Rodin, Renoir, Toulouse-Lautrec,
, Washington Allston, Thomas Cole, Homer, Thomas Eakins, Turner,
Bingham, Rossetti, William Morris, Hunt, Millais, Ruskin, Seurat,
Maillol, Van Gogh, Cezanne.
2.
C.
How does this course fit the goals of the program?
This is a traditional course in art history and is being offered as an
elective in response to student demand. It is not part of a degree
program.
D.
How does this course affect degree requirements?
No effect.
E.
What are the calendar changes necessary to reflect the addition
of this course?
New course, addition.
.
?
F. What course, if any, is being dropped from the calendar if
this course is approved?
None.
C. What
is the nature of student demand for this course?
Petitions circulated by students indicates their broad interest in
Fine Arts. This course would be a partial fulfillment of that demand.
H. Other
reasons for introducing the course.
.
?
3.
4. BUDGETARY AND SPACE FACTORS
A.
Which faculty will be available to teach this course?
A. J. Grants
B.
What are the special space and/or equipment requirements
for this course?
Lecture Theatre equiped with slide projector and screen.
C.
Any other budgetary implications of mounting this course:
Addition of a one-half faculty position to present university commitments.
Approval:
Dean of Division:
Senate:
's
