What makes a painting good?: an enquiry into the criteria used in evaluation
- Authors: Frost, Lola
- Date: 1988
- Subjects: Painting -- Appreciation
- Language: English
- Type: Thesis , Masters , MFA
- Identifier: vital:2461 , http://hdl.handle.net/10962/d1008542
- Description: From introduction: "To affirm that a work of art is good or bad is to commend or condemn, but not describe . Thus criticism does not, and cannot, have the impersonal character and strict rules applicable independently of time and place," .. . (Macdonald 1966: 111) "Criticism and appraisal, too, are more like creation than like demonstration and proof." (Macdonald 1966: 112) This essay articulates evaluatory criteria that are used by both critics and laymen and which are cross -culturally applicable. Thus it seeks to articulate relatively objective types of criteria which we all use when evaluating paintings. This essay articulates fixed and objective criteria, but within these categories recognizes that there is much room for skillful, sympathetic and knowledgeable criticism. Thus criticism is a creative act. These objectively- articulated criteria are best seen as aids to, rather than carbon copies, for evaluation.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 1988
- Authors: Frost, Lola
- Date: 1988
- Subjects: Painting -- Appreciation
- Language: English
- Type: Thesis , Masters , MFA
- Identifier: vital:2461 , http://hdl.handle.net/10962/d1008542
- Description: From introduction: "To affirm that a work of art is good or bad is to commend or condemn, but not describe . Thus criticism does not, and cannot, have the impersonal character and strict rules applicable independently of time and place," .. . (Macdonald 1966: 111) "Criticism and appraisal, too, are more like creation than like demonstration and proof." (Macdonald 1966: 112) This essay articulates evaluatory criteria that are used by both critics and laymen and which are cross -culturally applicable. Thus it seeks to articulate relatively objective types of criteria which we all use when evaluating paintings. This essay articulates fixed and objective criteria, but within these categories recognizes that there is much room for skillful, sympathetic and knowledgeable criticism. Thus criticism is a creative act. These objectively- articulated criteria are best seen as aids to, rather than carbon copies, for evaluation.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 1988
Work in Progress issue no.52
- COSATU
- Authors: COSATU
- Date: 1988
- Subjects: COSATU
- Language: English
- Type: text
- Identifier: http://hdl.handle.net/10962/173573 , vital:42385
- Description: As this edition of Work In Progress was going to print the state effectively banned 17 organisations and an undisclosed number of individuals, and severely restricted the Congress of South African Trade Unions. By doing this the government of State President PW Botha has escalated its ongoing war against the people of South and Southern Africa. Precisely why the state chose to act this way at this time is not clear. Visible resistance to apartheid in the townships has declined under the burden of emergency rule, and popular political and community organisation has been severely weakened. One possibility is that government is attempting to limit the massive resistance expected against the October local government elections, including the boycott call made by a number of those organisations effected by the latest clampdown. But whatever the reason, there remains no excuse whatsoever for believing that ‘reformers’ within the state hold any power. If the distinction between ‘militarists’ and ‘reformers’ is real, then the militarists have so obviously won ascendency that talk of ‘reformers’ wielding influence in government is absurd. There is even less excuse for those elements which stubbornly hold to the belief that the Botha administration has a reform programme. There is no doubt that it has plans to change the face of South Africa. So did the Nationalist government of Verwoerd. But it was never suggested that this involved ‘reform’. Change can be for the worse - and this is what the changes being made by Botha’s militarists involve. South Africa is a society at war. Government is at war with the majority of South Africans and Namibians, with the Angolan nation, and with the majority of frontline states. In Natal, it seems unwilling or unable to use the might of its laws against the vigilante perpetrators of a bloody and enduring civil war. On the labour front, its proposed amendment to the Labour Relations Act, combined with emergency restrictions on Cosatu, aim to close down trade union organisation or render it impotent. This war against the working class has another side, seen in Botha’s new economic deal, the wage freeze and moves to privatise substantial areas of the public sector. Many of the articles in this issue of WIP deal with facets of this war - from the ANC’s armed struggle to Botha’s economic war against the working class; from the Maritzburg civil war to allegations of riot police on the rampage in townships. Government’s 24 February banning of organisations and individuals, and the restrictions on Cosatu activity, must be seen in this context of a society at war with itself.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 1988
- Authors: COSATU
- Date: 1988
- Subjects: COSATU
- Language: English
- Type: text
- Identifier: http://hdl.handle.net/10962/173573 , vital:42385
- Description: As this edition of Work In Progress was going to print the state effectively banned 17 organisations and an undisclosed number of individuals, and severely restricted the Congress of South African Trade Unions. By doing this the government of State President PW Botha has escalated its ongoing war against the people of South and Southern Africa. Precisely why the state chose to act this way at this time is not clear. Visible resistance to apartheid in the townships has declined under the burden of emergency rule, and popular political and community organisation has been severely weakened. One possibility is that government is attempting to limit the massive resistance expected against the October local government elections, including the boycott call made by a number of those organisations effected by the latest clampdown. But whatever the reason, there remains no excuse whatsoever for believing that ‘reformers’ within the state hold any power. If the distinction between ‘militarists’ and ‘reformers’ is real, then the militarists have so obviously won ascendency that talk of ‘reformers’ wielding influence in government is absurd. There is even less excuse for those elements which stubbornly hold to the belief that the Botha administration has a reform programme. There is no doubt that it has plans to change the face of South Africa. So did the Nationalist government of Verwoerd. But it was never suggested that this involved ‘reform’. Change can be for the worse - and this is what the changes being made by Botha’s militarists involve. South Africa is a society at war. Government is at war with the majority of South Africans and Namibians, with the Angolan nation, and with the majority of frontline states. In Natal, it seems unwilling or unable to use the might of its laws against the vigilante perpetrators of a bloody and enduring civil war. On the labour front, its proposed amendment to the Labour Relations Act, combined with emergency restrictions on Cosatu, aim to close down trade union organisation or render it impotent. This war against the working class has another side, seen in Botha’s new economic deal, the wage freeze and moves to privatise substantial areas of the public sector. Many of the articles in this issue of WIP deal with facets of this war - from the ANC’s armed struggle to Botha’s economic war against the working class; from the Maritzburg civil war to allegations of riot police on the rampage in townships. Government’s 24 February banning of organisations and individuals, and the restrictions on Cosatu activity, must be seen in this context of a society at war with itself.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 1988