» Reminders
· Project 2 wrap-up tasks due (S 08-Nov): Reflec­tion & Pro­posal
· Due S 11/15: Exer­cise 2 Art Event review — Instruc­tions below

 
Act III   Post-Internet Art
Project: Praxis Proposal

 
M 10-Nov                Read/discuss: Fibrecul­ture issue 7   *choose 1 arti­cle
(see list of 9 under “Arti­cles”: Tofts, Mun­ster, et al through Arm­strong)
— please post your selec­tion below

Dis­cuss: inno­vat­ing dis­ci­pli­nary con­ven­tions + art dis­course
— also Project 3 Introduction

 
 

W 12-Nov     Con­tinue using Fibrecul­ture issue 7  arti­cle                     

» Focus: “Dis­trib­uted Aesthetics”

 
                    
Due: Blog entry (+ class­mate com­ment Thurs.)

— Dis­cuss term/concept from cho­sen arti­cle + con­nect to your major/field

 
 
 
F 14-Nov   Inde­pen­dent Work: ArtEvent Review (Exercise)

• Post what event attend­ing to review.

• Post exam­ple review (read for mod­el­ing — dis­ci­pline spe­cific conventions)

 
 
» Due (S 15-Nov) Art Event Review (Exer­cise 2) — Prompt/Instructions below

 
 
 

MFA 2014 Fall The­sis Exhi­bi­tion
CU Art Museum

 

 

 

Novem­ber 14 - Uni­ver­sity Theatre

In their shared MFA the­sis show, chore­o­g­ra­phers Kris­ten Dema­ree and Sara Roy­bal explore cul­ture and self-identification with fresh new pieces that uti­lize and upend clas­si­cal bal­let and folk­loric dance.

 

 
 

---

 

Art Event Review (Exer­cise 2)

Due S 15-Nov
500 words (min. / 750 words max); 1 image/video
10 points (see exer­cise guide­lines)

 
» Task: Com­pose review of event/exhibit (in-person dis­play, per­for­mance) attended — in style suit­able to dis­ci­pline, apply­ing con­ven­tions of dis­course com­mu­nity (as observed in model/example).

You might imag­ine writ­ing for the pub­li­ca­tion of the model you observed, con­sid­er­ing edi­to­r­ial stan­dards and audi­ence expec­ta­tions.
Or, con­sider blog [as] pub­lish­ing: read­ers of your review likely include those who have attended or plan to attend the local event/exhibit.
In either case, thor­oughly con­sider audi­ence, apply­ing rhetor­i­cal aware­ness and under­stand­ing of dis­ci­pli­nary writ­ing con­ven­tions of your field. For instance, don’t for­get an over­all assess­ment (the­sis); con­text or con­nec­tion to field/movement, and a con­clu­sion (e.g. broader sig­nif­i­cance or relevance?)

Remem­ber (impor­tant): as review this should be crit­i­cal with spe­cific exam­ples, while lim­it­ing summary/description (what would edi­tor expect/advise? what do read­ers expect?)
While this is a straight­for­ward review — apply­ing con­ven­tions rec­og­nized — not nec­es­sar­ily con­cern­ing net­worked media ecol­ogy, you cer­tainly might also dis­cuss some of our recent top­ics like ambiance, speci­ficity of site and mate­ri­al­ity, audi­ence expe­ri­ence, etc; per­haps con­sider, to inform your review (left implied), or to dis­cuss in con­clu­sion.