1.6: Tools of the Trade – Formal and Art Historical Analysis

How to Look At (and Think About) Art

By Sarah Churchill

In the discipline of art history, the artist and his labors form the objects of our scholarly interest. Our research, which considers not only what the art looks like, but what the works means, involves what we call "formal analysis" and "art historical research." With formal analysis, we are trying to understand the appearance of the work as a series of purposeful choices made by the artist. We seek to know why these choices were made and how they contribute to the overall impact and meaning of the work. With art historical research, we seek to understand the social, cultural, economic and historical contexts in which artists live and work. This involves reading primary and secondary resources in order to learn about the conditions of artistic production. We will discuss each of these in greater detail below.

When art historians look at and think about art, many questions come to mind. These may include: Why does a work look as it does? Who made the work? Why did they make it? What does it mean? In what style was the work produced? What is the work's purpose? Who was it produced for? By using both formal analysis and art historical research, we come to understand how the work of art communicates as it does. We can also begin to understand how meaning can change over time or how meaning is impacted by contexts of display (an altar in a church versus an altar on display in a museum for example) and layers of time and space. As Picasso explained, a picture "lives a life like a living creature…the picture lives only through the man who is looking at it.”

Picasso's statement here reminds us that while artists create with specific intentions, works of art are also socially produced, influenced by politics, religion, culture and social circumstances and even by our own biases and experiences. We too bring something to the study of art. According to James Elkins, art doesn’t “speak”, we speak for it. As viewers we bring our own meanings into the study of art and we draw understanding from our own experiences. Therefore, it's important that we understand our own critical thinking. As art historians, we learn to separate subjective responses and opinions from that which is observably true and objective.

Formal Analysis: Making Thinking Visible

Why is art so compelling? Formal analysis, or a detailed examination of the physical object itself and the elements and principles of design that make up a work of art, gives you the language to describe and understand your experience with art more fully. Basically, formal analysis is the means by which you slow down and observe different aspects of the work of art, like the use of color or textures, and consider how the work's observable characteristics contribute to the meaning or function of the work. It is a process that helps to make our own thinking more visible.

In formal analysis, we temporarily put aside questions of historical context to focus solely on what the work looks like. Here we develop detailed descriptions of the visual properties and analyze the impact and effect of these characteristics on the work as a whole. A series of broken, jagged lines, for example, can communicate aggression. It might make you feel uneasy. Conversely, a smooth, meandering line can signal playfulness. Your response as a viewer may be one of joy or pleasure. Color, composition, texture, etc. all play a part in the way the work of art communicates its meaning to the viewer.

The process of carefully looking and then reflecting on what you're observing reveals what the brain does automatically when you experience a work of art. First you observe, then you analyze and react. Formal analysis slows this process down and helps you to understand it better. It forces you to carefully consider the choices an artist has made and the effects of these decisions upon the viewer.

Although your subjective (personal) response is part of a formal analysis, judgment ("I like" or "I don't like;" "This is beautiful," or "This is not beautiful") is not the end goal in formal analysis. Rather, formal analysis deconstructs our thinking about works of art. With slow, careful observation, we begin to unpack a work of art by understanding the series of choices the artist has made. Formal analysis helps us to understand both artistic intentions and our own thinking more deeply. The video below provides a useful example of formal analysis in action.

Formal (or Visual) Analysis "How To" - a Quick Start Guide

It helps to organize your looking according to the various elements of principles of design (see section 1.2), skipping any that don't necessarily apply to the work your analyzing. Creating a chart or mind map is also a useful way to collect your thoughts. The categories below will help you get started.

• size/scale
• line
• color
• composition
• material (or medium)
• form (or shapes)
• light (or tone)
• textures or patterns

1. Begin by considering the piece as a whole. Note your sensations and subjective reactions but put them aside. You’ll come back to them later.

2. Create a brief “snapshot” that describes, in a sentence or two, what it is you’re looking at. This snapshot might also be understood as the subject matter or narrative of the work Ex. "A portrait of a young woman with red hair in a white dress holding a black cat lovingly in her lap." or "A seascape featuring an enormous clipper ship being tossed in an angry black sea at dusk." Remember that a subject need not be figurative or narrative. Abstract art also has a subject, though the subject might be color or form itself!

3. What do you see? Look at the work in detail. Consider the qualities of color, line, form, etc. and make notes about what you observe. Use the list of categories provided to help organize your observations, or create your own. Use lots of describing words. No detail is too small! Questions listed below will help you get started:

• What colors are used? Are they warm or cool? Are they harmonious or do they clash? Ex. "burnt orange sun - contrasts with cobalt sky"
• What shapes or forms do you see? Are they amorphous, rectangular, figurative etc.?
• What materials are used? (oil paint, graphite, marble, stone, metal, fabric. etc.)
• Are there words, numbers or letters?
• Are there any recognizable figures or is the work abstract?
• Notice line if it exists. Describe it in detail: fluid, curving, sharp, wide, dashed, etc. "solid, thin and snaking line is used to suggest the edges of the various forms of a desk and chair"
• Is the work three-dimensional or flat?
• Is the space deep or shallow? Explain your answer.
• Describe the light. Where does it fall? Are parts of the image obscured by light or lack of it?

4. Support evaluative statements ("I feel like," or "this looks like") with visual evidence. What do you see that makes you say that? Ex. "I think the woman in the painting is sad because she holds her head in hands and looks away from us. Her body language, which is hunched over, suggests that she is in pain." Be careful not to assume anything - always be asking yourself, "what's the visual evidence that supports this idea?"

5. Consider the role of each of the elements you've observed in contributing to the work's meaning or function. Refer back to your initial subjective reaction here. A night sky, for example, may feel peaceful or ominous, depending upon specific choices the artist has made. Ask why different elements of the work operate as they do. Why did the artist choose these colors, textures, composition, etc.?

6. Discuss meaning of the work only after you’ve carefully considered formal properties and analyzed their purpose within the larger work. Revisit your initial reactions. Have they changed? Which of the formal elements you observed made you feel that way? If your feelings have shifted, why?

Art Historical Analysis:

Clearly, there are limits to what art historians can understand about a work just by looking at it! In order to get at the context of how or why a work was produced, or what it might mean, we must incorporate additional resources and information. With art historical analysis, we compare what we see against what we know of the longer timeline of art history. We might, for example, compare a painting or sculpture against other works with which it may share stylistic characteristics. Or, we may look for ways in which the work in question is different from other works from the same period or by the same artist. Comparison can tell art historians an awful lot about meaning and production in art.

We also consult primary and secondary resources to learn about the conditions and circumstances of artistic production. Primary resources are an immediate, first-hand account and include legal documents, newspaper articles, speeches, diaries, letters, interviews, archival records, auto-biographies, economic data, ledgers and photographs. A secondary resource is one step away from the primary resource. The author has consulted the primary resources and is distilling and analyzing them for you, the reader. A secondary resource may include a survey text, an anthology, a biography, a scholarly article or a documentary.

Art historians use both formal analysis and historical research to understand better the history of art. Note in the video below how the narrators, Beth Harris and Steven Zucker, consider Goya's Third of May (1808). They begin with a formal analysis before moving on to a discussion of the subject matter (or narrative). Finally, the historical context of the painting's production is explored. As you watch, make note of all the different kinds of questions Harris and Zucker pose of the painting and then see if you can determine what kinds of evidence and which methods of research (formal or historical) were used to answer them. The video's conclusion illustrates how formal analysis, subject matter and historical research can be brought together to illuminate how and why Goya's Third of May remains such an arresting painting.