HUM 302 - Theories and Methods
Welcome to the course. I have posted separately the Grading Policy, Marks, Requirements. That's required reading.
Welcome to "Theories and Methods," a course offered by the Interdisciplinary Humanities Department.
I always prepare long course introductions, on the theory that you've got the right to know what you're getting into: "truth in packaging"! But also, if you're unfamiliar with the American university tradition, reading this will give you an idea of the professor's values, how he marks, what kind of work he's looking for in this class.
This course requires more than the usual number of disclaimers up front. First, the title. Like most Humanities Department courses, the title (chosen by a committee) tries to give room for interpretation to the greatest number of professors and students. Accordingly, each professor who teaches this course ventures into one or two clearings in this great forest, depending on his or her interests, education and abilities. We choose a part that will suggest the whole, and which will give you some methods with which to venture further into this endless forest on your own.
Our course involves asking deceptively simple questions about the stuff we see around us that people refer to as "art." We ask the first big question of "aesthetics": does the stuff have any value on its own, other than the obvious political or moral preaching it can do? Or magical. If a Cro Magnon paints a buffalo on a wall and hits it with his spear point for magical purposes, is that still "art"? We ask, did all countries at all times refer to the same stuff as "art?" How did they differ, and does it tell us anything about what everybody everywhere has always called "art"? Is there some core to it?
We ask DUMB questions you've suppressed since highschool. Why is there such a thing as verse drama? Or Opera? Or museums? Do we still need any of these? Art forms die all the time. Museums started off as curio cabinets and now they're almost an art form on their own.
Movies didn't start off as art, but as a technology that was going to be used to record stage plays that were art. How and why did movies turn into an art on their own?
Modern "avant garde" abstract art is so different from all Western art up to about the time of Constable, or the Impressionists. What happened? What hit art to make it change, after being pretty consistent for 2300 years?
Notice: although courses in History and Political Science would deal with history and politics of the arts, this is Interdisciplinary Humanities and we study cultures as expressed in their literature and arts. This isn't a poly sci course. I do art and literature and music, not history, though we'll certainly look at the historical contexts. (It's not wrong to have those other important interests, but they're fully addressed in other departments. You can already take courses on those topics there. And you should. This course complements those.)
Also, while it's very hard to say what a "great" work of art is, it's a simple matter of record which have been most influential. Madame Bovary, for instance, has been endlessly copied. One could also prove that art since 1890 can't be understood at all without knowing something about Monet and Van Gogh. That influences our choice of topics and artists. There may be some woman artist, for instance, who is much praised now, like Artemisia Gentilleschi. Even her partisans will insist that she was unjustly overlooked-- hence, uninfluential. We, in this course, won't be giving her the same amount of time we give a far more "influential" artist like Michelangelo or Van Gogh.
HOW HAS THIS PROFESSOR BEEN EVALUATED BY STUDENTS?
During the past fifteen years over 2500 students have, after Prof. Leonard's classes, filled out anonymous computer evaluations administered by SFSU, given to the professor only after the marks have been mailed. They are kept on departmental file. In answer to ten specific questions like "Was his grading fair?" "Was he available at stated office hours?" "Did he know his subject?" and so on, replies have averaged, with amazing consistency, about 80% "excellents", 17 percent "very goods," with 1 percent "good," 1 percent "poor" 1 percent "no opinion."
Though Prof Leonard has never taught 302 before, here are the optional anonymous written comments in full (both positive and negative comments) exactly as written for the very similar course Romanticism and Impressionism, compiled by Dept. Secretary Annette Speed:
2003
/I have never taken a class like this one! Prof. Leonard stimulated my curiosity about art more than one could ever imagine. This class was set up so as to "show" us the differences between eras such as, Romantics, Classics, Natural Supernaturalism and Impressionism. There was a trip to a museum to see first hand what were being lectured on. I thought this was wonderful, we had a chance to put his lecture with the true reality right before my eyes. Because of this class, I have become more interested in art, especially Impressionism. I have to give Prof. Leonard a great big thank you for bringing to me a whole new hobby.
/I don't even know where to start, Prof Leonard's classes are the classes many of us look for all our lives and through some wonderful fate eventually stumble into. He pushes us to learn and create and gives us the place and resource to do so. The subject matter is useful in its classic education nature so we have our basics (many of us are lucky) but it goes beyond that in his extensive research of the subject matter and his ability to relate it to students. To give us the heart of it. His classes are among the best I have ever taken. I learn more and in turn I can teach more. This and his other classes have and will impact my life for the better. There is no way to express the breadth of his impact on his students.
/Leonard is an excellent instructor, perhaps the best I've had (2nd time) and a valuable asset to SFSU. The HUM 407 course is invaluable, important, and fun. I will recommend the course and instructor.
/I knew the class was going to be fantastic from the combination of professor and subject, and it's lived up to my expectations so far. Prof. Leonard's lectures are prepared to the point of perfection. He works to draw everyone into the discussion, validating everyone's ideas equally. While there is no tolerance for slack, Prof. Leonard is willing to manipulate his curriculum to suit the needs of the class and the individual interests of the students. Couldn't be better!
/Professor Leonard organizes a dynamic, lucid, provocative and thoughtful course that enriches and enlightens the participant-- as well as stimulates one to continue to seek knowledge on one's own. He is masterfully adept at bringing illustrative material together into a synthesized whole that leaves one satisfied, enriched with understanding, and a bit awed at what sometimes approaches what can be called the (power) of his lecture. HUM 407 is one course that I expect to remember throughout my life. I highly recommend it.
/Prof. Leonard leads provocative and informative discussion sessions that really encourage the students to think creatively. He is exceedingly knowledgeable and willing to share his knowledge. The subject matter undertakes is extensive and diversified. I would be pleased to see him take on other courses.
/Until now, I have avoided taking classes teaching European art/history/culture, etc. because I hadn't found a professor that could effectively teach the impact of its contributions. As a Humanities major, I have investigated Asian, African and cross-cultural cultures and though it best to stay away from Europe. This class challenged my uneducated notions of European culture. This class has enriched my studies in other parts of the world through art and literature. Leonard did a superb job and redefined my limits in excellence.
/This is the second class that I am taking with Prof. Leonard. I have immensely enjoyed the first class I took and this class is as wonderful. I have learned a tremendous amount and was stimulated to realize how much more I need to know. This class has broadened my awareness of my immediate surroundings. It is a great class.
/Through his Imperial Cultures course, Prof. Leonard has stimulated my interest in art enough to look into art history as a minor. Tests and papers were due at the right dates, something I appreciate. It's the best course I've taken, truly interesting.
/Prof. Leonard's commentary on and discussion of the art of this period was very illuminating. I gained a greater understanding of the various styles of this period.
/The subject matter is wonderful and Prof. Leonard's presentation is outstanding. The only problem I incurred was a surprise eight page midterm that had not been mentioned in the syllabus. It has thrown off my studies for the rest of the semester. Magnitude and due dates of subjects should be a must for any syllabus.
/Professor Leonard could easily be classified as the best teacher I have ever had; not only is he extremely knowledgeable in many areas he takes our opinions seriously and never blows off our ideas or comments.
/This class is one of the best I've ever taken. I've never looked at art with such enthusiasm and excitement. I would take him again!
2005
/This was flat out the best class I have ever taken. Ever. Although this was my last class of the week, it was the one class I never missed. I found myself thinking, talking, telling people about the course and how amazing the teacher is. The most inspiring class I've had this far, I look forward to having more classes with Dr. Leonard as he always kept everything new and interesting. Thank you so much.
/Having a small class made the class more enjoyable. As well as the slides helped since the course had paintings dealing with the class. Having a variety of majors in the class also made the class better, variety helped the class become interesting.
/Dr. Leonard, I wasn't really sure that I even belonged in college when I enrolled in your course because it was the only class that had seats left. During this semester I have actually felt competent or interesting. My first semester here I was overwhelmed and really swallowed whole by militant, aggressive and pushy teachers and students. I really thought college was fore those who had money - great test scores, or a big mouth that was usually used for some politically arrogant statement. So all that in mind, I showed up and to my critical surprise I never dropped. Really it felt like you were actually speaking to me and more interestingly, it felt like the other students were actually listening. I really like the small class size. I loved the teaching style and angle. Doesn't hurt to be fed - me always being hungry. So thank you, great class. I think I'll stick around in this college thing. It could be worth it.
/This course provided a real "college" experience which many courses in the Humanities lack. It was an intimate environment where people were not afraid to speak, unlike other classes where the class size is more intimidating.
/As a student who sits towards the back, I feel having smaller classes allows those individuals to feel more involved in the class. When in a big lecture class, I could leave and the professor wouldn't really notice.
/The course was particularly beneficial to me as an intimate discussion source that was very valuable. A large class 'population' may have distracted from individual learning so I particularly enjoyed getting this type of setting considering that classes at SFSU are somewhat expensive and students don't always get what they pay for.
/I enjoyed the small format of the class. The content is easier to explain on an intimate level.
/It's helpful when classes are small because you are more focused, you get to know the professor, and you feel your opinions are more valued.
/I enjoyed the small setting of the course. It allowed for discussion that everyone could participate in. There should be more classes like this one.
/The class was very interesting and insightful. I fell like I learned a great deal about art. This class makes me want to learn more about the romantic and impressionist style of art.
/There have been things in this course that have really opened up my eyes. I enjoyed every session. I was just incredibly intimidated when it came to expressing myself during discussion. This class needs to be small.
METHODOLOGY: INTERDISCIPLINARY HUMANITIES
I've been trying to underline that the Interdisciplinary Humanities department is not the history, philosophy or political science department. We believe that when certain subjects or cultures flower into art objects, you can understand the even the history and politics better by considering those objects!
Of course, you have to learn how to "read" them. If you've never taken a course in this department before, you may need a little while to get the hang of it. To start, consider what Sir Kenneth Clark said at the start of his PBS series Civilisation. He quoted John Ruskin, who had claimed, "Great nations write their autobiographies in three manuscripts, the book of their deeds, the book of their words and the book of their art.
"Not one of these books can be understood unless we read the two others, but of the three the only trustworthy one is the last." Sir Kenneth said he thought that was true. "If I had to say which was telling the truth about society, a speech by a Minister of Housing or the actual buildings put up in his time, I should believe the buildings."
John Ruskin said elsewhere, "Tell me what you like, and I'll tell you who you are." You know this already. A lot of people will tell you, in all honesty, "I'm... a Christian... sort of a spiritual person." And where did you spend your vacation? "Vegas." What you like reveals more about who you really are, down there in your gut values, than what you claim about yourself-- even when you believe what you're claiming. When we study art objects, we're studying precisely what cultures liked-- and sometimes it tells a lot about them. (There are some supposedly Christian cultures, in fact, whose art is closer to Vegas.) In this department we study a culture's history and its philosophy, but we're careful to take a long look at what it likes. We'll look at carefully selected samples of both high art and popular art in this course. Popular art is very revealing. What people are willing to pay money for and admire just for fun without having it assigned can tell a lot about them!
THE MANNER OF THE COURSE
This course is fine for lower division students and non Humanities Majors. I have to say though, that our artists don't have a lot of sexual hangups, and frequently are out to challenge any that you yourself have.If you would never dream of taking a course in Human Sexuality, for instance, this course probably isn't for you.
This course's style is what the University officially terms "evolutionary": the course evolves with the students' interests. Starting with the questionnaire tonight I'll work at knowing your individual intellectual goals, then I'll alter the course to help you reach them.
I'll announce such changes well ahead of time in class, which is one reason attendance is required. If you're forced to miss a class, it's your responsibility to inquire if you missed any such updates or assignments.
After I've read what you've written about yourselves-- by next week, say-- you'll get not a schedule but a "probable order of topics to be discussed." At the course's beginning we'll stick to it fairly closely; as your interests emerge and I tailor the course to you, we'll refer less and less to the "probable order" sheet. Each class catches fire on certain topics and I try to help the class's interests unfold. Now I'm sure that sounds good, but be aware, folks, we'll pay a price: less clarity to the course outline. You may bring a book to class and find out we're not getting there till next week. Some students are from departments in which even the advanced courses are all geared to pre-printed readers. I let your inquiry, your understanding set the pace. The price we pay for freedom and flexibility will be a lack of comforting structure.
Speaking generally, in the humanities, we don't tell you what the answers are, we tell you what the big questions are. There's no one answer for all human conditions. Everyone comes up with a different one to fit themselves. You'll be encouraged to think for yourself.
MARKS
One important paper will require you to visit a museum. You don't have to attend my lecture there on a Saturday a few weeks from now that I'll give there. That lecture will be optional but the paper won't be. Another paper will require you to attend some other event related to this course, probably a student opera production if we're lucky enough to have them put one on. (Watching SFSU classmates try to sing that Olympic-level material is hair-raising, and when they do it, it's really cool.)
There will be a midterm and a comprehensive exam-- essays involving slides shown during the exam. If anyone wants to try to lock up an A by writing a fuller term paper, based on the museum trip or any other topic I approve, I will work with you, mark it, and figure it into your final mark as an extra credit in proportion to its length and difficulty.
There will be no early midterms or finals. Since class tests partly test you on the fact of class attendance, there'll be no make-ups. If you cut midterm class and miss a quiz that's an F on the quiz.
Latecomers will be cautioned. If people persistently come later (more than twice) I will lower a final grade by up to one entire grade.
For undergraduates, there's a minimum of fifteen pages of evaluated prose (that total includes the pages you write on your midterms and finals, however-- it doesn't mean a fifteen page term paper) and for graduates, slightly more. Grads: you must see me immediately to arrange your extra assignment. There are no late or early finals and no incompletes for the course!
THERE ARE NO INCOMPLETES IN THIS COURSE. The "incomplete" mark has been misused, in recent years, like that "late exam." I'm trying to be fair to every student who did the work in the time allowed. No special treatment means no late exams and no incompletes.
I follow the new University policy about W: after the midterm, they are only granted for cases of documented personal illness. You can't bomb out in the call and just before you get an F say, "Why don't we call it a W?"
GRADUATES: By departmental rule, you will have to do slightly longer projects and/or a short presentation. See me immediately. It's your responsibility to initiate and choose now.
COURTESY TO OTHER STUDENTS:
This is always very important, but in a course like this, it's all-important.
Courtesy to other students is a requirement for attendance. (Studies have shown, for instance, that women are more frequently interrupted when they try to speak in class.) All students will be encouraged to speak and guaranteed the right to a courteous hearing. After all: We can only discuss the explosive and personal topics like sex and gender if everyone agrees that overbearing behavior won't be tolerated in debate. You have to raise your hand, have to wait to be called on, can't just shout things out no matter how passionately you believe them. (Or how angry you are at hearing a religious or political position you think false, even offensive.) This course's topic require us to talk about exactly those things nice people aren't supposed to mention at a dinner party!
It's distressing to realize now that in some of my favorite college classes--the ones in which I was allowed to dominate the discussions-- my favorite profs weren't really doing their job. If you're the kind of student I was, I'd better ask your help, and patience, in advance. Everyone must get a chance.
By the same token, ignoring the student who has the floor by doing other school work or engaging in side discussions is rude. Any student speaking merits your attention, and his or her ideas merit your consideration. When an excellent student insults an average student this way it's worse. Shouldering other students aside who have raised their hand and waited their turn to speak is unacceptable.
Anyone who is routinely discourteous to the other students will be warned; if the discourteous behavior continues, that student will have to be dropped from the course. (That's never happened, but I'm leaving the possibility open.) You've been read these rules on the first night, and by continuing to attend, you agree to follow them. (Civilization, Freud said, is discontent.)
ARE YOU OFFENDED BY CERTAIN TOPICS? READ THIS PART CAREFULLY.
If a student signs up for one of our Human Sexuality courses, he or she thereby gives up the right to march out of class complaining they're being shown "dirty pictures."
There's a parallel with our course. Our writers and artists are often out to confront you with topics which make nice people uncomfortable. If frank discussion of sex, God, racial prejudices or ethnic or gender stereotypes makes you very uncomfortable, this isn't the course for you. We've no interest in offending anyone! Guideline: If you would never dream of taking a Human Sexuality course, for instance, you might feel uneasy, at times, here. We read masterworks which demand we re-examine our attitudes to religion, sex, race-- everything you're never supposed to mention in polite conversation. That's our job. We're professionals.
We'll see a lot of Romanticism, which championed love, beauty, honor, sex and the rights of the individual to joy-- particularly the joy of freedom. The Romantics are out to provoke us, out to shatter all easy assumptions about what men and women want. Students who read Stendhal or view works by Delacroix must be able to patiently consider all points of view, even alarming ones. Course requirement: In classes and papers we will practice the romantic value of personal freedom in its essence, free speech. Everyone's opinions will receive a courteous (if not always credulous) hearing.
A discussion of Delacroix's The Death of Sardanapalus, for instance, may lead us to discuss attitudes to gender-- that is, what this culture thinks it means to be A Man, A Woman. We always try to relate the material to our lives, and in the course of that, many of us choose to share anecdotes and stories. (You don't have to, of course! But as you get to know each other, many people have relevant stories to share. Taking what you've learned home to your life and seeing if it fits what you've experienced is at the heart of being a real college student.) When we discuss topics that really matter to us, it's inevitable that, in the course of the term, we hear something we disagree with strongly. How strongly? Remember, some of us think abortion is murder, others think certain sex roles a form of violence, etc.
The 19th Century Romantics were trying to shock some deeper sense into a materialistic culture that thought human beings were simple machines, payable with simple pleasures. When Stendhal has a sophisticated heroine, astonished to be in love, chop off her hair and offer it to her lover, crying "I renounce the use of my reason! You are my master!" it still shocks most of us. It may even offend you. But announcing you're offended would be irrelevant-- just as if you were studying Variations in Human Sexuality. You're expected to be a professional here. If you choose to be in this course, you're agreeing to handle yourself professionally, almost clinically, in class, analyzing calmly ideas for which you may feel distaste. That's an important skill to have in a free society.
We're looking for people who can discuss these matters with each other frankly while keeping their professional balance and their sense of humor. Some of the best works we study use humor every chance they get-- these subjects sometimes cut so close to the bone only laughter can ease the tension.
But you're entitled to your personal tastes! If you suspect you'll be unbearably offended-- religiously, politically, personally-- do not choose this course. (Or ask me for more details so you can decide.) We're not here to hurt anyone's feelings.
No-one will be allowed to continue in class who refuses to allow other students to express their opinions, no matter how "offensive" he or she decides those opinions are. As a veteran of the American Civil Liberties Union I defend free speech. The Constitution gives no-one the "right" not to be insulted, because the free flow of ideas is vital to our survival. One of our most distinguished professors, Betty Medsger, back from a year researching the neo-Nazis in Germany, concluded (I quote inexactly, from memory): "We have to help our students gain courage: the courage to let all ideas be expressed, even ideas we hate; and then the courage to oppose those ideas. We have to help students know the importance of not shutting each other up."
I dwell on this at such length because I don't want anyone to have a bad experience, and because I've learned that my courses, since they're discussion courses, depend on who shows up for them.
They rely so much on free discussion, it works almost like a dinner party: if the mix is right, it's great, if not, nothing can help it.
Having even one tense, doctrinaire person at the dinner table can kill the conversation and start everyone peeking at their watches. Once every few years we get just one or two people like that, and then it's like having to watch a shouting match between two true believers handing out leaflets in front of the Student Union. The years this course has worked, however-- it has been exciting. After all, these aren't bland, academic subjects! Far from it! We'll just have to wait and see.
Into the Light of Things
Principles of Art History Writing
Voltaire's Candide Entire book. Read the excellent introduction to understand the situation, and to remind yourself that this may be a short comic novel, but it's from THE major philosopher of the French Age of Reason.
Madame de Pompadour
"Elegy for an Age," by John D. Rosenberg
"While Europe Slept," by Bruce Bawer
French Revolution, Terror, and Romanticism
OFFICE HOURS: "Please bother me."
"Please bother me" was a sign I saw on a reference librarian's desk. Students don't seem to realize that teaching one-to-one is the fun part. Also, the better I learn your interests, the better I can steer the classwork towards them.
Students have felt that office hours right before class and afterward, made me most accessible. Beyond that, I've spread my hours over the widest variety of times, so that students with almost any schedule can catch me in.
No more email. Face to face is still by far the best way to teach. I'd like to see everybody at least once. If you come from a culture which makes you unfamiliar with the "office hours" concept, be sure to come! Don't let my manner scare you off, people from New York don't smile a lot. And a New York novelist-- man, that's INTENSE. I'm your coach, I want to see you.
The hours are posted outside my door, HUM 530. Appointments aren't required, but I always appreciate the advance notice. It's also a good way to avoid showing up on a day when I've suddenly been pressed into service on some committee. My office phone is 338-7428 and there's an answering machine. I return calls! Messages are best left in my mailbox in the Humanities Department office, hum 410-411. If it's very urgent, our excellent secretary, Ms. Annette Speed, can contact me at home. She's at 338-1830.
Well, now all the stern, official professor stuff has been said, and I can just say, welcome to the course! I look forward to meeting you and to hearing your ideas. This is a special course and it always attracts some really special people.