Here is the synopsis of our sample research paper on Art/Floris, Tolstoy & Collingwood. Have the paper e-mailed to you 24/7/365.
Essay / Research Paper Abstract
A 10 page research paper that examines a work by Frans Floris. In 1562, artist Frans Floris (1516-1570), the leading painter in sixteenth-century Antwerp and a forerunner of Rubens in his use of transparent glazes, created a complex work The Sacrifice of Christ Protecting Humanity (Frans Floris, 2005). This evaluation of this art addresses this work as a means for understanding two theories of art, one formulated by R.G. Collingwood and the other by Leo Tolstoy. Bibliography lists 6 sources.
Page Count:
10 pages (~225 words per page)
File: D0_khfloris.rtf
Buy This Term Paper »
Unformatted sample text from the term paper:
Sacrifice of Christ Protecting Humanity (Frans Floris, 2005). This work, which is painted on wood and is 1.65 m. tall and 2.3 m. wide is on display in the Louvre(Frans
Floris, 2005). The following evaluation of this art addresses this work as a means for understanding two theories of art, one formulated by R.G. Collingwood and the other by Leo
Tolstoy. However, before specifically detailing how Floris art demonstrates these theories, it is first necessary to outline the parameters of each authors perception of art. Tolstoy In his essay
What is Art? Leo Tolstoy, the renown Russian novelist, divides his discussion into three principal categories: art as opposed to non-art; art in general as compared to art that fits
the "full meaning of the word"; and good art versus bad art (Jahn, 2000). While each of these categories provides a specific function within Tolstoys theory, it is often
problematic for the reader to keep the various categories segregated (Jahn, 2000). Addressing this problem, Jahn (2000) observes that the adjectives "good" and "bad" are used normally by Tolstoy only
in regards to a moral sense. Therefore, when Tolstoy characterizes a specific work as "bad art," it means that the work itself fits his aesthetic criteria for art, but
that he considers its effect on the public to be morally bad (Jahn, 2000). Of course, in the typical connotation "bad art" is far closer to what Tolstoy would call
"non-art" or "weak art" (Jahn, 2000). However, for Tolstoy "non-art" is something else altogether and the concept of "weak art" has no meaning within his cognitive framework. Tolstoy
use of the words "feeling" and "religious perception" are similarly confusing, yet both of these concept are of critical importance to his aesthetic theory. Jahn (2000) argues that the word
...