• Subject-by-subject: Organizing the body of the paper in this way involves writing everything that you want
to say about Moreland’s painting rst (in a series of paragraphs) before moving on to everything
about the ceramic bottle (in a series of paragraphs). Using our example, after the introduction, you
could include a paragraph that discusses the positioning of the animals in Moreland’s painting,
another paragraph that describes the depiction of the pigs’ surroundings, and a third explaining the
role of geometry in forming the animals. You would then follow this discussion with paragraphs
focused on the same topics, in the same order, for the ancient South American vessel. You could
then follow this discussion with a paragraph that synthesizes all of the information and explores the
signicance of the comparison.
• Point-by-point: This strategy, in contrast, involves discussing a single point of comparison or contrast for
both objects at the same time. For example, in a single paragraph, you could examine the use of
color in both of our examples. Your next paragraph could move on to the differences in the gures’
setting or background (or lack thereof).
Tread lightly
As our use of “pig-like” in this section indicates, titles can be misleading. Many titles are assigned by curators
and collectors, in some cases years after the object was produced. While the ceramic vessel is titled
Bottle in
the Form of a Pig
, the date and location suggest it may depict a peccary, a pig-like species indigenous to Peru.
As you gather information about your objects, think critically about things like titles and dates. Who assigned
the title of the work? If it was someone other than the artist, why might they have given it that title? Don’t
always take information like titles and dates at face value.
Be cautious about considering contextual elements not immediately apparent from viewing the objects
themselves unless you are explicitly asked to do so (try referring back to the prompt or assignment
description; it will often describe the expectation of outside research). You may be able to note that the
artworks were created during different periods, in different places, with different functions. Even so, avoid
making broad assumptions based on those observations. While commenting on these topics may only require
some inference or notes from class, if your argument demands a large amount of outside research, you may
be writing a different kind of paper. If so, check out the next section!
3. Research papers
Some assignments in art history ask you to do outside research (i.e., beyond both formal analysis and lecture
materials). These writing assignments may ask you to contextualize the visual materials that you are
discussing, or they may ask you to explore your material through certain theoretical approaches. More
specically, you may be asked to look at the object’s relationship to ideas about identity, politics, culture, and
artistic production during the period in which the work was made or displayed. All of these factors require you
to synthesize scholars’ arguments about the materials that you are analyzing. In many cases, you may nd
little to no research on your specic object. When facing this situation, consider how you can apply scholars’
insights about related materials and the period broadly to your object to form an argument. While we cannot
cover all the possibilities here, we’ll highlight a few factors that your instructor may task you with
investigating.