AHIS V3437

By reviewing Culpa, it is clear that anyone who wrote a less than sparkling view for this teacher has no understanding of art history. The complaints against Professor Rosand's style of speaking and analyses do great injustice to the art history curriculum at Barnard and Columbia. If anyone is wondering about his capabilities as a teacher, the existing reviews are extremely misleading. He is a world-renowned scholar of Venetian painting. Those who do not appreciate his scholarship clearly do not appreciate art historical study in general.

The readings were especially interesting. Two papers graded by the TA. The midterm and final can be difficult, but not impossible. I'm not an Art History major by any means, but with a little elbow grease everything turned out fine!

Professor Cole is a very knowledgeable and intelligent professor. His lectures are fantastically fascinating, and so is his choice of material to cover. There were many moments when I found myself staring at the projector screen in the darkness at a work I had seen countless times before, and suddenly become overwhelmed by its beauty. All to Professor Cole's narration, of course. He talks quickly and quietly, so it's important to get a seat close to the action, because you'll want to hear every word he says! Sometimes I wish Professor Cole would use a microphone, but that would definitely take away from the intimacy of his lectures.

Sometimes, his lectures kick ass. and sometimes...they just didnt make sense! the man can ramble like a pro, and he sometimes never makes it back to a point. he talked about somethings WAY too much, and other things, he barely touched on...its a bit hard to handle, but overall, i found myself enjoying the class. that being said, they graded the papers pretty harshly, which is stupid since there was only one writing assignment. and he put images on the final that were DETAILS of paintings rather than the entire painting, which i didnt think was really kosher.

One mid-term exam (30%) + one final exam (40%) - lots of memorization and as stated above, you must be very good with your readings because he won't cover them directly. And one final term paper (40%) that tests the critical skills you've supposedly picked up in class. He's a tough grader. "Excellent essay" with no criticism means a B+ (boo hoo).

David Rosand speaks slowly, deliberately, and carefully. This is both good and bad. It's convenient because it allows the student to reflect and digest the presented material, which is very rewarding in its own way. But it's also horrible because Professor Rosand hardly defines his terms or takes the time to elaborate; when he says "coiffure" he means hair, when he says that " Euclid in the School of Athens represents the 'harmo-chordic' representations of the universe, despite the fact that he's presented as an ally of Plato instead of Aristotle", you kind of wonder what the hell he's talking about. You must heed his advice on the importance of independent learning or you may be in trouble. You'll notice that 80% of the 20 page syllabus lists the "reccomended/suggested" reading sections, so understand that he wants us to be independent learners. Just grab onto one of your picked up interests and stick with it. Also, make sure you're very careful with the required readings; Professor Rosand will throw curveballs at you during test time - for midterms, the question was "Discuss what Vasari means by the 'Modern Style' ", despite never going into depth with Vasari. This class can only be highly beneficial if you have time and passion, two things that have a hard time to simultaneously coeexist at Columbia! So stick with your practical guns and be good to yourself with Rosand!

If spending 4 classes on the Sistine Chapel ceiling sounds boring to you, don't take this class--it's for people who enjoy this sort of thing. In this class, Prof. Rosand used an object-based approach to examine the concept of the High Renaissance, focusing on Leonardo, Michelangelo, Raphael, Titian, and Giorgione. Although he did spend too much time on the Florentine artists, leaving only a few classes to cover Venetian painting, which is one of his areas of expertise, this fault only points up his absorption in the material. Rosand's lectures tended to focus on the main points of readings, making it possible for the lazier student to get by. On the other hand, the midterm and final did require a good command of the images, but that will come to anyone who goes to class and does a moderate amount of reading.