OnlineNursingOwl
← All nursing posts

Political Science · Studypool

Political Science Question

Post ID: 3069635

Overview

1. ASSESSMENT 1: Exhibition Review (15%) - 500 words.

The artwork I have chosen is: Narcissister’s three-metre-tall hanging sculpture ‘(Almost) all of my dead mother’s beautiful things’ centres on the crushing weight of beauty ideals that are passed from one generation to another. It is at the Cult of Beauty exhibition at the Wellcome Collection.

Before you start, have a look at some information about the artwork, click on the link and scroll down to the bit where it talks about Narcissister’s three-metre-tall hanging sculpture. Read the audio transcript too for more info.

https://wellcomecollection.org/guides/exhibitions/...

  • Introduce the artwork and artist.
  • Reflect on the reasons you were particularly drawn to this work.
  • Explain what the work reveals about beauty and how this relates to debates in Gender and Politics.
  • Evaluate where possible the strengths and/or weaknesses of the work.
  • Reference at least ONE text from the core/additional/supplementary reading list (“The Cult of Beauty” and Topics 1, 2 and 3)

Thats these readings below:

  1. Naomi Wolff (1991) The Beauty Myth. Vintage. Below you will find a PDF copy of the first chapter (The Beauty Myth)
  2. Reina Lewis (2019) Modest Body Politics: The Commercial and Ideological Intersect of Fat, Black, and Muslim in the Modest Fashion Market and Media. Fashion Theory, Volume 23, Issue 2, pp. 243–273
  3. Link to Topic 1 - What is gender? - use reading: R.W. Connell (2009) “The question of gender,” in Short Introductions: Gender in World Perspective. Cambridge, Polity Press, pp. 1-12.
  4. Link to topic 2 - Rethinking sex and gender - use reading: Judith Butler (1993) Bodies That Matter. On the Discursive Limits of ‘Sex’. New York: Routledge. Please read the Preface (pp. ix-xii), Introduction (only pp. 1-16) and the section “Gender Perfomativity and Drag” in Chapter 8, “Critically Queer” (pp. 230-233).
  5. Link to topic 3 - Intersectionality: Uses and abuses - use reading: Audre Lorde (1981) The Uses of Anger. Women's Studies Quarterly 9(3), pp. 7-10.
  6. Photograph of an exhibition installation showing a solitary chair placed in the centre of a blue circular plinth. Under the chair are a pair of silver stilettos. Above the chair, a multitude of objects seem to be falling out down from the dark ceiling. These objects include clothes, photo albums and furniture.Thats the photo of the artwork.

2. ASSESSMENT 2: ARTICLE REVIEW [500 words]

Select ONE core text from the Topics covered in the first half of Semester B (from 1 to 6) and write an article review (max. 500. words).

The core text I have chosen is

  • Kimberlé Crenshaw (1989) Demarginalizing the intersection of race and sex: A black feminist critique of antidiscrimination doctrine, feminist theory and antiracist politics. University of Chicago Legal forum 139, pp. 139-168.

The article review should include the following:

  • Summarise the argument(s) of the text.
  • Explain how the argument(s) of the text relates to perspectives/ debates in Gender and Politics.
  • Evaluate where possible the strengths and/or weaknesses of the text.
  • Conclude by providing a brief discussion of the overall contribution of the text to our understanding of the topic.

You can bring in other texts from the module reading list if relevant and to offer a comparison, expand or challenge a point raised or justify any claims made. Remember, however, that the focus should remain on the text under review. You may use the readings I put for the first assessment above and/or the readings down below:

Consider the following questions when writing your review:

  1. How does the text you are reviewing relate to other ideas that you have read or come across?
  2. How comprehensive / partial is the information provided in the text? What else would you need to know to have a full appreciation of the subject matter?
  3. Is the content located within a particular school of thought or ideological positioning? Could you locate it within a debate? Are there other views presented elsewhere that support or counter the views stated in your text?
  4. Does the text provide empirical evidence to support its claims or are they based on theory and argument? How persuasive are they?
  5. What are the core insights of the text and, if relevant, how do they complement/ contradict the insights from other reading(s) you have encountered in your studies?
  6. What are the relative strengths and limitations of the text?

Any questions feel free to ask please.