Tutor Report for Assignment 5 – Contextual Studies and Refinements Made

I have attached below my tutor report for Assignment 5 – Contextual Studies. Overall this draft of the essay was much better received but there were some amendments suggested by my tutor to further improve the essay. I have since refined the essay based on my tutor’s comments and I have recorded these edits below also.

I was pleased with the comments for my abstract. Making changes to this was quite easy where I first briefly defined gentrification, acknowledging it can have positive effects for an area but in the case of my essay, it has mainly negative connotations. Then I made the final sentence for the abstract clearer so it conveyed what I was trying to say better.

For the title of the essay I had gone with a question initially. I’ll admit it was obscuring because I tried to cover too much with one question. As my tutor mentioned, my essay covers multiple questions related around ‘artwashing’ and regeneration. Therefore I have changed it from a question to a broader title saying what the essay tackles.

Developing my “linguistic opposition” was a learning experience for me. It makes perfect sense in retrospect to use opposing terms like “beneath” and “emerge” to make my point that there were two contrasting viewpoints. Before I had used “beneath” and “linger” which wasn’t as obvious so I’ve since amended this part of the essay.

There was another error in my text my tutor highlighted for me and he suggested I go through looking for other similar mistakes and correcting them. I found a few more and have edited these as well.

I’ve now removed the small introductions for each chapter as they weren’t adding much to the essay. This is with exception to the last chapter where I changed the introduction into a question. I feel this poises the reader for the rest of the Chapter 4 better but with the other chapters the introductions weren’t necessary.

I reread what I’d written about the Battersea power station advert and now I’ve made it clearer that I think the advertising images are mainly used to attract wealthy incomers. I maintain though that sometimes this means advertising hoardings seem to only depict certain types of age and race.

I added back in some text from my previous essay where I outlined other reasons local residents might not be in favour of luxury apartments going ahead. These included their affordability and their height. I feel these comments make the essay more in-depth while not taking away from my argument.

I realised superposition meant something different to superimposing so changed this word!

Things are usually contentious when they have something to say so I changed my wording.

I found out the name of the artist for Figure 5. This was more difficult than it sounds because the sculpture wasn’t labelled anything on a plaque for instance. Instead I revisited where I’d found the sculpture and found it to be below the “Scalpel”, a famous building on the London skyline. I searched for a sculpture below the Scalpel and found it to be called “Roundhouse” by Joel Perlman, made in 2018.

I reread what I’d written about Anna Francis’ work and agree with my tutor it seems “tendentious”. I’ve rewritten parts of that paragraph to make it clearer that I think it is a confusing critique of the effects of gentrification because it is so convincing. This is different to what I’d originally written where I used the word conspiring which insinuates Estate Agency (2017) was a deliberate form of ‘artwashing’.

I amended my reasoning on why graffiti’s message is limited to consider its placement. While graffiti can have pertinent messages regarding gentrification (and other topical debates), its often illegal placement on the property of residents or public buildings means people can be angry at where it appears.

I couldn’t think of an appropriate picture or image to illustrate the conclusion so I didn’t add one.

Lastly, I listened to my tutor’s advice to add something about the “instrumentalisation” of art – how it is used when an artist accepts a commission. This is important because it raises further questions about how an artist might be implicated in a company’s motives when they take on paid work. How can an artist avoid ‘artwashing’ if the commissioner is in an authoritative position? I suggest an artist should be aware of how their work will be used and maintain some control over the process.

I am glad I made these refinements to my essay in light of my tutor’s comments for Assignment 5 – Contextual Studies. This is because I would say it makes the essay stronger, specifically it is clearer to read now and has a bit more depth.