<p>I figured that since this has not been created yet, I might as well create one.</p>
<p>Here goes!</p>
<p>If you have taken AP Art History previously, advice about anything in the exam would be appreciated!</p>
<p>I now have a list of books that are often used for this exam</p>
<p>[ol][<em>]Barron’s Art History
[</em>]REA Art History
[<em>]Crash Course Art History
[</em>]The Annotated Mona Lisa
[<em>]The Annotated Arch
[</em>]Gardner’s Art Through The Ages[/ol]</p>
<p>^That helps a lot since I’m going to be self-studying this exam this year and I had no idea. So, among those, which ones are the best? lol</p>
<p>Oooh, a fellow self-studier! I think 1,4,5 are good. 6 is good if you have time. Actually if we both start reading that 1000-page book now, we’ll be in good hands come May next year.</p>
<p>I found this website by a teacher of Art History and she recommends REA Art History. Here it is: <a href=“http://sites.google.com/site/msmegg1/aparthistory[/url]”>http://sites.google.com/site/msmegg1/aparthistory</a></p>
<p>hey nice self-studying also!! Yeah, I heard 1 and 4 are good also. Heard nothing about REA or the annotated arch one. I’ll look at that link. But, if I get 1,4, and 6 (the appaerntly 1000 page book) think i should be good right? lol I would have to start this summer to ensure i finish that :-)</p>
<p>I used Barrons, The Annotated Mona Lisa, and Gardner’s Art Through the Ages. However, I stopped studying/working about three months before the exam, which was probably not a good idea. I still managed to get a 5 by some strange miracle.</p>
<p>Go slow through the material - don’t rush, and do regular assessments to ensure that you have the pieces memorized and understand how to analyze them. Write essays requiring extensive analysis of one or two seminal pieces per period, then have them subjected to review by someone else familiar with the subject. In my opinion, learning how to “read” a piece of art is the most important aspect of Art History, because if you are equipped to do that, then memorizing every single piece is unnecessary. </p>
<p>I don’t recommend that you self-study this subject - in fact, I think you’re near-insane for attempting to do so. In my opinion, you should take this as a course or make your self-study two years, because the sheer amount of material you are required to retain is ridiculous. For instance, one question on the exam dealt with the name of the court painter of Henry VIII. If you are unable to draw associations between Henry VIII (16th century), the mode of dress depicted in paintings of the era and the most famous painters of that time, you would not be able to deduce the name of the painter, Hans Holbein the Younger.</p>
<p>That’s just one question out of 120. Often, the material you are required to know does not overlap at all. Holbein the Younger appeared nowhere else on the rest of the exam.</p>
<p>Yeah if you get that 1000-page book and start reading now, you should be good for May next year. </p>
<p>The Annotated Arch is about architecture since architecture is tested on the exam and The Annotated Mona Lisa doesn’t have anything about architecture, as the name implies.</p>
<p>Hey I actually do know about Hans Holbein the Younger.</p>
<p>^Architecture isn’t really necessary for the exam, in my opinion. A cursory but comprehensive understanding of buildings of the major periods is all that is necessary.</p>
<p>To be honest, your comments have unnerved me a little. I’m on the verge of deciding not to self-study Art History and self-study World History. I have to pick between the two so do you think World is easier to self-study?</p>
<p>“In fact, I think you’re near-insane for attempting to do so.” Wrong. Trust me, i’m just insane overall in life 
Honestly though, you self-studied and got a 5 right? If we started now it’d definitely be possible.</p>
<p>^I did not self-study. I took a course, and even with that, I found the exam extremely difficult.</p>
<p>Im guessing World would probably be easier but im gonna stick with art history anyways…if i fail, then that’s my problem. lol</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>World History is the infinitely better choice. It’s easier to comprehend and requires less memorization than Art History. If you take the World exam first, then Art History the following year, you’d be in great shape. Art History = World (on 'roids) + knowledge of Artworks and arcane philosophies behind them.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>That’s right. It’s not my $86.00 (or whatever they charge next year). :)</p>
<p>However, will reiterate my strong opposition to self-studying for this exam. The amount of time required to prepare for this exam is not to be underestimated.</p>
<p>lol you are funny ksarmand. well you took the class…i dont know i still want to self-study it. i can always change it to 2 years if i need to, but if i start now i dont know. thanks for the advice though.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Good for you! However, I guarantee you that you will feel like a certified idiot after finishing the multiple choice on the exam. The essays are a lot more BS-friendly. </p>
<p>If you think you can do it, then go for it - I’m not here to tell you what to do, just what I wouldn’t dare do.</p>
<p>^^No problem. Just to give you an idea about the amount of time necessary for daily studying, I spent an average of three hours daily on art history homework. For longer essay and research assignments, the time was about five to seven hours. For shorter assignments, like analyses of various pieces (compare/contrasts, etc), I spent about 1.5 to 2 hours daily. If you have the time to expend, then go for it. If you can’t devote an appropriate amount of time, don’t waste your money.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>GAH. Oh no. If I need that much time to prepare for Art History, I might do Art History after I finish my country’s national exams.</p>
<p>^If you do decide to pursue the subject, know that working in a concentrated fashion like I described above will be excellent preparation. I did no “studying” of any kind for the exam and managed to retain plenty of information from all those arcane, backbreaking, and absurdly long assignments. :)</p>
<p>Ksarmand is making it seem far more difficult than it actually is. I self-studied it this year and scored a 5 without much difficulty. Like most AP exams, the MC questions always have a couple potential answers that are incredibly far off, so narrowing things down is generally a breeze if you have any knowledge of the period(s) in question.</p>
<p>I’d recommend spending more time on the earlier periods (Greece - the Renaissance), as the works and artists from these periods have more nuanced differences than those found in later periods (Baroque - Postmodernism, etc). Architecture is important to understand - especially church construction - as it can pop up on written answers and multiple choice. Don’t worry too much about it though, just know your narthexes and ambulatories (etc). </p>
<p>A book that I’d recommend, which I haven’t seen used before, is E.H. Gombrich’s “The Story of Art”. It’s not a book to study from, and it is incredibly fun and easy to read, yet it is very helpful in understanding the development of art + role of the artist. Other than that I used Gardner’s and REA - both of which were helpful.</p>
<p>Last year someone posted this list [url=<a href=“http://sites.google.com/site/msmegg1/aparthistory]msmegg1:”>http://sites.google.com/site/msmegg1/aparthistory]msmegg1:</a> aparthistory<a href=“Top%20200%20Works%20-%20bottom%20left%20corner”>/url</a> and I found it pretty damn helpful for studying.</p>
<p>Asian/african/native art is not very important, memorize a couple works if you want. </p>
<p>Sometimes they’ll throw in a few questions on contemporary artists; Faith Ringgold was used on the 2010. You can’t really study for the breadth of this category, so just learn the significance of Postmodernism (body as art, feminism, race, politics, installation, post-colonialism, earth art, etc) and apply the common tropes in your analyses. </p>
<p>Sorry for the wall of text, and hopefully it helps.</p>
<p>Also, I spent no more than 3 hours a week studying for the exam. Some of my pleasure reading at the time involved Art History, which helped, but studying for the exam is nowhere near as involved as Ksarman makes it out to be.</p>