Datasets:

naist-nlp

/

ExpArt

like 3

0101_T

Tribute to the Eucharist (Damaskinos)

Focus on Tribute to the Eucharist (Damaskinos) and discuss the Notable Copies.

The work of art is one of the most important painted icons of the Cretan School. Two versions of the work are attributed to Michael Damaskinos. There are ten existing works with a similar theme and characteristics to Damaksino's masterpieces completed during 1550–1800. The Allegory of the Holy Communion by Andreas Karantinos is very well preserved, it is at the Byzantine & Christian Museum. Two versions are attributed to Stephanos Tzangarolas. One version is in a private collection in Kefalonia and the other is in the Church of Evangelistria in Kastro Kefalonia. Konstantinos Kontarinis also has two versions attributed to him. One version is at the Byzantine Museum of Ioannina. The other version is at the Byzantine & Christian Museum in Athens. Georgios Mazokopos also painted a similar theme. The icon is at the State Hermitage Museum in Saint Petersburg, Russia. Two versions have unknown authors. The Benaki Museum has one of the works with a forged signature of Emmanuel Tzanes. The other unknown work is at the National Gallery of Athens. It was possibly completed by Panagiotis Doxaras.

0101_NT

Tribute to the Eucharist (Damaskinos)

Focus on this artwork and discuss the Notable Copies.

The work of art is one of the most important painted icons of the Cretan School. Two versions of the work are attributed to Michael Damaskinos. There are ten existing works with a similar theme and characteristics to Damaksino's masterpieces completed during 1550–1800. The Allegory of the Holy Communion by Andreas Karantinos is very well preserved, it is at the Byzantine & Christian Museum. Two versions are attributed to Stephanos Tzangarolas. One version is in a private collection in Kefalonia and the other is in the Church of Evangelistria in Kastro Kefalonia. Konstantinos Kontarinis also has two versions attributed to him. One version is at the Byzantine Museum of Ioannina. The other version is at the Byzantine & Christian Museum in Athens. Georgios Mazokopos also painted a similar theme. The icon is at the State Hermitage Museum in Saint Petersburg, Russia. Two versions have unknown authors. The Benaki Museum has one of the works with a forged signature of Emmanuel Tzanes. The other unknown work is at the National Gallery of Athens. It was possibly completed by Panagiotis Doxaras.

0102_T

Russian Schoolroom

How does Russian Schoolroom elucidate its abstract?

Russian Schoolroom (1967), also known as The Russian Classroom and Russian Schoolchildren, is an oil on canvas painting created by American illustrator Norman Rockwell (1894–1978) and commissioned by Look magazine. It depicts Soviet schoolchildren in a classroom with a bust of Soviet leader Vladimir Lenin. The painting is shown at the National Museum of American Illustration.

0102_NT

Russian Schoolroom

How does this artwork elucidate its abstract?

Russian Schoolroom (1967), also known as The Russian Classroom and Russian Schoolchildren, is an oil on canvas painting created by American illustrator Norman Rockwell (1894–1978) and commissioned by Look magazine. It depicts Soviet schoolchildren in a classroom with a bust of Soviet leader Vladimir Lenin. The painting is shown at the National Museum of American Illustration.

0103_T

Russian Schoolroom

Focus on Russian Schoolroom and analyze the Description.

Russian Schoolroom depicts a group of seated and attentive Soviet schoolchildren looking towards the viewer's left, presumably at a teacher outside the visual frame. A bust of Vladimir Lenin with strewn flowers is, however, partially visible there. The children wear red Young Pioneer neckerchiefs and a Russian slogan on the wall behind them exhorts them to "Study and Learn". One pupil on the right, however, looks away to the viewer's right, like a typical schoolkid losing focus and finding something more interesting to see outdoors.

0103_NT

Russian Schoolroom

Focus on this artwork and analyze the Description.

Russian Schoolroom depicts a group of seated and attentive Soviet schoolchildren looking towards the viewer's left, presumably at a teacher outside the visual frame. A bust of Vladimir Lenin with strewn flowers is, however, partially visible there. The children wear red Young Pioneer neckerchiefs and a Russian slogan on the wall behind them exhorts them to "Study and Learn". One pupil on the right, however, looks away to the viewer's right, like a typical schoolkid losing focus and finding something more interesting to see outdoors.

0104_T

Russian Schoolroom

In Russian Schoolroom, how is the Background discussed?

Russian Schoolroom was published in the October 3, 1967, edition of Look as part of a series of articles on life in the Soviet Union. Rockwell had visited School No. 29 in Moscow where he drew puppy sketches on a chalkboard. Reference photos of the Moscow classroom with pupils, taken as a model for Rockwell's final painting, reveal that the inattentive pupil is actually paying close attention to the teacher, with eyes front. It has been suggested that in changing this detail, Rockwell slightly subverted the image to make a subtle political point in favor of non-conformity. Additional reference photos show Rockwell himself sitting in that student's seat, apparently demonstrating a distracted look, which the student then emulated.

0104_NT

Russian Schoolroom

In this artwork, how is the Background discussed?

Russian Schoolroom was published in the October 3, 1967, edition of Look as part of a series of articles on life in the Soviet Union. Rockwell had visited School No. 29 in Moscow where he drew puppy sketches on a chalkboard. Reference photos of the Moscow classroom with pupils, taken as a model for Rockwell's final painting, reveal that the inattentive pupil is actually paying close attention to the teacher, with eyes front. It has been suggested that in changing this detail, Rockwell slightly subverted the image to make a subtle political point in favor of non-conformity. Additional reference photos show Rockwell himself sitting in that student's seat, apparently demonstrating a distracted look, which the student then emulated.

0105_T

Russian Schoolroom

Focus on Russian Schoolroom and explore the Theft and litigation.

The painting was stolen during an exhibit at a small art gallery in Clayton, Missouri, in June 1973. In 1988, it turned up and was sold at an auction in New Orleans for about $70,000. Steven Spielberg bought the painting from Judy Goffman Cutler, a noted art dealer who specialized in American illustrators, in 1989 for $200,000. A member of his staff spotted the painting on an FBI web listing of stolen works of art and the authorities were immediately notified. By 2009, the painting was in the custody of the U.S. District Court in Las Vegas. The court decided in 2010 that the 1973 owner had been appropriately reimbursed and that the painting belonged to Cutler, who had by then traded it with Spielberg for another work; she subsequently added it to the collection on display at the National Museum of American Illustration, which she co-founded.

0105_NT

Russian Schoolroom

Focus on this artwork and explore the Theft and litigation.

The painting was stolen during an exhibit at a small art gallery in Clayton, Missouri, in June 1973. In 1988, it turned up and was sold at an auction in New Orleans for about $70,000. Steven Spielberg bought the painting from Judy Goffman Cutler, a noted art dealer who specialized in American illustrators, in 1989 for $200,000. A member of his staff spotted the painting on an FBI web listing of stolen works of art and the authorities were immediately notified. By 2009, the painting was in the custody of the U.S. District Court in Las Vegas. The court decided in 2010 that the 1973 owner had been appropriately reimbursed and that the painting belonged to Cutler, who had by then traded it with Spielberg for another work; she subsequently added it to the collection on display at the National Museum of American Illustration, which she co-founded.

0106_T

Richard Wagner Monument

Focus on Richard Wagner Monument and explain the abstract.

The Richard Wagner Monument (German: Richard-Wagner-Denkmal) is a memorial sculpture of Richard Wagner by Gustav Eberlein, located in Tiergarten in Berlin, Germany. It was created during 1901–1903 and is installed along Tiergartenstraße across from the Indian Embassy. It depicts Wagner in a seated pose and is covered by a roof.

0106_NT

Richard Wagner Monument

Focus on this artwork and explain the abstract.

The Richard Wagner Monument (German: Richard-Wagner-Denkmal) is a memorial sculpture of Richard Wagner by Gustav Eberlein, located in Tiergarten in Berlin, Germany. It was created during 1901–1903 and is installed along Tiergartenstraße across from the Indian Embassy. It depicts Wagner in a seated pose and is covered by a roof.

0107_T

Wimmer's Fountain

Explore the abstract of this artwork, Wimmer's Fountain.

Wimmer's Fountain (Czech: Wimmerova kašna), or Wimmer Fountain, is an outdoor fountain and sculpture in Old Town, Prague, Czech Republic.

0107_NT

Wimmer's Fountain

Explore the abstract of this artwork.

Wimmer's Fountain (Czech: Wimmerova kašna), or Wimmer Fountain, is an outdoor fountain and sculpture in Old Town, Prague, Czech Republic.

0108_T

Diego and I

Focus on Diego and I and discuss the abstract.

Diego and I (Spanish: Diego y yo) is a 1949 oil painting by the Mexican artist Frida Kahlo (1907-1954). In November 2021, it sold at auction in Sotheby's New York for US$34.9 million, a record for a Kahlo work, and for a work by a Latin American artist. It shattered the record previously held by the painting The Rivals (1931) by her husband Diego Rivera (1886-1957) who appears on her forehead in this work.It is the last fully realized "bust" self-portrait Kahlo completed before her death in 1954.The purchaser was Eduardo Costantini, the founder of MALBA, the Museum of Latin American Art of Buenos Aires, who bought it for his private collection. The painting had previously sold at Sotheby's in 1990 for $1.4 million.

0108_NT

Diego and I

Focus on this artwork and discuss the abstract.

Diego and I (Spanish: Diego y yo) is a 1949 oil painting by the Mexican artist Frida Kahlo (1907-1954). In November 2021, it sold at auction in Sotheby's New York for US$34.9 million, a record for a Kahlo work, and for a work by a Latin American artist. It shattered the record previously held by the painting The Rivals (1931) by her husband Diego Rivera (1886-1957) who appears on her forehead in this work.It is the last fully realized "bust" self-portrait Kahlo completed before her death in 1954.The purchaser was Eduardo Costantini, the founder of MALBA, the Museum of Latin American Art of Buenos Aires, who bought it for his private collection. The painting had previously sold at Sotheby's in 1990 for $1.4 million.

0109_T

Snap the Whip

How does Snap the Whip elucidate its abstract?

Snap the Whip is an 1872 oil painting by the American artist Winslow Homer. It depicts a group of children playing crack the whip in a field in front of a small red schoolhouse. With more of America's population moving to cities, the portrait depicts the simplicity of rural agrarian life that Americans were beginning to leave behind in the post-Civil War era, evoking a mood of nostalgia. Homer spent several summers in New York's Hudson Valley, and is said to have been inspired to paint this scene by local boys playing at the Hurley schoolhouse. Homer painted a second version, of similar date, which is now in the Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York. In this, he retains the schoolhouse but the background hillscape is removed, making the location less regionally specific.

0109_NT

Snap the Whip

How does this artwork elucidate its abstract?

Snap the Whip is an 1872 oil painting by the American artist Winslow Homer. It depicts a group of children playing crack the whip in a field in front of a small red schoolhouse. With more of America's population moving to cities, the portrait depicts the simplicity of rural agrarian life that Americans were beginning to leave behind in the post-Civil War era, evoking a mood of nostalgia. Homer spent several summers in New York's Hudson Valley, and is said to have been inspired to paint this scene by local boys playing at the Hurley schoolhouse. Homer painted a second version, of similar date, which is now in the Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York. In this, he retains the schoolhouse but the background hillscape is removed, making the location less regionally specific.

0110_T

The Bathers (Courbet)

Focus on The Bathers (Courbet) and analyze the abstract.

The Bathers is an oil-on-canvas painting by the French artist Gustave Courbet, first exhibited at the Paris Salon of 1853, where it caused a major scandal. It was unanimously attacked by art critics for the huge nude woman at its centre and the sketchy landscape background, both against official artistic canons. It was bought for 3000 francs by Courbet's future friend Alfred Bruyas, an art collector – this acquisition allowed the artist to become financially and artistically independent. It is signed and dated in the bottom right hand corner on a small rock. It has been in the musée Fabre in Montpellier since 1868.

0110_NT

The Bathers (Courbet)

Focus on this artwork and analyze the abstract.

The Bathers is an oil-on-canvas painting by the French artist Gustave Courbet, first exhibited at the Paris Salon of 1853, where it caused a major scandal. It was unanimously attacked by art critics for the huge nude woman at its centre and the sketchy landscape background, both against official artistic canons. It was bought for 3000 francs by Courbet's future friend Alfred Bruyas, an art collector – this acquisition allowed the artist to become financially and artistically independent. It is signed and dated in the bottom right hand corner on a small rock. It has been in the musée Fabre in Montpellier since 1868.

0111_T

The Bathers (Courbet)

In The Bathers (Courbet), how is the History discussed?

The painter had already experienced his first successes in France, Belgium and Germany, with some major figures of the Second French Republic buying his works. He had won a medal and resumed exhibitions at the Paris Salon. In summer 1852 he returned to the female nude, which he had previously treated in The Bacchante (possibly 1847) and Sleeping Blonde Woman (1849, private collection), the latter of which included a similar figure to the central figure in The Bathers. Almost 34, Courbet wrote to his parents on 13 May 1853:My paintings are received by the jury these days without any kind of objection. I am considered as let in by the public and beyond judgement. They have finally left responsibility for my paintings up to me. I annex ground every day. All Paris is waiting to see them and to hear the noise they will make. As for The Bathers, it's a bit scary, but since then I've added a cloth over the buttocks. The landscape in this painting is generally successful. Despite his reassurances he also wrote of wanting more success in a similar way in a letter to his parents dated May 1852 – "annex" is a translation of "empiète", a military term. As he hoped, the work caused a scandal at the next Salon on 15 May 1853. It had a prime position in the hang, at eye-height unlike its pendant The Wrestlers. The rendering was very different to the more accepted style established by Ingres and the female nude did not fit the then-current ideals of Romantic and Neoclassical painting. The poet and critic Théophile Gautier wrote in La Presse on 21 July that in The Bathers he saw "a kind of Hottentot Venus getting out of the water, and turning towards the spectator a monstrous rump with padded dimples at the bottom which only lack the mark of passementerie". Gautier thus contrasted a civilised classical Venus with what he saw as the uncivilised African savagery of Courbet's image.Distancing himself from Titian and Rubens, Courbet had broken the artistic hierarchy of genres, combining a naked ordinary woman within a landscape of the Franche-Comté to make a scene of everyday life. Such a combination had first been attempted at the start of the 17th century by the Le Nain brothers, who had shown posing peasants looking at the viewer, and by painters of the Dutch and Flemish Golden Ages. The large format was also usually then reserved for religious and mythological paintings and portraits of princes. France's rising urban population also made intellectuals wish both to reject the rural world and to idealise it in a pseudo-pantheistic fashion.The art critic Jules Champfleury attempted to provoke Georges Sand by addressing a polemical letter to her – this was published in L'Artiste on 2 September 1855 and included an account of his first encounter with the painting, quoting the philosopher Pierre-Joseph Proudhon's 1853 La Philosophie du progrès:The image of vice, just as much as that of virtue, is the domain of painting and poetry: following the lesson which the artist wants to give, every figure, beautiful or ugly, can fulfil the aim of art. [...] Let the people, recognising their misery, learn to blush at their cowardice and to detest tyrants; let the aristocracy, exposed in its greasy and obscene nudity, be whipped on every muscle for its parasitic nature, its insolence and its corruption. [...] And let every generation, putting on canvas or marble the secret of its genius, be left to posterity without blame or apology for its artists' works Courbet and Proudhon were from the same region of France, but this defence betrays a misunderstanding of the work of Courbet, who did not want to spend his life painting rural people or attacking the middle classes. The work was also caricatured by Cham in Le Charivari.

0111_NT

The Bathers (Courbet)

In this artwork, how is the History discussed?

The painter had already experienced his first successes in France, Belgium and Germany, with some major figures of the Second French Republic buying his works. He had won a medal and resumed exhibitions at the Paris Salon. In summer 1852 he returned to the female nude, which he had previously treated in The Bacchante (possibly 1847) and Sleeping Blonde Woman (1849, private collection), the latter of which included a similar figure to the central figure in The Bathers. Almost 34, Courbet wrote to his parents on 13 May 1853:My paintings are received by the jury these days without any kind of objection. I am considered as let in by the public and beyond judgement. They have finally left responsibility for my paintings up to me. I annex ground every day. All Paris is waiting to see them and to hear the noise they will make. As for The Bathers, it's a bit scary, but since then I've added a cloth over the buttocks. The landscape in this painting is generally successful. Despite his reassurances he also wrote of wanting more success in a similar way in a letter to his parents dated May 1852 – "annex" is a translation of "empiète", a military term. As he hoped, the work caused a scandal at the next Salon on 15 May 1853. It had a prime position in the hang, at eye-height unlike its pendant The Wrestlers. The rendering was very different to the more accepted style established by Ingres and the female nude did not fit the then-current ideals of Romantic and Neoclassical painting. The poet and critic Théophile Gautier wrote in La Presse on 21 July that in The Bathers he saw "a kind of Hottentot Venus getting out of the water, and turning towards the spectator a monstrous rump with padded dimples at the bottom which only lack the mark of passementerie". Gautier thus contrasted a civilised classical Venus with what he saw as the uncivilised African savagery of Courbet's image.Distancing himself from Titian and Rubens, Courbet had broken the artistic hierarchy of genres, combining a naked ordinary woman within a landscape of the Franche-Comté to make a scene of everyday life. Such a combination had first been attempted at the start of the 17th century by the Le Nain brothers, who had shown posing peasants looking at the viewer, and by painters of the Dutch and Flemish Golden Ages. The large format was also usually then reserved for religious and mythological paintings and portraits of princes. France's rising urban population also made intellectuals wish both to reject the rural world and to idealise it in a pseudo-pantheistic fashion.The art critic Jules Champfleury attempted to provoke Georges Sand by addressing a polemical letter to her – this was published in L'Artiste on 2 September 1855 and included an account of his first encounter with the painting, quoting the philosopher Pierre-Joseph Proudhon's 1853 La Philosophie du progrès:The image of vice, just as much as that of virtue, is the domain of painting and poetry: following the lesson which the artist wants to give, every figure, beautiful or ugly, can fulfil the aim of art. [...] Let the people, recognising their misery, learn to blush at their cowardice and to detest tyrants; let the aristocracy, exposed in its greasy and obscene nudity, be whipped on every muscle for its parasitic nature, its insolence and its corruption. [...] And let every generation, putting on canvas or marble the secret of its genius, be left to posterity without blame or apology for its artists' works Courbet and Proudhon were from the same region of France, but this defence betrays a misunderstanding of the work of Courbet, who did not want to spend his life painting rural people or attacking the middle classes. The work was also caricatured by Cham in Le Charivari.

0112_T

The Bathers (Courbet)

Focus on The Bathers (Courbet) and explore the X-ray.

The Centre de recherche et de restauration des musées de France X-rayed the canvas to see its underdrawing. This showed up the earliest composition for the work, in which a nude woman faced the viewer and pointed at a figure getting up on the right, probably a motif borrowed from a Perseus Delivering Andromeda which Courbet had copied in a museum. That composition was covered by a well-finished scene showing a lifesize figure in a striped costume with his hand in his hair and seemingly hallucinating as he throws himself off a precipice, with Death personified as a skeleton at the base waiting for him. A sketch of that work survives – Courbet was already working on it in April 1845 but abandoned it in January 1846. Seven years later he reused the canvas for The Bathers.

0112_NT

The Bathers (Courbet)

Focus on this artwork and explore the X-ray.

The Centre de recherche et de restauration des musées de France X-rayed the canvas to see its underdrawing. This showed up the earliest composition for the work, in which a nude woman faced the viewer and pointed at a figure getting up on the right, probably a motif borrowed from a Perseus Delivering Andromeda which Courbet had copied in a museum. That composition was covered by a well-finished scene showing a lifesize figure in a striped costume with his hand in his hair and seemingly hallucinating as he throws himself off a precipice, with Death personified as a skeleton at the base waiting for him. A sketch of that work survives – Courbet was already working on it in April 1845 but abandoned it in January 1846. Seven years later he reused the canvas for The Bathers.

0113_T

Indian Summer (painting)

Focus on Indian Summer (painting) and explain the Description.

The painting depicts a young barefoot peasant woman lying in the middle of a pasture and lifting her right hand in which she holds threads of gossamer. She wears a white skirt and shirt. A yellow headscarf lying under her head serves as a contrast and brightens the central part of the composition. The horizon line is placed near the middle of the painting. The sunlight, dry grass and a cloudy sky evoke an aura of a calm September afternoon. On the left, the background portrays a herd of cattle and figures of peasants seen from the distance as well as a black dog sitting and looking in their direction. The painting is dominated by soft shades of brown and grey colours, which emphasizes the atmosphere of Indian summer.

0113_NT

Indian Summer (painting)

Focus on this artwork and explain the Description.

The painting depicts a young barefoot peasant woman lying in the middle of a pasture and lifting her right hand in which she holds threads of gossamer. She wears a white skirt and shirt. A yellow headscarf lying under her head serves as a contrast and brightens the central part of the composition. The horizon line is placed near the middle of the painting. The sunlight, dry grass and a cloudy sky evoke an aura of a calm September afternoon. On the left, the background portrays a herd of cattle and figures of peasants seen from the distance as well as a black dog sitting and looking in their direction. The painting is dominated by soft shades of brown and grey colours, which emphasizes the atmosphere of Indian summer.

0114_T

Jeanne d'Arc (Frémiet)

Explore the abstract of this artwork, Jeanne d'Arc (Frémiet).

Jeanne d'Arc (English: Joan of Arc) is an 1874 French gilded bronze equestrian sculpture of Joan of Arc by Emmanuel Frémiet. The outdoor statue is prominently displayed in the Place des Pyramides in Paris.

0114_NT

Jeanne d'Arc (Frémiet)

Explore the abstract of this artwork.

Jeanne d'Arc (English: Joan of Arc) is an 1874 French gilded bronze equestrian sculpture of Joan of Arc by Emmanuel Frémiet. The outdoor statue is prominently displayed in the Place des Pyramides in Paris.

0115_T

Jeanne d'Arc (Frémiet)

Focus on Jeanne d'Arc (Frémiet) and discuss the History.

The original statue was commissioned by the French government after the defeat of the country in the 1870 Franco-Prussian War. It is the only public commission of the state from 1870 to 1914, called the Golden Age of statuary in Paris, the other statues were funded by private subscriptions. The sculptor took as his model Aimée Girod (1856–1937), a young woman from Domrémy, Joan of Arc's village in Lorraine. The statue was inaugurated in 1874. The pedestal was designed by the architect Paul Abadie. The artist, who made another version of the monument for the city of Nancy in 1889, replaced the horse of the Parisian monument 10 years later by a copy of the smaller Nancy one, which earned him criticism.The monument was classified as a historic monument on March 31, 1992. Reviving a tradition from the far-right leagues, on every May Day, the National Front holds an annual ceremony in her honour at the statue.

0115_NT

Jeanne d'Arc (Frémiet)

Focus on this artwork and discuss the History.

The original statue was commissioned by the French government after the defeat of the country in the 1870 Franco-Prussian War. It is the only public commission of the state from 1870 to 1914, called the Golden Age of statuary in Paris, the other statues were funded by private subscriptions. The sculptor took as his model Aimée Girod (1856–1937), a young woman from Domrémy, Joan of Arc's village in Lorraine. The statue was inaugurated in 1874. The pedestal was designed by the architect Paul Abadie. The artist, who made another version of the monument for the city of Nancy in 1889, replaced the horse of the Parisian monument 10 years later by a copy of the smaller Nancy one, which earned him criticism.The monument was classified as a historic monument on March 31, 1992. Reviving a tradition from the far-right leagues, on every May Day, the National Front holds an annual ceremony in her honour at the statue.

0116_T

Statue of Gilgamesh, University of Sydney

How does Statue of Gilgamesh, University of Sydney elucidate its abstract?

The Statue of Gilgamesh at the University of Sydney, Camperdown, was created by Assyrian-Australian artist Lewis Batros on commission from the Assyrian community, and unveiled in 2000. The 2.5m statue depicts Gilgamesh, an ancient Sumerian king of the city-state of Uruk whose legendary exploits are told in the Epic of Gilgamesh, an Akkadian epic poem written during the late second millennium BC, based on much earlier material. The Gilgamesh Cultural Centre, on behalf of the Assyrian community, presented the statue to the University to commemorate its sesquicentenary. The statue was unveiled by Dame Leonie Kramer, A.C., and D.B.E., on 15 October 2000. It is located in the Camperdown/Darlington Campus of the University of Sydney between the Old Teachers College Building and the Women's Sports Centre, facing towards the Charles Perkins Centre.

0116_NT

Statue of Gilgamesh, University of Sydney

How does this artwork elucidate its abstract?

The Statue of Gilgamesh at the University of Sydney, Camperdown, was created by Assyrian-Australian artist Lewis Batros on commission from the Assyrian community, and unveiled in 2000. The 2.5m statue depicts Gilgamesh, an ancient Sumerian king of the city-state of Uruk whose legendary exploits are told in the Epic of Gilgamesh, an Akkadian epic poem written during the late second millennium BC, based on much earlier material. The Gilgamesh Cultural Centre, on behalf of the Assyrian community, presented the statue to the University to commemorate its sesquicentenary. The statue was unveiled by Dame Leonie Kramer, A.C., and D.B.E., on 15 October 2000. It is located in the Camperdown/Darlington Campus of the University of Sydney between the Old Teachers College Building and the Women's Sports Centre, facing towards the Charles Perkins Centre.

0117_T

Statue of Gilgamesh, University of Sydney

Focus on Statue of Gilgamesh, University of Sydney and analyze the History.

Gilgamesh was a king of Uruk in the land of Sumer, Mesopotamia. Gilgamesh is described as a demigod of superhuman strength, as he was two-thirds God from his mother, Ninsun, and one-third human from his father, the former king, Lugalbunda. Gilgamesh built the city walls of Uruk to defend his people. Gilgamesh fought the demon Humbaba (or Huwawa), along with wild man Enkidu and brought his head back to Uruk on a raft. The pair also defeated the Bull of Heaven sent by the furious goddess Ishtar. These conquered beasts can be linked to the creature in the statue as a representation of Gilgamesh's strength and power. Gilgamesh is seen as a worldly-wise, cultured king and protector who is at the centre of human society. The statue was erected to celebrate the might and power of Gilgamesh and commemorate his achievements as a protector and king.

0117_NT

Statue of Gilgamesh, University of Sydney

Focus on this artwork and analyze the History.

Gilgamesh was a king of Uruk in the land of Sumer, Mesopotamia. Gilgamesh is described as a demigod of superhuman strength, as he was two-thirds God from his mother, Ninsun, and one-third human from his father, the former king, Lugalbunda. Gilgamesh built the city walls of Uruk to defend his people. Gilgamesh fought the demon Humbaba (or Huwawa), along with wild man Enkidu and brought his head back to Uruk on a raft. The pair also defeated the Bull of Heaven sent by the furious goddess Ishtar. These conquered beasts can be linked to the creature in the statue as a representation of Gilgamesh's strength and power. Gilgamesh is seen as a worldly-wise, cultured king and protector who is at the centre of human society. The statue was erected to celebrate the might and power of Gilgamesh and commemorate his achievements as a protector and king.

0118_T

Little Machine Constructed by Minimax Dadamax in Person

In Little Machine Constructed by Minimax Dadamax in Person, how is the abstract discussed?

Little Machine Constructed by Minimax Dadamax in Person (Von minimax dadamax selbst konstruiertes maschinchen) (1919–20) is a mixed-media work of art by the German dadaist and surrealist Max Ernst. It is probably the most famous example of a series of Ernst's works that were based on diagrams of scientific instruments. The work began by creating print reproductions of these diagrams. They were then colored and textured with a combination of watercolor, gouache and pencil and ink frottage. Frottage is a technique created by Ernst that involves creating rubbings of different textured surfaces like wood and textiles to give the work a three-dimensional appearance. The work also displays Ernst's interest in typography. Many of the shapes in the machine can be seen as letters. At the bottom is an inscription that reads "Little machine constructed by Minimax Dadamax in person for fearless pollination of female suckers at the beginning of the change of life and for other such fearless functions."

0118_NT

Little Machine Constructed by Minimax Dadamax in Person

In this artwork, how is the abstract discussed?

Little Machine Constructed by Minimax Dadamax in Person (Von minimax dadamax selbst konstruiertes maschinchen) (1919–20) is a mixed-media work of art by the German dadaist and surrealist Max Ernst. It is probably the most famous example of a series of Ernst's works that were based on diagrams of scientific instruments. The work began by creating print reproductions of these diagrams. They were then colored and textured with a combination of watercolor, gouache and pencil and ink frottage. Frottage is a technique created by Ernst that involves creating rubbings of different textured surfaces like wood and textiles to give the work a three-dimensional appearance. The work also displays Ernst's interest in typography. Many of the shapes in the machine can be seen as letters. At the bottom is an inscription that reads "Little machine constructed by Minimax Dadamax in person for fearless pollination of female suckers at the beginning of the change of life and for other such fearless functions."

0119_T

Bülow Memorial, Berlin

Focus on Bülow Memorial, Berlin and explore the abstract.

The Bülow Memorial on Unter den Linden avenue in Berlin's Mitte district commemorates the Prussian army general and freedom fighter Friedrich Wilhelm Bülow von Dennewitz (1755–1816). Created from 1819 to 1822 by Christian Daniel Rauch in neoclassical style, it is a masterpiece of the Berlin school of sculpture.Until 1951 the memorial stood to the left of the Neue Wache, with which it formed an urban ensemble, and since 2002 it has stood opposite it. The marble statue was removed in 2021 due to weathering and will be replaced by a replica. In this context the re-erection at the original location is being discussed.

0119_NT

Bülow Memorial, Berlin

Focus on this artwork and explore the abstract.

The Bülow Memorial on Unter den Linden avenue in Berlin's Mitte district commemorates the Prussian army general and freedom fighter Friedrich Wilhelm Bülow von Dennewitz (1755–1816). Created from 1819 to 1822 by Christian Daniel Rauch in neoclassical style, it is a masterpiece of the Berlin school of sculpture.Until 1951 the memorial stood to the left of the Neue Wache, with which it formed an urban ensemble, and since 2002 it has stood opposite it. The marble statue was removed in 2021 due to weathering and will be replaced by a replica. In this context the re-erection at the original location is being discussed.

0120_T

The Expedition in Pursuit of Rare Meats

Focus on The Expedition in Pursuit of Rare Meats and explain the abstract.

The Expedition in Pursuit of Rare Meats is a mural by the English artist Rex Whistler (1905–1944), commissioned in 1926 and completed in 1927 at the Tate Gallery (now Tate Britain) in London. The mural was commissioned by the gallery's inaugural director, Charles Aitken, for the re-opening of its restaurant, where it forms the entire interior surround of what was the eponymously named eatery, "The Rex Whistler Restaurant".The work has been at the centre of controversy in recent years over the artist's depiction, in one scene, of a black child chained to and running behind a horse and cart and, in another, of Chinese people deemed by some to read as stereotypical as the figures are "caricatured". The entire painting, and its background story, can also be read as a satire on imperialism ("Rare Meats" being a culinary term for lightly cooked meat, while the painting goes to extremes to find food that is "rare" in the sense of being difficult to find). The room displaying the mural was closed as a restaurant in 2020.

0120_NT

The Expedition in Pursuit of Rare Meats

Focus on this artwork and explain the abstract.

The Expedition in Pursuit of Rare Meats is a mural by the English artist Rex Whistler (1905–1944), commissioned in 1926 and completed in 1927 at the Tate Gallery (now Tate Britain) in London. The mural was commissioned by the gallery's inaugural director, Charles Aitken, for the re-opening of its restaurant, where it forms the entire interior surround of what was the eponymously named eatery, "The Rex Whistler Restaurant".The work has been at the centre of controversy in recent years over the artist's depiction, in one scene, of a black child chained to and running behind a horse and cart and, in another, of Chinese people deemed by some to read as stereotypical as the figures are "caricatured". The entire painting, and its background story, can also be read as a satire on imperialism ("Rare Meats" being a culinary term for lightly cooked meat, while the painting goes to extremes to find food that is "rare" in the sense of being difficult to find). The room displaying the mural was closed as a restaurant in 2020.

0121_T

The Expedition in Pursuit of Rare Meats

Explore the Reception of this artwork, The Expedition in Pursuit of Rare Meats.

When the restaurant re-opened with the mural completed it was described by its publicity as "the most amusing room in Europe". The mural is described as "one of the outstanding mural schemes of the Inter-War years" in Tate Britain's heritage listing on the National Heritage List for England. Writing in Apollo magazine in 2014, Digby Warde-Aldam remarked that "[l]ooking at the mural now is a strange experience; while its subject matter and frivolously gallant style are almost unutterably camp, there's a sombre sobriety to the tones of the paint that renders it an impressive work rather than the sort of kitsch and ephemerally fashionable diorama churned out by some of his contemporaries".

0121_NT

The Expedition in Pursuit of Rare Meats

Explore the Reception of this artwork.

When the restaurant re-opened with the mural completed it was described by its publicity as "the most amusing room in Europe". The mural is described as "one of the outstanding mural schemes of the Inter-War years" in Tate Britain's heritage listing on the National Heritage List for England. Writing in Apollo magazine in 2014, Digby Warde-Aldam remarked that "[l]ooking at the mural now is a strange experience; while its subject matter and frivolously gallant style are almost unutterably camp, there's a sombre sobriety to the tones of the paint that renders it an impressive work rather than the sort of kitsch and ephemerally fashionable diorama churned out by some of his contemporaries".

0122_T

The Expedition in Pursuit of Rare Meats

In the context of The Expedition in Pursuit of Rare Meats, discuss the 2020 petition and review of the Reception.

In 2020, The White Pube, a duo of art critics, began a campaign against the mural on Instagram. A petition by the duo read: "The fundamental point of a high class restaurant (used primarily by an older white demographic) being installed with art of this horrific nature is not being acknowledged as the harmful and hateful issue it is" and that The Expedition in Pursuit of Rare Meats "sounds more like a concept for a horror film than what you would expect Britain's largest art institution to offer up as an exclusive dining experience...Tate Britain allowing this overtly racist painting to remain for diners' enjoyment is not acceptable". The Tate stated in response: "it is important to acknowledge the presence of offensive and unacceptable content and its relationship to racist and imperialist attitudes in the 1920s and today". The work was reviewed by an ethics committee which reported to the board of the Tate galleries in September 2020. The committee was headed by the Canadian postal executive Moya Greene. The committee reported that they were "unequivocal in their view that the imagery of the work is offensive" and that the offence was "compounded by the use of the room as a restaurant"; however, they stated that the work "should not be altered or removed" and that it is in the care of the Tate's trustees. The mural is part of the fabric of the Grade II* listed building and so cannot be easily resited. The room displaying the mural was closed as a restaurant in 2020.The Tate removed a description from its website that had described the restaurant as "the most amusing room in Europe" and wrote that "Whistler's treatment of non-white figures reduces them to stereotypes" and that the gallery was "working to become a space that is more relevant, welcoming and inclusive for everyone".Martin Bailey wrote in The Art Newspaper that "Tate now faces a dilemma. As an art gallery, it can hardly cover the offending figures with a screen and it has a responsibility to allow public access to a work by an important early 20th-century British painter". The future visibility of the room will have to be determined, either by appointment or on a limited or permanent basis to visitors. A permanent security presence will also be required. The notoriety of the mural is also likely to attract many future visitors and thus increase the visibility of the offensive depictions. Bailey wrote that by "drawing attention to the two black children and the Chinese figures the overwhelming number of visitors will go to see the mural simply because of the controversy. They will focus on the offensive passages rather than engage with it as a work of art—and many more people are likely to view the inappropriate figures than a few years ago".In February 2022 The Tate announced that the former restaurant would reopen to the public as a display space containing, alongside Whistler's work, "interpretive material" and a site-specific art installation to "critically engage" with the piece.

0122_NT

The Expedition in Pursuit of Rare Meats

In the context of this artwork, discuss the 2020 petition and review of the Reception.

In 2020, The White Pube, a duo of art critics, began a campaign against the mural on Instagram. A petition by the duo read: "The fundamental point of a high class restaurant (used primarily by an older white demographic) being installed with art of this horrific nature is not being acknowledged as the harmful and hateful issue it is" and that The Expedition in Pursuit of Rare Meats "sounds more like a concept for a horror film than what you would expect Britain's largest art institution to offer up as an exclusive dining experience...Tate Britain allowing this overtly racist painting to remain for diners' enjoyment is not acceptable". The Tate stated in response: "it is important to acknowledge the presence of offensive and unacceptable content and its relationship to racist and imperialist attitudes in the 1920s and today". The work was reviewed by an ethics committee which reported to the board of the Tate galleries in September 2020. The committee was headed by the Canadian postal executive Moya Greene. The committee reported that they were "unequivocal in their view that the imagery of the work is offensive" and that the offence was "compounded by the use of the room as a restaurant"; however, they stated that the work "should not be altered or removed" and that it is in the care of the Tate's trustees. The mural is part of the fabric of the Grade II* listed building and so cannot be easily resited. The room displaying the mural was closed as a restaurant in 2020.The Tate removed a description from its website that had described the restaurant as "the most amusing room in Europe" and wrote that "Whistler's treatment of non-white figures reduces them to stereotypes" and that the gallery was "working to become a space that is more relevant, welcoming and inclusive for everyone".Martin Bailey wrote in The Art Newspaper that "Tate now faces a dilemma. As an art gallery, it can hardly cover the offending figures with a screen and it has a responsibility to allow public access to a work by an important early 20th-century British painter". The future visibility of the room will have to be determined, either by appointment or on a limited or permanent basis to visitors. A permanent security presence will also be required. The notoriety of the mural is also likely to attract many future visitors and thus increase the visibility of the offensive depictions. Bailey wrote that by "drawing attention to the two black children and the Chinese figures the overwhelming number of visitors will go to see the mural simply because of the controversy. They will focus on the offensive passages rather than engage with it as a work of art—and many more people are likely to view the inappropriate figures than a few years ago".In February 2022 The Tate announced that the former restaurant would reopen to the public as a display space containing, alongside Whistler's work, "interpretive material" and a site-specific art installation to "critically engage" with the piece.

0123_T

Senecio (Klee)

How does Senecio (Klee) elucidate its abstract?

Senecio or Head of a Man Going Senile is a 1922 Cubist painting by Swiss artist Paul Klee. It is currently in the Kunstmuseum Basel.

0123_NT

Senecio (Klee)

How does this artwork elucidate its abstract?

Senecio or Head of a Man Going Senile is a 1922 Cubist painting by Swiss artist Paul Klee. It is currently in the Kunstmuseum Basel.

0124_T

Senecio (Klee)

Focus on Senecio (Klee) and analyze the Analysis.

Klee's adaptation of the human head divides an elderly face into rectangles of orange, red, yellow, and white. The flat geometric squares within the circle resemble a mask or the patches of a harlequin, hence the title's reference to the artist-performer Senecio. The triangle and curved line above the left and right eyes respectively give the illusion of a raised eyebrow.The painting's use of lines, ambiguous shapes, and space all demonstrate the principles of Klee's artistry in which simple graphical elements are "set in motion by energy from the artist's mind."

0124_NT

Senecio (Klee)

Focus on this artwork and analyze the Analysis.

Klee's adaptation of the human head divides an elderly face into rectangles of orange, red, yellow, and white. The flat geometric squares within the circle resemble a mask or the patches of a harlequin, hence the title's reference to the artist-performer Senecio. The triangle and curved line above the left and right eyes respectively give the illusion of a raised eyebrow.The painting's use of lines, ambiguous shapes, and space all demonstrate the principles of Klee's artistry in which simple graphical elements are "set in motion by energy from the artist's mind."

0125_T

Portrait of Adele Bloch-Bauer I

In Portrait of Adele Bloch-Bauer I, how is the Reception discussed?

Klimt exhibited his portrait at the 1907 Mannheim International Art Show, alongside the Portrait of Fritza Riedler (1906). Many of the critics had negative reactions to the two paintings, describing them as "mosaic-like wall-grotesqueries", "bizarre", "absurdities" and "vulgarities".In 1908 the portrait was exhibited at the Kunstschau in Vienna where critical reaction was mixed. The unnamed reviewer from the Wiener Allgemeine Zeitung described the painting as "an idol in a golden shrine", while the critic Eduard Pötzl described the work as "mehr Blech als Bloch" ("more brass than Bloch"). According to the art historian Tobias G. Natter, some critics disapproved of the loss of the sitter's individuality, while others "accused Klimt of endangering the autonomy of art".

0125_NT

Portrait of Adele Bloch-Bauer I

In this artwork, how is the Reception discussed?

Klimt exhibited his portrait at the 1907 Mannheim International Art Show, alongside the Portrait of Fritza Riedler (1906). Many of the critics had negative reactions to the two paintings, describing them as "mosaic-like wall-grotesqueries", "bizarre", "absurdities" and "vulgarities".In 1908 the portrait was exhibited at the Kunstschau in Vienna where critical reaction was mixed. The unnamed reviewer from the Wiener Allgemeine Zeitung described the painting as "an idol in a golden shrine", while the critic Eduard Pötzl described the work as "mehr Blech als Bloch" ("more brass than Bloch"). According to the art historian Tobias G. Natter, some critics disapproved of the loss of the sitter's individuality, while others "accused Klimt of endangering the autonomy of art".

0126_T

Portrait of Adele Bloch-Bauer I

In the context of Portrait of Adele Bloch-Bauer I, explain the 1912–1945 of the History and ownership.

After exhibition at the Kunstschau, the portrait was hung at the Bloch-Bauer's Vienna residence. In 1912 Ferdinand commissioned a second painting of his wife, in which "the erotic charge of the likeness of 1907 has been spent", according to Whitford. In February 1918, Klimt suffered a stroke and was hospitalised; he caught pneumonia due to the worldwide influenza epidemic and died that month.On 19 January 1923 Adele Bloch-Bauer wrote a will. Ferdinand's brother Gustav, a lawyer by training, helped her frame the document and was named as the executor. The will included a reference to the Klimt works owned by the couple, including the two portraits of her:Meine 2 Porträts und die 4 Landschaften von Gustav Klimt, bitte ich meinen Ehegatten nach seinem Tode der österr. Staats-Gallerie in Wien, die mir gehörende Wiener und Jungfer. (Translates from the German as: "I ask my husband after his death to leave my two portraits and the four landscapes by Gustav Klimt to the Austrian State Gallery in Vienna.") In February 1925 Adele died of meningitis. Shortly afterwards Gustav filed for probate; he included a document that stated that the clause in the will was precatory, i.e. a request rather than a binding testament. He added that Ferdinand had said he would honour the clause, even though he, not Adele, was the legal owner of the paintings. The works by Klimt which Ferdinand owned, including the two portraits, were moved to Adele's bedroom as a shrine to her. The painting was lent for an exhibition at the Vienna Secession in 1928 to mark the tenth anniversary of Klimt's death; in 1934 it was displayed in London as part of the Austria in London exhibition. In 1936 Ferdinand gave Schloss Kammer am Attersee III to the Österreichische Galerie Belvedere; he later acquired a further Klimt painting, the Portrait of Amalie Zuckerkandl (1917–1918). In 1937 the golden portrait of Adele was lent for display at the Paris Exposition. In December 1937 Gustav's daughter–and Ferdinand's niece–Maria, married the young opera singer Fritz Altman. Ferdinand gave her Adele's jewelled choker, depicted in the painting, as a wedding present. Ferdinand left Vienna for his Czechoslovakian castle in March 1938, following the Anschluss (annexation) of Austria by Nazi Germany. That autumn, following the Munich Agreement allowing the Nazi annexations in Czechoslovakia, he realised he was not safe and left for Paris. In September the following year, he moved to neutral Switzerland where he lived in a hotel. In his absence the Nazi regime falsely accused him of evading taxes of 1.4 million Reichsmarks. His assets were frozen and, in May 1938, a seizure order was issued that allowed the state to dispose of his property as they felt fit. His sugar factory was confiscated and turned over to the state, and went through a process of Aryanisation as Jewish shareholders and managers were replaced. His Viennese residence became an office of Deutsche Reichsbahn, the German railway company, while his castle in Czechoslovakia was taken after the German occupation as the personal residence of the SS-Obergruppenführer Reinhard Heydrich.As part of the process to deal with the purported tax evasion, the Nazi lawyer Friedrich Führer was appointed as the administrator of the estate. In January 1939 he convened a meeting of museum and gallery directors to inspect the works and to give an indication of which they would like to obtain. After the collection was catalogued, Adolf Hitler used the Führervorbehalt decree to obtain part of the collection at a reduced price. Several other Nazi leaders, including Hermann Göring, the Commander-in-Chief of the Luftwaffe, also obtained works from the collection. Göring also used the Führervorbehalt decree to obtain the jewelled choker that had been given to Maria Altmann; it was given as a gift to Emmy, his wife. In December 1941 Führer transferred the paintings Portrait of Adele Bloch-Bauer I and Apfelbaum I to the Galerie Belvedere in return for Schloss Kammer am Attersee III, which he then sold to Gustav Ucicky, an illegitimate son of Klimt. A note accompanying the paintings stated he was acting in accordance with Adele's will. To remove all reference to its Jewish subject matter, the gallery renamed the portrait with the German title Dame in Gold (translates as Lady in Gold).

0126_NT

Portrait of Adele Bloch-Bauer I

In the context of this artwork, explain the 1912–1945 of the History and ownership.

After exhibition at the Kunstschau, the portrait was hung at the Bloch-Bauer's Vienna residence. In 1912 Ferdinand commissioned a second painting of his wife, in which "the erotic charge of the likeness of 1907 has been spent", according to Whitford. In February 1918, Klimt suffered a stroke and was hospitalised; he caught pneumonia due to the worldwide influenza epidemic and died that month.On 19 January 1923 Adele Bloch-Bauer wrote a will. Ferdinand's brother Gustav, a lawyer by training, helped her frame the document and was named as the executor. The will included a reference to the Klimt works owned by the couple, including the two portraits of her:Meine 2 Porträts und die 4 Landschaften von Gustav Klimt, bitte ich meinen Ehegatten nach seinem Tode der österr. Staats-Gallerie in Wien, die mir gehörende Wiener und Jungfer. (Translates from the German as: "I ask my husband after his death to leave my two portraits and the four landscapes by Gustav Klimt to the Austrian State Gallery in Vienna.") In February 1925 Adele died of meningitis. Shortly afterwards Gustav filed for probate; he included a document that stated that the clause in the will was precatory, i.e. a request rather than a binding testament. He added that Ferdinand had said he would honour the clause, even though he, not Adele, was the legal owner of the paintings. The works by Klimt which Ferdinand owned, including the two portraits, were moved to Adele's bedroom as a shrine to her. The painting was lent for an exhibition at the Vienna Secession in 1928 to mark the tenth anniversary of Klimt's death; in 1934 it was displayed in London as part of the Austria in London exhibition. In 1936 Ferdinand gave Schloss Kammer am Attersee III to the Österreichische Galerie Belvedere; he later acquired a further Klimt painting, the Portrait of Amalie Zuckerkandl (1917–1918). In 1937 the golden portrait of Adele was lent for display at the Paris Exposition. In December 1937 Gustav's daughter–and Ferdinand's niece–Maria, married the young opera singer Fritz Altman. Ferdinand gave her Adele's jewelled choker, depicted in the painting, as a wedding present. Ferdinand left Vienna for his Czechoslovakian castle in March 1938, following the Anschluss (annexation) of Austria by Nazi Germany. That autumn, following the Munich Agreement allowing the Nazi annexations in Czechoslovakia, he realised he was not safe and left for Paris. In September the following year, he moved to neutral Switzerland where he lived in a hotel. In his absence the Nazi regime falsely accused him of evading taxes of 1.4 million Reichsmarks. His assets were frozen and, in May 1938, a seizure order was issued that allowed the state to dispose of his property as they felt fit. His sugar factory was confiscated and turned over to the state, and went through a process of Aryanisation as Jewish shareholders and managers were replaced. His Viennese residence became an office of Deutsche Reichsbahn, the German railway company, while his castle in Czechoslovakia was taken after the German occupation as the personal residence of the SS-Obergruppenführer Reinhard Heydrich.As part of the process to deal with the purported tax evasion, the Nazi lawyer Friedrich Führer was appointed as the administrator of the estate. In January 1939 he convened a meeting of museum and gallery directors to inspect the works and to give an indication of which they would like to obtain. After the collection was catalogued, Adolf Hitler used the Führervorbehalt decree to obtain part of the collection at a reduced price. Several other Nazi leaders, including Hermann Göring, the Commander-in-Chief of the Luftwaffe, also obtained works from the collection. Göring also used the Führervorbehalt decree to obtain the jewelled choker that had been given to Maria Altmann; it was given as a gift to Emmy, his wife. In December 1941 Führer transferred the paintings Portrait of Adele Bloch-Bauer I and Apfelbaum I to the Galerie Belvedere in return for Schloss Kammer am Attersee III, which he then sold to Gustav Ucicky, an illegitimate son of Klimt. A note accompanying the paintings stated he was acting in accordance with Adele's will. To remove all reference to its Jewish subject matter, the gallery renamed the portrait with the German title Dame in Gold (translates as Lady in Gold).

0127_T

Portrait of Adele Bloch-Bauer I

Explore the Since 1945 about the History and ownership of this artwork, Portrait of Adele Bloch-Bauer I.

In August 1945 Ferdinand wrote a final will that revoked all previous ones. It made no reference to the pictures, which he thought had been lost forever, but it stated that his entire estate was left to his nephew and two nieces—one of whom was Maria Altmann. Ferdinand died in Switzerland in November that year.In 1946 the Austrian state issued an Annulment Act that declared all transactions motivated by Nazi discrimination were void; any Jews who wanted to remove artwork from Austria were forced to give some of their works to Austrian museums in order to obtain an export permit for others. The Bloch-Bauer family hired Dr Gustav Rinesh, a Viennese lawyer, to reclaim stolen artwork on their behalf. Using the records produced by Führer, he traced most of the works to the Galerie Belvedere, and Häuser in Unterach, to Führer's own private collection. Several works were returned to the Bloch-Bauer estate, but no Klimt paintings; to obtain the necessary export permits, the family were forced to let the Austrian state retain Häuser in Unterach am Attersee, Adele Bloch-Bauer I, Adele Bloch-Bauer II, and Apfelbaum I. They were also forced to relinquish any claims on Buchenwald and Schloss Kammer am Attersee III. The Galerie Belvedere based its claim of retention of the Klimt works on Adele's will.In 1998 the Austrian government introduced the Art Restitution Act, which looked again at the question of art stolen by the Nazis. The government formed a restitution committee to report on which works should be returned; government archives were opened up to research into the provenance of works held by the government. Hubertus Czernin, the Austrian investigative journalist, undertook extensive research in the newly opened archives and published a story about the theft of art by the Nazis; with the subsequent refusal of the Austrian state to return the art or to acknowledge a theft had taken place, Czernin described the situation as "a double crime". Altmann, then living in the US, hired E. Randol Schoenberg to act on her behalf. Schoenberg was the son of a woman she had been friends with since they lived in Vienna. They filed a claim with the restitution committee for the return of six paintings: Adele Bloch-Bauer I, Adele Bloch-Bauer II, Apfelbaum I, Buchenwald, Häuser in Unterach am Attersee and Amalie Zuckerkandl. The committee turned down the request, again citing Adele's will as the reason they were retaining the works. The committee's decision recommended that 16 Klimt drawings and 19 pieces of porcelain that had been held by Ferdinand and Adele and which were still at the Galerie Belvedere should be returned, as they fell outside the request of the will.In March 2000 Altmann filed a civil claim against the Austrian government for the return of the paintings. She was informed that the cost of filing (consisting of 1.2% of the amount in question, plus a filing fee), would have meant a fee of €1.75 million. To avoid the prohibitively high costs, Altmann and Schoenberg sued the Galerie Belvedere, and the museums owner, the Austrian government, in the US courts. The Austrian government filed for dismissal, with arguments based on the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (1976). The Act granted immunity to sovereign nations except under certain conditions. Schoenberg showed that three of the conditions pertinent to the case were that Altmann's property had been taken in violation of international law; the property was in the possession of the state in question, or one of its agencies; and that the property had been used on a commercial basis in the US. Over four years of litigation followed as to whether the case could be brought against a sovereign state before it was brought before the Supreme Court in Republic of Austria v. Altmann. In June 2004 the Supreme Court determined that the paintings had been stolen and that Austria was not immune from a claim from Altmann; the court made no comment on the current ownership of the paintings. To avoid returning to the courts in what could have been lengthy litigation process, arbitration in Austria was agreed upon by both parties, although the Austrians had turned down such a move in 1999. Three arbitrators formed the panel, Andreas Nödl, Walter Rechberger and Peter Rummel. Schoenberg gave evidence before them in September 2005 and, in January 2006, they delivered their judgement. They stated that five of the six paintings in question should be returned to the Bloch-Bauer estate, as outlined in Ferdinand's will; only the Portrait of Amalie Zuckerkandl was to be retained by the gallery.After the panel's decision was announced, the Galerie Belvedere ran a series of advertisements that appeared in bus stops and on underground railway platforms. The posters said "Ciao Adele", advertising the last opportunity before the painting left the country and long queues formed around the block. Although there were calls from some Austrians for the state to purchase the five paintings, the government stated that the price would be too high to justify the expense. The paintings were exported from Austria in March 2006 and exhibited together at the Los Angeles County Museum of Art from April to June that year.When Altmann was asked what she wanted to do with the paintings, she stated "I would not want any private person to buy these paintings, ... It is very meaningful to me that they are seen by anybody who wants to see them, because that would have been the wish of my aunt." In June 2006 the Portrait of Adele Bloch-Bauer I was sold to Ronald Lauder for $135 million for his public art museum, at the time a record price for a painting. Eileen Kinsella, the editor of ARTnews, considered the high price was due to several factors, particularly the painting's provenance, the increasing demand for Austrian Expressionism, rising prices in the art world and "Lauder's passion for and pursuit of this particular work". Lauder placed the work in the Neue Galerie, the New York–based gallery he co-founded. The painting has been on display at the location since.Michael Kimmelman, the chief art critic for the New York Times, was critical of the sale, and wrote that "A story about justice and redemption after the Holocaust has devolved into yet another tale of the crazy, intoxicating art market." Altmann said of the sale that it was not practical for her, or her relatives who were also part of the estate, to retain any of the paintings. In November 2006 the remaining four Klimt paintings were sold at Christie's auction house. Adele Bloch-Bauer II sold for $87.9 million, Apfelbaum I for $33 million, Buchenwald for $40.3 million and Häuser in Unterach am Attersee for $31 million. All went to private collections.

0127_NT

Portrait of Adele Bloch-Bauer I

Explore the Since 1945 about the History and ownership of this artwork.

In August 1945 Ferdinand wrote a final will that revoked all previous ones. It made no reference to the pictures, which he thought had been lost forever, but it stated that his entire estate was left to his nephew and two nieces—one of whom was Maria Altmann. Ferdinand died in Switzerland in November that year.In 1946 the Austrian state issued an Annulment Act that declared all transactions motivated by Nazi discrimination were void; any Jews who wanted to remove artwork from Austria were forced to give some of their works to Austrian museums in order to obtain an export permit for others. The Bloch-Bauer family hired Dr Gustav Rinesh, a Viennese lawyer, to reclaim stolen artwork on their behalf. Using the records produced by Führer, he traced most of the works to the Galerie Belvedere, and Häuser in Unterach, to Führer's own private collection. Several works were returned to the Bloch-Bauer estate, but no Klimt paintings; to obtain the necessary export permits, the family were forced to let the Austrian state retain Häuser in Unterach am Attersee, Adele Bloch-Bauer I, Adele Bloch-Bauer II, and Apfelbaum I. They were also forced to relinquish any claims on Buchenwald and Schloss Kammer am Attersee III. The Galerie Belvedere based its claim of retention of the Klimt works on Adele's will.In 1998 the Austrian government introduced the Art Restitution Act, which looked again at the question of art stolen by the Nazis. The government formed a restitution committee to report on which works should be returned; government archives were opened up to research into the provenance of works held by the government. Hubertus Czernin, the Austrian investigative journalist, undertook extensive research in the newly opened archives and published a story about the theft of art by the Nazis; with the subsequent refusal of the Austrian state to return the art or to acknowledge a theft had taken place, Czernin described the situation as "a double crime". Altmann, then living in the US, hired E. Randol Schoenberg to act on her behalf. Schoenberg was the son of a woman she had been friends with since they lived in Vienna. They filed a claim with the restitution committee for the return of six paintings: Adele Bloch-Bauer I, Adele Bloch-Bauer II, Apfelbaum I, Buchenwald, Häuser in Unterach am Attersee and Amalie Zuckerkandl. The committee turned down the request, again citing Adele's will as the reason they were retaining the works. The committee's decision recommended that 16 Klimt drawings and 19 pieces of porcelain that had been held by Ferdinand and Adele and which were still at the Galerie Belvedere should be returned, as they fell outside the request of the will.In March 2000 Altmann filed a civil claim against the Austrian government for the return of the paintings. She was informed that the cost of filing (consisting of 1.2% of the amount in question, plus a filing fee), would have meant a fee of €1.75 million. To avoid the prohibitively high costs, Altmann and Schoenberg sued the Galerie Belvedere, and the museums owner, the Austrian government, in the US courts. The Austrian government filed for dismissal, with arguments based on the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (1976). The Act granted immunity to sovereign nations except under certain conditions. Schoenberg showed that three of the conditions pertinent to the case were that Altmann's property had been taken in violation of international law; the property was in the possession of the state in question, or one of its agencies; and that the property had been used on a commercial basis in the US. Over four years of litigation followed as to whether the case could be brought against a sovereign state before it was brought before the Supreme Court in Republic of Austria v. Altmann. In June 2004 the Supreme Court determined that the paintings had been stolen and that Austria was not immune from a claim from Altmann; the court made no comment on the current ownership of the paintings. To avoid returning to the courts in what could have been lengthy litigation process, arbitration in Austria was agreed upon by both parties, although the Austrians had turned down such a move in 1999. Three arbitrators formed the panel, Andreas Nödl, Walter Rechberger and Peter Rummel. Schoenberg gave evidence before them in September 2005 and, in January 2006, they delivered their judgement. They stated that five of the six paintings in question should be returned to the Bloch-Bauer estate, as outlined in Ferdinand's will; only the Portrait of Amalie Zuckerkandl was to be retained by the gallery.After the panel's decision was announced, the Galerie Belvedere ran a series of advertisements that appeared in bus stops and on underground railway platforms. The posters said "Ciao Adele", advertising the last opportunity before the painting left the country and long queues formed around the block. Although there were calls from some Austrians for the state to purchase the five paintings, the government stated that the price would be too high to justify the expense. The paintings were exported from Austria in March 2006 and exhibited together at the Los Angeles County Museum of Art from April to June that year.When Altmann was asked what she wanted to do with the paintings, she stated "I would not want any private person to buy these paintings, ... It is very meaningful to me that they are seen by anybody who wants to see them, because that would have been the wish of my aunt." In June 2006 the Portrait of Adele Bloch-Bauer I was sold to Ronald Lauder for $135 million for his public art museum, at the time a record price for a painting. Eileen Kinsella, the editor of ARTnews, considered the high price was due to several factors, particularly the painting's provenance, the increasing demand for Austrian Expressionism, rising prices in the art world and "Lauder's passion for and pursuit of this particular work". Lauder placed the work in the Neue Galerie, the New York–based gallery he co-founded. The painting has been on display at the location since.Michael Kimmelman, the chief art critic for the New York Times, was critical of the sale, and wrote that "A story about justice and redemption after the Holocaust has devolved into yet another tale of the crazy, intoxicating art market." Altmann said of the sale that it was not practical for her, or her relatives who were also part of the estate, to retain any of the paintings. In November 2006 the remaining four Klimt paintings were sold at Christie's auction house. Adele Bloch-Bauer II sold for $87.9 million, Apfelbaum I for $33 million, Buchenwald for $40.3 million and Häuser in Unterach am Attersee for $31 million. All went to private collections.

0128_T

Portrait of Adele Bloch-Bauer I

Focus on Portrait of Adele Bloch-Bauer I and discuss the Legacy.

The history of the Portrait of Adele Bloch-Bauer I and the other paintings taken from the Bloch-Bauers has been recounted in three documentary films, Stealing Klimt (2007), The Rape of Europa (2007) and Adele's Wish (2008). The painting's history is described in the 2012 book The Lady in Gold: The Extraordinary Tale of Gustav Klimt's Masterpiece, Portrait of Adele Bloch-Bauer, by the journalist Anne-Marie O'Connor. The history, as well as other stories of other stolen art, is told by Melissa Müller and Monika Tatzkow in Lost Lives, Lost Art: Jewish Collectors, Nazi Art Theft, and the Quest for Justice, published in 2010. The story of Adele Bloch-Bauer and Maria Altmann formed the basis for the 2017 novel Stolen Beauty by Laurie Lico Albanese. The portrait is featured in the memoir of Gregor Collins, The Accidental Caregiver, about his relationship with Maria Altmann, published in August 2012. The book was dramatised for the stage in January 2015. In 2015 Altmann's story was dramatised for the film Woman in Gold starring Helen Mirren as Maria and Ryan Reynolds as Schoenberg.Altmann died in February 2011, aged 94. Schoenberg, who had worked on a 40 per cent conditional fee throughout, received $54 million for the sale of Portrait of Adele Bloch-Bauer I and $55 million for the sale of the remaining four paintings. After he donated over $7 million for the building of the new premises of the Los Angeles Museum of the Holocaust, he said that he had "tried to do good things with the money". He subsequently specialised in the restitution of artwork plundered by the Nazis.Elements of the portrait have been noted by art critics to have influenced the painting First Lady Michelle Obama, by Amy Sherald in 2018.

0128_NT

Portrait of Adele Bloch-Bauer I

Focus on this artwork and discuss the Legacy.

The history of the Portrait of Adele Bloch-Bauer I and the other paintings taken from the Bloch-Bauers has been recounted in three documentary films, Stealing Klimt (2007), The Rape of Europa (2007) and Adele's Wish (2008). The painting's history is described in the 2012 book The Lady in Gold: The Extraordinary Tale of Gustav Klimt's Masterpiece, Portrait of Adele Bloch-Bauer, by the journalist Anne-Marie O'Connor. The history, as well as other stories of other stolen art, is told by Melissa Müller and Monika Tatzkow in Lost Lives, Lost Art: Jewish Collectors, Nazi Art Theft, and the Quest for Justice, published in 2010. The story of Adele Bloch-Bauer and Maria Altmann formed the basis for the 2017 novel Stolen Beauty by Laurie Lico Albanese. The portrait is featured in the memoir of Gregor Collins, The Accidental Caregiver, about his relationship with Maria Altmann, published in August 2012. The book was dramatised for the stage in January 2015. In 2015 Altmann's story was dramatised for the film Woman in Gold starring Helen Mirren as Maria and Ryan Reynolds as Schoenberg.Altmann died in February 2011, aged 94. Schoenberg, who had worked on a 40 per cent conditional fee throughout, received $54 million for the sale of Portrait of Adele Bloch-Bauer I and $55 million for the sale of the remaining four paintings. After he donated over $7 million for the building of the new premises of the Los Angeles Museum of the Holocaust, he said that he had "tried to do good things with the money". He subsequently specialised in the restitution of artwork plundered by the Nazis.Elements of the portrait have been noted by art critics to have influenced the painting First Lady Michelle Obama, by Amy Sherald in 2018.

0129_T

Crenaia, the Nymph of the Dargle

How does Crenaia, the Nymph of the Dargle elucidate its abstract?

Crenaia, the Nymph of the Dargle is an oil painting by Frederic Leighton, first exhibited in 1880. It is in the collection of Juan Antonio Pérez Simón.

0129_NT

Crenaia, the Nymph of the Dargle

How does this artwork elucidate its abstract?

Crenaia, the Nymph of the Dargle is an oil painting by Frederic Leighton, first exhibited in 1880. It is in the collection of Juan Antonio Pérez Simón.

0130_T

Crenaia, the Nymph of the Dargle

Focus on Crenaia, the Nymph of the Dargle and analyze the History.

Leighton had visited Ireland to paint landscape in the summer of 1874, and possibly on other occasions in the 1870s. The first owner of the picture was Lord Powerscourt, whose Irish seat, the Powerscourt Estate, was near to the landscape that inspired Crenaia. The little River Dargle flows through the estate and forms many waterfalls.The picture, now also known as The Nymph of the Dargle, was exhibited at the Royal Academy of Arts in 1880 under the title of Crenaia. Frederic George Stephens, writing for The Athenæum, was enthusiastic about the painting when it was shown: The next picture is a small one, named Crenaia (655), and comprises a single figure of a nymph standing in a cavern or rocky niche by the side of a spring of clear water, and huddling to her chin an abundance of diaphanous white drapery, which, falling in front, conceals half the bearer's form, and leaves half uncovered. This is a pretty action, and has been expressed with taste and much spontaneity. The carnations lack a little of that inner golden tint which, when omitted, leaves the purer red and white too rosy and too pale. The drapery is beautiful in design and painting.

0130_NT

Crenaia, the Nymph of the Dargle

Focus on this artwork and analyze the History.

Leighton had visited Ireland to paint landscape in the summer of 1874, and possibly on other occasions in the 1870s. The first owner of the picture was Lord Powerscourt, whose Irish seat, the Powerscourt Estate, was near to the landscape that inspired Crenaia. The little River Dargle flows through the estate and forms many waterfalls.The picture, now also known as The Nymph of the Dargle, was exhibited at the Royal Academy of Arts in 1880 under the title of Crenaia. Frederic George Stephens, writing for The Athenæum, was enthusiastic about the painting when it was shown: The next picture is a small one, named Crenaia (655), and comprises a single figure of a nymph standing in a cavern or rocky niche by the side of a spring of clear water, and huddling to her chin an abundance of diaphanous white drapery, which, falling in front, conceals half the bearer's form, and leaves half uncovered. This is a pretty action, and has been expressed with taste and much spontaneity. The carnations lack a little of that inner golden tint which, when omitted, leaves the purer red and white too rosy and too pale. The drapery is beautiful in design and painting.

0131_T

Crenaia, the Nymph of the Dargle

In Crenaia, the Nymph of the Dargle, how is the Description discussed?

The painting represents a small full-length figure facing the spectator; the River Dargle flows through Powerscourt, and forms the waterfall here represented in the background, hence its name. The figure is remarkable for its Irish traits. Edgcumbe Staley calls it "the least eclectic of all Leightons girl-beauties". Her carnations are pale; her arms are modestly crossed over her bosom. She is nearly nude: what draperies she has are creamy.

0131_NT

Crenaia, the Nymph of the Dargle

In this artwork, how is the Description discussed?

The painting represents a small full-length figure facing the spectator; the River Dargle flows through Powerscourt, and forms the waterfall here represented in the background, hence its name. The figure is remarkable for its Irish traits. Edgcumbe Staley calls it "the least eclectic of all Leightons girl-beauties". Her carnations are pale; her arms are modestly crossed over her bosom. She is nearly nude: what draperies she has are creamy.

0132_T

Mrs. Thomas Gage

Focus on Mrs. Thomas Gage and explore the abstract.

Mrs. Thomas Gage is a 1771 oil painting on canvas by John Singleton Copley. The portrait depicts Margaret Kemble Gage, the American-born wife of the British General Thomas Gage, commander-in-chief of the British forces in North America. It was painted in New York during a six-month stay there by Bostonian Copley.

0132_NT

Mrs. Thomas Gage

Focus on this artwork and explore the abstract.

Mrs. Thomas Gage is a 1771 oil painting on canvas by John Singleton Copley. The portrait depicts Margaret Kemble Gage, the American-born wife of the British General Thomas Gage, commander-in-chief of the British forces in North America. It was painted in New York during a six-month stay there by Bostonian Copley.

0133_T

Danaë (Rembrandt painting)

Focus on Danaë (Rembrandt painting) and explain the abstract.

Danaë is a painting by the Dutch artist Rembrandt van Rijn. It was first completed in 1636, but Rembrandt reworked it significantly by 1643 at the latest. Once part of Pierre Crozat's collection, it has been in the Hermitage Museum, in St. Petersburg, Russia since the 18th century.It is a life-sized depiction of the character Danaë from Greek mythology, the mother of Perseus. She is presumably depicted as welcoming Zeus, who impregnated her in the form of a shower of gold. Given that this is one of Rembrandt's most magnificent paintings, it is not out of the question that he cherished it, but it also may have been difficult to sell because of its eight-by-ten-foot size. Although the artist's wife Saskia was the original model for Danaë, Rembrandt later changed the figure's face to that of his mistress Geertje Dircx. The reworking changed the positions of, among other things, the head, outstretched arm and legs of Danaë. The painting has been considerably cut down. It has a hard-to-read signature with a date ending in "6", but this may not be genuine.It was seriously vandalized in 1985, but has been restored.

0133_NT

Danaë (Rembrandt painting)

Focus on this artwork and explain the abstract.

Danaë is a painting by the Dutch artist Rembrandt van Rijn. It was first completed in 1636, but Rembrandt reworked it significantly by 1643 at the latest. Once part of Pierre Crozat's collection, it has been in the Hermitage Museum, in St. Petersburg, Russia since the 18th century.It is a life-sized depiction of the character Danaë from Greek mythology, the mother of Perseus. She is presumably depicted as welcoming Zeus, who impregnated her in the form of a shower of gold. Given that this is one of Rembrandt's most magnificent paintings, it is not out of the question that he cherished it, but it also may have been difficult to sell because of its eight-by-ten-foot size. Although the artist's wife Saskia was the original model for Danaë, Rembrandt later changed the figure's face to that of his mistress Geertje Dircx. The reworking changed the positions of, among other things, the head, outstretched arm and legs of Danaë. The painting has been considerably cut down. It has a hard-to-read signature with a date ending in "6", but this may not be genuine.It was seriously vandalized in 1985, but has been restored.

0134_T

Danaë (Rembrandt painting)

Explore the Vandalism of this artwork, Danaë (Rembrandt painting).

On June 15, 1985 Rembrandt's painting was attacked by Bronius Maigys, a Soviet Lithuanian national later judged insane; he threw sulfuric acid on the canvas and cut it twice with his knife. The entire central part of the composition was turned into a mixture of spots with a conglomerate of splashes and areas of dripping paint. The worst damage was to the face and hair of Danaë, her right arm, and legs.The process of restoring the painting began the same day. Following consultations with chemists, art restorers began washing the surface of the painting with water; they kept the painting in the vertical position, and sprayed water at the painting to prevent further degradation of the painting.The restoration of the painting was accomplished between 1985 and 1997 by staff of the State Hermitage's Laboratory of Expert Restoration of Easel Paintings: Ye. N. Gerasimov (group leader), A. G. Rakhman, and G. A. Shirokov, with the participation of T. P. Alioshina in matters of scientific methodology.

0134_NT

Danaë (Rembrandt painting)

Explore the Vandalism of this artwork.

On June 15, 1985 Rembrandt's painting was attacked by Bronius Maigys, a Soviet Lithuanian national later judged insane; he threw sulfuric acid on the canvas and cut it twice with his knife. The entire central part of the composition was turned into a mixture of spots with a conglomerate of splashes and areas of dripping paint. The worst damage was to the face and hair of Danaë, her right arm, and legs.The process of restoring the painting began the same day. Following consultations with chemists, art restorers began washing the surface of the painting with water; they kept the painting in the vertical position, and sprayed water at the painting to prevent further degradation of the painting.The restoration of the painting was accomplished between 1985 and 1997 by staff of the State Hermitage's Laboratory of Expert Restoration of Easel Paintings: Ye. N. Gerasimov (group leader), A. G. Rakhman, and G. A. Shirokov, with the participation of T. P. Alioshina in matters of scientific methodology.

0135_T

Indian Hunter (Ward)

Focus on Indian Hunter (Ward) and discuss the abstract.

Indian Hunter is an outdoor bronze sculpture by John Quincy Adams Ward, located at Central Park in Manhattan, New York.It was cast in bronze in 1866 at the L.A. Amouroux, NY at a cost of $10,000. It was displayed at the Paris Exposition in 1867 and was later presented to the city of New York, where it was unveiled on February 4, 1869. The statue was the first sculpture by an American artist at Central Park, which at the time was only 11 years old.

0135_NT

Indian Hunter (Ward)

Focus on this artwork and discuss the abstract.

Indian Hunter is an outdoor bronze sculpture by John Quincy Adams Ward, located at Central Park in Manhattan, New York.It was cast in bronze in 1866 at the L.A. Amouroux, NY at a cost of $10,000. It was displayed at the Paris Exposition in 1867 and was later presented to the city of New York, where it was unveiled on February 4, 1869. The statue was the first sculpture by an American artist at Central Park, which at the time was only 11 years old.

0136_T

Indian Hunter (Ward)

How does Indian Hunter (Ward) elucidate its Physical description?

The plinth is polished Rockport granite, and the statue, which depicts a larger than life size hunter and dog, is made of bronze. The dimensions of the monument atop the plinth is 10 ft (3m) wide, 5 ft (1.5m) deep, and 6'3" (1.9m) tall.

0136_NT

Indian Hunter (Ward)

How does this artwork elucidate its Physical description?

The plinth is polished Rockport granite, and the statue, which depicts a larger than life size hunter and dog, is made of bronze. The dimensions of the monument atop the plinth is 10 ft (3m) wide, 5 ft (1.5m) deep, and 6'3" (1.9m) tall.

0137_T

Peace Monument (Decatur, Indiana)

Focus on Peace Monument (Decatur, Indiana) and analyze the abstract.

Peace Monument is a cenotaph designed by Charles Mulligan. It is located at the Adams County Courthouse in Decatur, Indiana, in the United States. It is a war memorial devoted to peace, active women in the American Civil War and as a general war memorial commemorating the sacrifice of soldiers in war. It is the first monument in the United States specifically devoted to peace.

0137_NT

Peace Monument (Decatur, Indiana)

Focus on this artwork and analyze the abstract.

Peace Monument is a cenotaph designed by Charles Mulligan. It is located at the Adams County Courthouse in Decatur, Indiana, in the United States. It is a war memorial devoted to peace, active women in the American Civil War and as a general war memorial commemorating the sacrifice of soldiers in war. It is the first monument in the United States specifically devoted to peace.

0138_T

Peace Monument (Decatur, Indiana)

In Peace Monument (Decatur, Indiana), how is the Description discussed?

Peace Monument is made of Indiana limestone and metal. The front of the piece has an allegory of Peace, represented as a woman. She stands to the proper left and wears armor. Her hair is styled in a bun. In her proper left hand she wields a shield representing the United States which she holds in front of herself, and it sits on the ground in front of her feet. Her right arm is outstretched in front of her. It sits upon a laurel twig. The twig sits upon four furled flags which lay across the top of the cenotaph, centered. She has a sword, which rests in a scabbard, strapped to her proper left side, just behind the shield.Bronze panels on either side of Peace include the names of 1,276 veterans from Adams County. The back of the cenotaph has the words inscribed:TO THE GLORY OF OUR COUNTRY AND IN LOVING MEMORY OF OUR SOLDIER HEROS TO THE WOMEN OF OUR NATION AS A TRIBUTE TO THEIR COURAGE DEVOTION AND SACRIFICEThe back of the cenotaph has a relief depicting a nurse treating a wounded soldier. The cenotaph used to house a fountain which poured into a trough just beneath the relief. Near the relief, is a metal tablet that is installed on the cenotaph. The metal was taken from USS Maine. Inscribed on the plaque are the words "IN MEMORIAM/U.S.S. MAINE". The plaque was unearthed in 2008, during a restoration project by the county. There is a bench at the cenotaph base. Two urns are placed in front of the cenotaph, for plantings, and sit in front of Peace.

0138_NT

Peace Monument (Decatur, Indiana)

In this artwork, how is the Description discussed?

Peace Monument is made of Indiana limestone and metal. The front of the piece has an allegory of Peace, represented as a woman. She stands to the proper left and wears armor. Her hair is styled in a bun. In her proper left hand she wields a shield representing the United States which she holds in front of herself, and it sits on the ground in front of her feet. Her right arm is outstretched in front of her. It sits upon a laurel twig. The twig sits upon four furled flags which lay across the top of the cenotaph, centered. She has a sword, which rests in a scabbard, strapped to her proper left side, just behind the shield.Bronze panels on either side of Peace include the names of 1,276 veterans from Adams County. The back of the cenotaph has the words inscribed:TO THE GLORY OF OUR COUNTRY AND IN LOVING MEMORY OF OUR SOLDIER HEROS TO THE WOMEN OF OUR NATION AS A TRIBUTE TO THEIR COURAGE DEVOTION AND SACRIFICEThe back of the cenotaph has a relief depicting a nurse treating a wounded soldier. The cenotaph used to house a fountain which poured into a trough just beneath the relief. Near the relief, is a metal tablet that is installed on the cenotaph. The metal was taken from USS Maine. Inscribed on the plaque are the words "IN MEMORIAM/U.S.S. MAINE". The plaque was unearthed in 2008, during a restoration project by the county. There is a bench at the cenotaph base. Two urns are placed in front of the cenotaph, for plantings, and sit in front of Peace.

0139_T

Adoration of the Shepherds (Ribera, Castellammare di Stabia)

Focus on Adoration of the Shepherds (Ribera, Castellammare di Stabia) and explore the abstract.

Adoration of the Shepherds is an oil on canvas painting by the Spanish artist Jusepe de Ribera, executed c. 1650. It is now on display in the left transept of Santissima Maria Assunta and San Catello Co-Cathedral in Castellammare di Stabia. It is almost identical to the artist's work on the same subject in Paris, apart that work being in portrait format and the Castellammare di Stabia work is in landscape format. Neither are securely dated and so it is unknown which is a copy of the other.

0139_NT

Adoration of the Shepherds (Ribera, Castellammare di Stabia)

Focus on this artwork and explore the abstract.

Adoration of the Shepherds is an oil on canvas painting by the Spanish artist Jusepe de Ribera, executed c. 1650. It is now on display in the left transept of Santissima Maria Assunta and San Catello Co-Cathedral in Castellammare di Stabia. It is almost identical to the artist's work on the same subject in Paris, apart that work being in portrait format and the Castellammare di Stabia work is in landscape format. Neither are securely dated and so it is unknown which is a copy of the other.

0140_T

The Martyrdom of Saint Barbara (Lucas Cranach the Elder)

Focus on The Martyrdom of Saint Barbara (Lucas Cranach the Elder) and explain the abstract.

The Martyrdom of Saint Barbara is an early 16th century painting by German artist Lucas Cranach the Elder. It is in the collection of the Metropolitan Museum of Art, in New York.The work depicts the martyrdom of Saint Barbara, a Greek princess who was executed by her heathen father Dioscorus at the behest of Roman officials; the execution was in retaliation for Barbara refusing to renounce her Christian faith.

0140_NT

The Martyrdom of Saint Barbara (Lucas Cranach the Elder)

Focus on this artwork and explain the abstract.

The Martyrdom of Saint Barbara is an early 16th century painting by German artist Lucas Cranach the Elder. It is in the collection of the Metropolitan Museum of Art, in New York.The work depicts the martyrdom of Saint Barbara, a Greek princess who was executed by her heathen father Dioscorus at the behest of Roman officials; the execution was in retaliation for Barbara refusing to renounce her Christian faith.

0141_T

Joseph's Dream (Rembrandt, 1645)

Explore the abstract of this artwork, Joseph's Dream (Rembrandt, 1645).

Joseph's Dream is a 1645 oil-on-canvas painting by Rembrandt. It was in the Königliche Schlöss in Berlin until 1830, when it moved to the city's Königliche Museum. It is now in the Gemaldegalerie, Berlin. It portrays Saint Joseph receiving the second of his dreams, warning him of the Massacre of the Innocents (Matthew 2: 13–15).

0141_NT

Joseph's Dream (Rembrandt, 1645)

Explore the abstract of this artwork.

Joseph's Dream is a 1645 oil-on-canvas painting by Rembrandt. It was in the Königliche Schlöss in Berlin until 1830, when it moved to the city's Königliche Museum. It is now in the Gemaldegalerie, Berlin. It portrays Saint Joseph receiving the second of his dreams, warning him of the Massacre of the Innocents (Matthew 2: 13–15).

0142_T

Tangendorf disc brooch

Focus on Tangendorf disc brooch and discuss the abstract.

The Tangendorf disc brooch (German: Scheibenfibel von Tangendorf) is an Iron Age fibula from the 3rd century AD, which was dug up in 1930 from the sand of a Bronze Age tumulus near Tangendorf, Toppenstedt, Harburg, Lower Saxony, Germany. The front of the elaborately crafted garment fibula is decorated with a rear-facing four-legged animal, probably a dog or a deer. It is one of Harburg's most important finds from the period of the Roman Empire, and is in the permanent exhibition of the Archaeological Museum Hamburg in Harburg, Hamburg.

0142_NT

Tangendorf disc brooch

Focus on this artwork and discuss the abstract.

The Tangendorf disc brooch (German: Scheibenfibel von Tangendorf) is an Iron Age fibula from the 3rd century AD, which was dug up in 1930 from the sand of a Bronze Age tumulus near Tangendorf, Toppenstedt, Harburg, Lower Saxony, Germany. The front of the elaborately crafted garment fibula is decorated with a rear-facing four-legged animal, probably a dog or a deer. It is one of Harburg's most important finds from the period of the Roman Empire, and is in the permanent exhibition of the Archaeological Museum Hamburg in Harburg, Hamburg.

0143_T

Tangendorf disc brooch

How does Tangendorf disc brooch elucidate its Findings?

The fibula is a multilayered structure. Its face consists of a very thin fire gilded and contoured silver disc, having a diameter of 58 millimetres (2.3 in). This is fixed by three silver rivet pins to an identically sized, 3 millimetres (0.12 in) thick copper plate and together with this on a stronger silver plate. The rear plate, 78 millimetres (3.1 in) in diameter, is significantly larger. On its rear, the pin was mounted. The reverse of the front plate was filled with a now whitish green mix of tin, lead and traces of copper in order to support the sensitive friction work and to prevent the pressing of the driven ornaments. But the tin components of the filler have damaged some of the metal parts of the decoration due to allotropic processes forced by low temperatures during long term storage in the soil (tin pest). The decoration consists of a quadrupedal animal walking to the right, with the animal's head facing backwards. It has two ears and a protruding tongue. Around its neck it wears a collar shaped ornament. The legs are positioned under the body to accommodate the round shape of the disc. The background is decorated with irregularly distributed impressions, imitating a granulation. The scene is framed by two ribbed bands, which are enclosed by an ornamental wreath and another ribbed band. Around the body of the animal there are three rosette shaped rivet heads. The body of the animal has a large defect caused by the degenerated tin filling. Some of the protruding edges of the rear mounting plate are broken away. Beneath the copper plate, residual amounts of organic material were found, which were interpreted as ivory. Due to typological comparisons of the ornaments, the fibula was dated to circa 300 AD.

0143_NT

Tangendorf disc brooch

How does this artwork elucidate its Findings?

The fibula is a multilayered structure. Its face consists of a very thin fire gilded and contoured silver disc, having a diameter of 58 millimetres (2.3 in). This is fixed by three silver rivet pins to an identically sized, 3 millimetres (0.12 in) thick copper plate and together with this on a stronger silver plate. The rear plate, 78 millimetres (3.1 in) in diameter, is significantly larger. On its rear, the pin was mounted. The reverse of the front plate was filled with a now whitish green mix of tin, lead and traces of copper in order to support the sensitive friction work and to prevent the pressing of the driven ornaments. But the tin components of the filler have damaged some of the metal parts of the decoration due to allotropic processes forced by low temperatures during long term storage in the soil (tin pest). The decoration consists of a quadrupedal animal walking to the right, with the animal's head facing backwards. It has two ears and a protruding tongue. Around its neck it wears a collar shaped ornament. The legs are positioned under the body to accommodate the round shape of the disc. The background is decorated with irregularly distributed impressions, imitating a granulation. The scene is framed by two ribbed bands, which are enclosed by an ornamental wreath and another ribbed band. Around the body of the animal there are three rosette shaped rivet heads. The body of the animal has a large defect caused by the degenerated tin filling. Some of the protruding edges of the rear mounting plate are broken away. Beneath the copper plate, residual amounts of organic material were found, which were interpreted as ivory. Due to typological comparisons of the ornaments, the fibula was dated to circa 300 AD.

0144_T

Tangendorf disc brooch

Focus on Tangendorf disc brooch and analyze the Interpretation.

Due to the improper recovery without accurate documentation of the find, accurate statements can not be given about the archaeological context the disc brooch to the Iron Age burial and the Bronze Age secondary burial. It is also not known how many additional grave goods were lost. Compared to similar finds, all of these burials should have usually contained other jewellery and utensils. Based on the statements of farmer Wille, the Iron Age grave with the disc brooch was suspected to be a cremation burial, on top of a pre-existing burial mound, a suspicion which is supported from many other Iron Age grave findings. The brooch is a high-quality, most likely Germanic, goldsmiths' work, inspired by Roman models. The animal depicted is interpreted as a dog or an antler-less deer. The reason for the depiction of a rear-facing animal may be found in Germanic art conventions or it may based on mythological ideas, but it can also be attributed to the fact that it allows a larger depiction of the animal within the available space. The protruding edge of the rear silver disc and the remains of organic material beneath the copper disk suggests that the front plates of the fibula was surrounded by an ornate ring of ivory of about 10 millimetres (0.39 in) width.

0144_NT

Tangendorf disc brooch

Focus on this artwork and analyze the Interpretation.

Due to the improper recovery without accurate documentation of the find, accurate statements can not be given about the archaeological context the disc brooch to the Iron Age burial and the Bronze Age secondary burial. It is also not known how many additional grave goods were lost. Compared to similar finds, all of these burials should have usually contained other jewellery and utensils. Based on the statements of farmer Wille, the Iron Age grave with the disc brooch was suspected to be a cremation burial, on top of a pre-existing burial mound, a suspicion which is supported from many other Iron Age grave findings. The brooch is a high-quality, most likely Germanic, goldsmiths' work, inspired by Roman models. The animal depicted is interpreted as a dog or an antler-less deer. The reason for the depiction of a rear-facing animal may be found in Germanic art conventions or it may based on mythological ideas, but it can also be attributed to the fact that it allows a larger depiction of the animal within the available space. The protruding edge of the rear silver disc and the remains of organic material beneath the copper disk suggests that the front plates of the fibula was surrounded by an ornate ring of ivory of about 10 millimetres (0.39 in) width.

0145_T

Tangendorf disc brooch

Describe the characteristics of the Comparable artwork in Tangendorf disc brooch's Interpretation.

A similar, 55 millimetres (2.2 in) diameter, disc brooch is known from a burial at Häven in Mecklenburg-Vorpommern, Germany, but depicts a forward-facing animal. The similarities in manufacture and decoration are so striking that Wegewitz believed they were produced in the same workshop. Parallels of the illustrated animal are known from archaeological finds on a silver goblet from Nordrup (near Skaftelev in Slagelse Municipality, Zealand (Denmark), a belt decoration plate from Skedemosse (Sweden), a drawing on a Quadi vessel shard of the 2nd century from Prikas, Olomouc, Moravia (Czech Republic), and on the gold bracteate of Ponsdorf Mistelbach District, Lower Austria. According to Willi Wegewitz the Tangendorf disc brooch is one of the most magnificent brooches of the period of the Roman Empire from northern Germany and Scandinavia.

0145_NT

Tangendorf disc brooch

Describe the characteristics of the Comparable artwork in this artwork's Interpretation.

A similar, 55 millimetres (2.2 in) diameter, disc brooch is known from a burial at Häven in Mecklenburg-Vorpommern, Germany, but depicts a forward-facing animal. The similarities in manufacture and decoration are so striking that Wegewitz believed they were produced in the same workshop. Parallels of the illustrated animal are known from archaeological finds on a silver goblet from Nordrup (near Skaftelev in Slagelse Municipality, Zealand (Denmark), a belt decoration plate from Skedemosse (Sweden), a drawing on a Quadi vessel shard of the 2nd century from Prikas, Olomouc, Moravia (Czech Republic), and on the gold bracteate of Ponsdorf Mistelbach District, Lower Austria. According to Willi Wegewitz the Tangendorf disc brooch is one of the most magnificent brooches of the period of the Roman Empire from northern Germany and Scandinavia.

0146_T

Tangendorf disc brooch

In the context of Tangendorf disc brooch, explore the Reconstruction of the Interpretation.

After a detailed analysis of the construction, Hans Drescher manufactured two reconstructions of the Tangendorf disc brooch, one copy for the Helms-Museum and the second for the Niedersächsisches Landesmuseum Hannover. Drescher used ivory for the organic ring, giving a decorative contrast between its white color and the golden disc. Drescher published his detailed findings in 1955.

0146_NT

Tangendorf disc brooch

In the context of this artwork, explore the Reconstruction of the Interpretation.

After a detailed analysis of the construction, Hans Drescher manufactured two reconstructions of the Tangendorf disc brooch, one copy for the Helms-Museum and the second for the Niedersächsisches Landesmuseum Hannover. Drescher used ivory for the organic ring, giving a decorative contrast between its white color and the golden disc. Drescher published his detailed findings in 1955.

0147_T

Tangendorf disc brooch

Focus on Tangendorf disc brooch and explain the Reception.

Since 2002, Toppenstedt has used a stylized representation of the brooch in its coat of arms.

0147_NT

Tangendorf disc brooch

Focus on this artwork and explain the Reception.

Since 2002, Toppenstedt has used a stylized representation of the brooch in its coat of arms.

0148_T

"Untitled" (Portrait of Ross in L.A.)

Explore the abstract of this artwork, "Untitled" (Portrait of Ross in L.A.).

"Untitled" (Portrait of Ross in L.A.) is a work of art by Félix González-Torres, currently in the collection of the Art Institute of Chicago. The work is one of the twenty "candy works" in Gonzalez-Torres's oeuvre. The candy works are manifestable; the artworks are not physically permanent, they can exist in more than one place at a time and can vary from one installation to the next in response to the decisions made by the exhibitor, the interactions of audiences, and changing circumstances. This candy work has an ideal weight of 175 pounds (79 kg).

0148_NT

"Untitled" (Portrait of Ross in L.A.)

Explore the abstract of this artwork.

"Untitled" (Portrait of Ross in L.A.) is a work of art by Félix González-Torres, currently in the collection of the Art Institute of Chicago. The work is one of the twenty "candy works" in Gonzalez-Torres's oeuvre. The candy works are manifestable; the artworks are not physically permanent, they can exist in more than one place at a time and can vary from one installation to the next in response to the decisions made by the exhibitor, the interactions of audiences, and changing circumstances. This candy work has an ideal weight of 175 pounds (79 kg).

0149_T

"Untitled" (Portrait of Ross in L.A.)

Focus on "Untitled" (Portrait of Ross in L.A.) and discuss the Presentation.

A manifestation of "Untitled" (Portrait of Ross in L.A.) consists of a pile of candies individually wrapped in variously colored wrappers. Viewers are permitted to choose to take a piece of candy from the work and the caption describes that there is an “endless supply” of candies. The specific type of candy used to manifest the work, the initial choice of configuration and overall size and shape of a particular manifestation of the work are decided by the exhibitor. The candy works have been exhibited as rectangular carpets of candies, heaped in the corners of exhibition spaces, spread across the floor in organic arrangements and shaped into mounds on the ground, etc. While the ideal weight of the work is a constant, the actual weight of the candies used to manifest the work is always in flux. The amount of candy changes as exhibitors make decisions about the weight that is initially installed, viewers choose to take candies from the work, and whether the candy is allowed to diminish and/or is replenished over the course of an exhibition. In one specific installation, art handlers at the Art Institute of Chicago recalled that the decisions for maintaining candies varied depending on visitors "During very busy periods, [we] may replenish the pile twice weekly, with approximately 45 pounds (20 kg) being added to the sculpture. On average, we add 15 or 20 pounds (6.8 or 9.1 kg) weekly." Sometimes the handlers would add candies to rebalance the piece's color.

0149_NT

"Untitled" (Portrait of Ross in L.A.)

Focus on this artwork and discuss the Presentation.

A manifestation of "Untitled" (Portrait of Ross in L.A.) consists of a pile of candies individually wrapped in variously colored wrappers. Viewers are permitted to choose to take a piece of candy from the work and the caption describes that there is an “endless supply” of candies. The specific type of candy used to manifest the work, the initial choice of configuration and overall size and shape of a particular manifestation of the work are decided by the exhibitor. The candy works have been exhibited as rectangular carpets of candies, heaped in the corners of exhibition spaces, spread across the floor in organic arrangements and shaped into mounds on the ground, etc. While the ideal weight of the work is a constant, the actual weight of the candies used to manifest the work is always in flux. The amount of candy changes as exhibitors make decisions about the weight that is initially installed, viewers choose to take candies from the work, and whether the candy is allowed to diminish and/or is replenished over the course of an exhibition. In one specific installation, art handlers at the Art Institute of Chicago recalled that the decisions for maintaining candies varied depending on visitors "During very busy periods, [we] may replenish the pile twice weekly, with approximately 45 pounds (20 kg) being added to the sculpture. On average, we add 15 or 20 pounds (6.8 or 9.1 kg) weekly." Sometimes the handlers would add candies to rebalance the piece's color.

0150_T

"Untitled" (Portrait of Ross in L.A.)

How does "Untitled" (Portrait of Ross in L.A.) elucidate its Exhibitions and interpretations?

“Untitled” (Portrait of Ross in L.A.) was first exhibited in a solo-presentation of the artist's work at Luhring Augustine Hetzler Gallery, Los Angeles, CA which was open from October 19 – November 16, 1991. The press release for the exhibition stated: "The real life and work of an artist exists within its own flowing continuum."González-Torres's partner Ross Laycock died of AIDS related complications in 1991, the same year as "Untitled" (Portrait of Ross in L.A.)'s creation. The work has been interpreted as an "allegorical portrait" of Laycock.The work was included in Could Not Bear the Sight of It: Contemporary Art Interventions on Critical Whiteness, an exhibition at the Jane Addams Hull House-Museum in Chicago, IL in 2012. The exhibition, curated by Lisa Yun Lee and Theaster Gates, sought to "ask a series of questions about how whiteness is both invisible and dominant: Is there any such thing as white culture? What is the secret to being white? How has whiteness changed over time? What does a world without racism look like?" In 2016, "Untitled" (Portrait of Ross in L.A.) was installed at The Metropolitan Museum of Art as part of the exhibition Unfinished: Thoughts Left Visible. The exhibition centered on the question of when an artwork is considered finished, and included works which were left incomplete by their makers, as well as those which were intentionally unfinished as a way to embrace unlimited possibilities. At some point between the summer of 2018 and fall of 2022, the Art Institute of Chicago removed references to Ross Laycock, homosexuality, and AIDS from the wall label for “Untitled” (Portrait of Ross in L.A.). This information remained in the audio guide that accompanied the installation. The edited label applauded Gonzalez-Torres's "uncanny ability to produce elegant and unrestrained sculptural forms out of common materials" and equates the 175 lb. of candy to the "average weight of an adult male". The edited label was replaced with a new wall label which included the previously removed context after the removal was decried by a letter in The Windy City Times and by a viral Tweet. Joshua Chambers-Letson was quoted in an October 2022 article for the Chicago Tribune: “Felix left a lot of responsibility in the hands of the people who exhibit the piece, and he was very generous in allowing spectators to produce any meaning that they need to in relationship to the work…. I can understand that person's reaction, but also, Ross is in the title. Felix secured for the rest of all time that there would be a reference to Ross (in the work).” In January 2023, Artnet News published an article that commented on these wall labels, saying "what the incident at the Art Institute illustrated was the complexities and nuances inherent to Gonzalez-Torres's work—and the intense personal connection to his story that many feel."The Art Story Foundation viewed the candy-eating aspect as "[one becoming] complicit in the disappearing process - akin to the years-long public health crisis of HIV/AIDS." Lauren Weinberg of Time Out Chicago interpreted it similarly: "the diminishment recalls how he wasted away before dying."The Art Story Foundation called "Untitled" (Portrait of Ross in L.A.) "one of González-Torres's most recognizable works." As of 2023, the work has been included in over 30 different exhibitions in galleries and museums around the world.

0150_NT

"Untitled" (Portrait of Ross in L.A.)

How does this artwork elucidate its Exhibitions and interpretations?

“Untitled” (Portrait of Ross in L.A.) was first exhibited in a solo-presentation of the artist's work at Luhring Augustine Hetzler Gallery, Los Angeles, CA which was open from October 19 – November 16, 1991. The press release for the exhibition stated: "The real life and work of an artist exists within its own flowing continuum."González-Torres's partner Ross Laycock died of AIDS related complications in 1991, the same year as "Untitled" (Portrait of Ross in L.A.)'s creation. The work has been interpreted as an "allegorical portrait" of Laycock.The work was included in Could Not Bear the Sight of It: Contemporary Art Interventions on Critical Whiteness, an exhibition at the Jane Addams Hull House-Museum in Chicago, IL in 2012. The exhibition, curated by Lisa Yun Lee and Theaster Gates, sought to "ask a series of questions about how whiteness is both invisible and dominant: Is there any such thing as white culture? What is the secret to being white? How has whiteness changed over time? What does a world without racism look like?" In 2016, "Untitled" (Portrait of Ross in L.A.) was installed at The Metropolitan Museum of Art as part of the exhibition Unfinished: Thoughts Left Visible. The exhibition centered on the question of when an artwork is considered finished, and included works which were left incomplete by their makers, as well as those which were intentionally unfinished as a way to embrace unlimited possibilities. At some point between the summer of 2018 and fall of 2022, the Art Institute of Chicago removed references to Ross Laycock, homosexuality, and AIDS from the wall label for “Untitled” (Portrait of Ross in L.A.). This information remained in the audio guide that accompanied the installation. The edited label applauded Gonzalez-Torres's "uncanny ability to produce elegant and unrestrained sculptural forms out of common materials" and equates the 175 lb. of candy to the "average weight of an adult male". The edited label was replaced with a new wall label which included the previously removed context after the removal was decried by a letter in The Windy City Times and by a viral Tweet. Joshua Chambers-Letson was quoted in an October 2022 article for the Chicago Tribune: “Felix left a lot of responsibility in the hands of the people who exhibit the piece, and he was very generous in allowing spectators to produce any meaning that they need to in relationship to the work…. I can understand that person's reaction, but also, Ross is in the title. Felix secured for the rest of all time that there would be a reference to Ross (in the work).” In January 2023, Artnet News published an article that commented on these wall labels, saying "what the incident at the Art Institute illustrated was the complexities and nuances inherent to Gonzalez-Torres's work—and the intense personal connection to his story that many feel."The Art Story Foundation viewed the candy-eating aspect as "[one becoming] complicit in the disappearing process - akin to the years-long public health crisis of HIV/AIDS." Lauren Weinberg of Time Out Chicago interpreted it similarly: "the diminishment recalls how he wasted away before dying."The Art Story Foundation called "Untitled" (Portrait of Ross in L.A.) "one of González-Torres's most recognizable works." As of 2023, the work has been included in over 30 different exhibitions in galleries and museums around the world.