Datasets:

naist-nlp

/

ExpArt

like 3

Follow

NAIST NLP 19

1051_T

The Massacre at Chios

Focus on The Massacre at Chios and explain the Massacre.

A military attack on the inhabitants of Chios by Ottoman forces commenced on 12 April 1822 and was prosecuted for several months into the summer of the same year. The campaign resulted in the deaths of twenty thousand citizens, and the forced deportation into slavery of almost all the surviving seventy thousand inhabitants.

1051_NT

The Massacre at Chios

Focus on this artwork and explain the Massacre.

A military attack on the inhabitants of Chios by Ottoman forces commenced on 12 April 1822 and was prosecuted for several months into the summer of the same year. The campaign resulted in the deaths of twenty thousand citizens, and the forced deportation into slavery of almost all the surviving seventy thousand inhabitants.

1052_T

The Massacre at Chios

Explore the Composition of this artwork, The Massacre at Chios.

Delacroix had been greatly impressed by his fellow Parisien Théodore Géricault's The Raft of the Medusa, a painting for which he himself modeled as the young man at the front with the outstretched arm. The pyramidal arrangement that governs Géricault's painting is similarly seen with the figures in the foreground of The Massacre at Chios. On this unlikely layout of characters, Delacroix commented, "One must fill up; if it is less natural, it will be more beautiful and fécond. Would that everything should hold together!" The dense assembly of characters at the front is in marked contrast to the open and dispersed spaces behind them. Land and sea, light and shade appear as bands of drifting colours listlessly running into each other, and Delacroix appears to abandon the laws of perspective altogether with his rendering of clouds. The complete effect of this background is to suggest a constant opening out, dissolution and centrelessness. Aesthetician Heinrich Wölfflin identified this technique, and classified it a tectonic form. The thirteen civilians—men, women and children–have been rounded up for slaughter or enslavement. They are harshly presented to the viewer in an almost flat plane; slumped, disordered, and unevenly distributed. Their arrangement principally comprises two human pyramids–one pyramid to the left of the canvas culminating in the man with the red fez, and the other to the right culminating in the mounted soldier. The area between the two pyramids contains two soldiers in shadow, and two more Greek victims–a young man embraced by a young woman. The two men in the pyramid to the left are injured. The man at the front is on or near to the point of death, and the man poised at the top of the group appears unable to prepare a defence for himself. His gaze is in the direction of the suffering children in front of him, but it does not fall on them. This seeming detachment, coupled with the vacant stare of the dying man lend to this group an air of despondent resignation.In contrast, the human pyramid to the right has a vigorous vertical thrust. The writhing of the woman tied to the horse, the upward reaching stretch of the figure to her left, the shocking mane of the horse, and the twisting and commanding figure of the soldier upon it, all give dynamism to the grouping as it rises. But at the foot of the pyramid, an old woman raises her head to gaze into the sky, and to her right a baby seeks maternal comfort from a clenched-fisted corpse. Body parts including a hand and forearm, and an indistinct, congealed bloody mass hover grimly above the infant. Of the rear, Elisabeth A. Fraser notes that "[t]he background cuts through the centre of the composition and drops inexplicably out and back from the cluster of [foreground] figures." This dramatic arrangement breaks the picture apart into fragments, with clumps of tangled bodies, scattered glances and other details competing for the viewers attention. In the middle distance, another mêlée of humanitarian disaster unfolds, and the background is an uneven display of sacked, burning settlements and scorched earth. Most of the Mediterranean horizon is painted with bleak earth colours, and it is punctuated only by smoke, the mane of the rearing horse and the head of the soldier.

1052_NT

The Massacre at Chios

Explore the Composition of this artwork.

Delacroix had been greatly impressed by his fellow Parisien Théodore Géricault's The Raft of the Medusa, a painting for which he himself modeled as the young man at the front with the outstretched arm. The pyramidal arrangement that governs Géricault's painting is similarly seen with the figures in the foreground of The Massacre at Chios. On this unlikely layout of characters, Delacroix commented, "One must fill up; if it is less natural, it will be more beautiful and fécond. Would that everything should hold together!" The dense assembly of characters at the front is in marked contrast to the open and dispersed spaces behind them. Land and sea, light and shade appear as bands of drifting colours listlessly running into each other, and Delacroix appears to abandon the laws of perspective altogether with his rendering of clouds. The complete effect of this background is to suggest a constant opening out, dissolution and centrelessness. Aesthetician Heinrich Wölfflin identified this technique, and classified it a tectonic form. The thirteen civilians—men, women and children–have been rounded up for slaughter or enslavement. They are harshly presented to the viewer in an almost flat plane; slumped, disordered, and unevenly distributed. Their arrangement principally comprises two human pyramids–one pyramid to the left of the canvas culminating in the man with the red fez, and the other to the right culminating in the mounted soldier. The area between the two pyramids contains two soldiers in shadow, and two more Greek victims–a young man embraced by a young woman. The two men in the pyramid to the left are injured. The man at the front is on or near to the point of death, and the man poised at the top of the group appears unable to prepare a defence for himself. His gaze is in the direction of the suffering children in front of him, but it does not fall on them. This seeming detachment, coupled with the vacant stare of the dying man lend to this group an air of despondent resignation.In contrast, the human pyramid to the right has a vigorous vertical thrust. The writhing of the woman tied to the horse, the upward reaching stretch of the figure to her left, the shocking mane of the horse, and the twisting and commanding figure of the soldier upon it, all give dynamism to the grouping as it rises. But at the foot of the pyramid, an old woman raises her head to gaze into the sky, and to her right a baby seeks maternal comfort from a clenched-fisted corpse. Body parts including a hand and forearm, and an indistinct, congealed bloody mass hover grimly above the infant. Of the rear, Elisabeth A. Fraser notes that "[t]he background cuts through the centre of the composition and drops inexplicably out and back from the cluster of [foreground] figures." This dramatic arrangement breaks the picture apart into fragments, with clumps of tangled bodies, scattered glances and other details competing for the viewers attention. In the middle distance, another mêlée of humanitarian disaster unfolds, and the background is an uneven display of sacked, burning settlements and scorched earth. Most of the Mediterranean horizon is painted with bleak earth colours, and it is punctuated only by smoke, the mane of the rearing horse and the head of the soldier.

1053_T

The Massacre at Chios

Focus on The Massacre at Chios and discuss the Figures.

Delacroix reveals over a number of weeks' entries in his Journal a desire to try to get away from the academically sound and muscular figures of his previous work Dante and Virgil in Hell. Two studies Delacroix worked on at this time, Head of an Old Greek Woman and Girl Seated in a Cemetery, show the combination of unexaggerated modelling and accented contour he was striving to incorporate into his larger work. The final treatment of figures in the Massacre is however less consistent than these two studies. The flesh of the dead (or dying) man at the front is for instance strongly colouristically rendered, contrasting with the more tonal modelling of the nude to the right, and the Veronese-like schematic modelling of the baby.

1053_NT

The Massacre at Chios

Focus on this artwork and discuss the Figures.

Delacroix reveals over a number of weeks' entries in his Journal a desire to try to get away from the academically sound and muscular figures of his previous work Dante and Virgil in Hell. Two studies Delacroix worked on at this time, Head of an Old Greek Woman and Girl Seated in a Cemetery, show the combination of unexaggerated modelling and accented contour he was striving to incorporate into his larger work. The final treatment of figures in the Massacre is however less consistent than these two studies. The flesh of the dead (or dying) man at the front is for instance strongly colouristically rendered, contrasting with the more tonal modelling of the nude to the right, and the Veronese-like schematic modelling of the baby.

1054_T

The Massacre at Chios

How does The Massacre at Chios elucidate its History?

On 15 September 1821, Delacroix wrote to his friend Raymond Soulier that he wanted to make a reputation for himself by painting a scene from the war between the Ottomans and the Greeks, and have this painting displayed at the Salon. At this time Delacroix was not famous, and had yet to paint a canvas that was to be hung for public display. In the event, he decided to paint his Dante and Virgil in Hell, but even as this painting was revealed to the public in April 1822, the atrocities at Chios were being meted out in full force. In May 1823, Delacroix committed to paint a picture about the massacre. When the Salon of 1824 opened on 25 August—an unusually late date for this institution—Delacroix's picture was shown there as exhibit no. 450 and entitled Scènes des massacres de Scio; familles grecques attendent la mort ou l'esclavage, etc. (English:Scenes of massacres at Chios; Greek families awaiting death or slavery, etc..) The painting was hung in the same room that housed Ingres' The Vow of Louis XIII. This display of two works exemplifying such a different approaches to the expression of form marked the beginning of the public rivalry between the two artists. Delacroix thought this was the moment the academy began to regard him as an "object of antipathy".Alexandre Dumas reported that "there is always a group in front of the picture ..., painters of every school engaged in heated discussion". Both Dumas and Stendhal remarked that they thought the picture was a depiction of a plague, which in part it was. Gros, from whose Plague of Jaffa Delacroix had noticeably borrowed, called it "the massacre of painting". Ingres said the painting exemplified the 'fever and epilepsy' of modern art. Critics Girodet and Thiers were, however, more flattering, and the painting was sufficiently well regarded for the state to purchase it the same year for the Musée du Luxembourg for 6000 francs. The purchase provoked internal conflicts in the Restoration arts administration, however, when the Comte de Forbin, director of the royal museums, bought the painting without the King's official approval, an irregular and politically risky procedure. In November 1874 it was transferred to the Musée du Louvre.

1054_NT

The Massacre at Chios

How does this artwork elucidate its History?

On 15 September 1821, Delacroix wrote to his friend Raymond Soulier that he wanted to make a reputation for himself by painting a scene from the war between the Ottomans and the Greeks, and have this painting displayed at the Salon. At this time Delacroix was not famous, and had yet to paint a canvas that was to be hung for public display. In the event, he decided to paint his Dante and Virgil in Hell, but even as this painting was revealed to the public in April 1822, the atrocities at Chios were being meted out in full force. In May 1823, Delacroix committed to paint a picture about the massacre. When the Salon of 1824 opened on 25 August—an unusually late date for this institution—Delacroix's picture was shown there as exhibit no. 450 and entitled Scènes des massacres de Scio; familles grecques attendent la mort ou l'esclavage, etc. (English:Scenes of massacres at Chios; Greek families awaiting death or slavery, etc..) The painting was hung in the same room that housed Ingres' The Vow of Louis XIII. This display of two works exemplifying such a different approaches to the expression of form marked the beginning of the public rivalry between the two artists. Delacroix thought this was the moment the academy began to regard him as an "object of antipathy".Alexandre Dumas reported that "there is always a group in front of the picture ..., painters of every school engaged in heated discussion". Both Dumas and Stendhal remarked that they thought the picture was a depiction of a plague, which in part it was. Gros, from whose Plague of Jaffa Delacroix had noticeably borrowed, called it "the massacre of painting". Ingres said the painting exemplified the 'fever and epilepsy' of modern art. Critics Girodet and Thiers were, however, more flattering, and the painting was sufficiently well regarded for the state to purchase it the same year for the Musée du Luxembourg for 6000 francs. The purchase provoked internal conflicts in the Restoration arts administration, however, when the Comte de Forbin, director of the royal museums, bought the painting without the King's official approval, an irregular and politically risky procedure. In November 1874 it was transferred to the Musée du Louvre.

1055_T

The Massacre at Chios

Focus on The Massacre at Chios and analyze the In Greece.

Naturally, Delacroix's painting aroused considerable attention in Greece. A draft of this painting, created under the supervision of Delacroix in his lab by one of his students, is in display in the Athens War Museum. In 2009, a copy of the painting was displayed in the local Byzantine museum on Chios. It was withdrawn from the museum in November 2009 in a "good faith initiative" for the improvement of Greek-Turkish relations. However, the Greek press protested its removal. The copy is now back on display in the museum.

1055_NT

The Massacre at Chios

Focus on this artwork and analyze the In Greece.

Naturally, Delacroix's painting aroused considerable attention in Greece. A draft of this painting, created under the supervision of Delacroix in his lab by one of his students, is in display in the Athens War Museum. In 2009, a copy of the painting was displayed in the local Byzantine museum on Chios. It was withdrawn from the museum in November 2009 in a "good faith initiative" for the improvement of Greek-Turkish relations. However, the Greek press protested its removal. The copy is now back on display in the museum.

1056_T

Stoning of Stephen (Damaskinos)

Focus on Stoning of Stephen (Damaskinos) and explore the Description.

The painting is egg tempera and gold leaf on wood. The painting is huge, it measures over five feet tall. The dimensions are 165.5 cm (65.2 in) x 97.5 cm (38.4 in) it was completed towards the end of the 16th century while the painter was in Crete. The painting follows the traditional maniera greca influenced by Venetian painting. The painter employs the Italian Renaissance cangiante style.Stephen is the central figure. Similar to both the Romano and Tintoretto. He stands in the foreground. His facial expression relays a message of sorrow. Both Romano and Damaskinos capture this moment similarly. Damaskinos elegantly accentuates the striations and folds of fabric. Stephen is wearing elaborate jewelry around his collar. He is also depicted with a halo. A bright red decorated stole overlaps his torso. To his right or our left, a man holding a stone appears with a detailed expression on his face. His forehead and his body demonstrate the painter's ability to use colors, lines, and shadows to present his figures. Under the man lies an ornate shield depicting the lion of Venice. Damaskinos is blending first-century attire with clothing and objects prevalent during his lifetime. Three figures are throwing stones. In the middle ground, a man sits observing the event. He was a high-ranking Roman soldier. The event followed a speedy trial based on the laws and customs of the time. Stephen did not have a trial like Jesus. The Roman soldier's armor is elaborately decorated. Once again, Damaskinos is mixing first-century attire with clothing prevalent during his lifetime. The Roman soldier wears the same armor in Damaskinos's Beheading of John the Baptist. The same character is in both paintings. Both paintings were created around the same period. The Virgin Mary and Apostles sit to the right of the Roman soldier. A unique building also lies behind the Roman soldier. In the Damaskinos parts of the painting were lost with time. Luckily, Philotheos Skoufos painted an identical version during the 1600s. There was also a city in the background. At the top of the painting, Jesus lies waiting for his disciple. He holds a book in his left hand representing the new testament. Angles are dispatched to go collect Saint Stephen the protomartyr.

1056_NT

Stoning of Stephen (Damaskinos)

Focus on this artwork and explore the Description.

The painting is egg tempera and gold leaf on wood. The painting is huge, it measures over five feet tall. The dimensions are 165.5 cm (65.2 in) x 97.5 cm (38.4 in) it was completed towards the end of the 16th century while the painter was in Crete. The painting follows the traditional maniera greca influenced by Venetian painting. The painter employs the Italian Renaissance cangiante style.Stephen is the central figure. Similar to both the Romano and Tintoretto. He stands in the foreground. His facial expression relays a message of sorrow. Both Romano and Damaskinos capture this moment similarly. Damaskinos elegantly accentuates the striations and folds of fabric. Stephen is wearing elaborate jewelry around his collar. He is also depicted with a halo. A bright red decorated stole overlaps his torso. To his right or our left, a man holding a stone appears with a detailed expression on his face. His forehead and his body demonstrate the painter's ability to use colors, lines, and shadows to present his figures. Under the man lies an ornate shield depicting the lion of Venice. Damaskinos is blending first-century attire with clothing and objects prevalent during his lifetime. Three figures are throwing stones. In the middle ground, a man sits observing the event. He was a high-ranking Roman soldier. The event followed a speedy trial based on the laws and customs of the time. Stephen did not have a trial like Jesus. The Roman soldier's armor is elaborately decorated. Once again, Damaskinos is mixing first-century attire with clothing prevalent during his lifetime. The Roman soldier wears the same armor in Damaskinos's Beheading of John the Baptist. The same character is in both paintings. Both paintings were created around the same period. The Virgin Mary and Apostles sit to the right of the Roman soldier. A unique building also lies behind the Roman soldier. In the Damaskinos parts of the painting were lost with time. Luckily, Philotheos Skoufos painted an identical version during the 1600s. There was also a city in the background. At the top of the painting, Jesus lies waiting for his disciple. He holds a book in his left hand representing the new testament. Angles are dispatched to go collect Saint Stephen the protomartyr.

1057_T

Stoning of Stephen (Damaskinos)

Focus on Stoning of Stephen (Damaskinos) and explain the Notable Copies.

There are four remaining works that are very similar to the original created between 1640-1707. The works were finished by three famous Greek painters. Philotheos Skoufos finished two versions of the original between 1640-1685. One of his versions is in good condition it is located at the Metsovo Folk Art Museum in Metsovo, Ioannina, Greece. The second version is slightly damaged it is located in the Byzantine Museum of Antivouniotissa in Corfu. It is on the same island as the original. Victor finished a copy of the work around the same period as Skoufos. The painting is housed at the Byzantine and Christian Museum. The final version is part of the Kalliga Collection in Greece. The icon was completed by Stephanos Tzangarolas in 1707.

1057_NT

Stoning of Stephen (Damaskinos)

Focus on this artwork and explain the Notable Copies.

There are four remaining works that are very similar to the original created between 1640-1707. The works were finished by three famous Greek painters. Philotheos Skoufos finished two versions of the original between 1640-1685. One of his versions is in good condition it is located at the Metsovo Folk Art Museum in Metsovo, Ioannina, Greece. The second version is slightly damaged it is located in the Byzantine Museum of Antivouniotissa in Corfu. It is on the same island as the original. Victor finished a copy of the work around the same period as Skoufos. The painting is housed at the Byzantine and Christian Museum. The final version is part of the Kalliga Collection in Greece. The icon was completed by Stephanos Tzangarolas in 1707.

1058_T

For Jennifer

Explore the abstract of this artwork, For Jennifer.

For Jennifer is a 32-foot-tall sculpture by Joel Shapiro, installed in Denver, Colorado, U.S.

1058_NT

For Jennifer

Explore the abstract of this artwork.

For Jennifer is a 32-foot-tall sculpture by Joel Shapiro, installed in Denver, Colorado, U.S.

1059_T

The Negro Scipion

Focus on The Negro Scipion and discuss the abstract.

The Negro Scipion is an early painting by Paul Cézanne. The painting depicts a model, Scipion, in Cézanne's studio. Scipion is portrayed with an elongated torso with a muscular back, accentuated by broad brushstrokes. Cézanne used a variety of colors to modulate the tone of Scipion's back. Art historians consider the painting to be among the strongest works of Cézanne's early career, as it surprised many visitors to Monet's studio in Giverny, including Louis Vauxcelles, who described it as a “striking masterpiece” and deemed it “worthy of Delacroix”.

1059_NT

The Negro Scipion

Focus on this artwork and discuss the abstract.

The Negro Scipion is an early painting by Paul Cézanne. The painting depicts a model, Scipion, in Cézanne's studio. Scipion is portrayed with an elongated torso with a muscular back, accentuated by broad brushstrokes. Cézanne used a variety of colors to modulate the tone of Scipion's back. Art historians consider the painting to be among the strongest works of Cézanne's early career, as it surprised many visitors to Monet's studio in Giverny, including Louis Vauxcelles, who described it as a “striking masterpiece” and deemed it “worthy of Delacroix”.

1060_T

The Negro Scipion

How does The Negro Scipion elucidate its Context and analysis?

Scipion was a model at the Académie Suisse, where Cézanne studied after arriving in Paris in 1862. Little else is known about him, but scholars speculate that he also posed for a plaster by Philippe Solari, which is exhibited at the Salon of 1868 titled Nègre endormi (Sleeping Negro).Scholars have offered various interpretations of the painting, often suggesting that Scipion is mourning over the death of an unknown person. Scholars also speculate that Cézanne may have initially included another figure in the painting in the area of the white mass, which he later painted over.The painting belonged to Monet, who owned thirteen other works by Cézanne. He kept this painting in his bedroom along with other favorite works. He considered it to be "un morceau de première force" ("a work of the greatest strength"). Originally, Monet acquired this canvas from Ambroise Vollard and subsequently passed to his son, Michel Monet, who sold it to the dealer Paul Rosenberg. The Museu de Arte in São Paulo purchased it from the Wildenstein Galleries in 1950.

1060_NT

The Negro Scipion

How does this artwork elucidate its Context and analysis?

Scipion was a model at the Académie Suisse, where Cézanne studied after arriving in Paris in 1862. Little else is known about him, but scholars speculate that he also posed for a plaster by Philippe Solari, which is exhibited at the Salon of 1868 titled Nègre endormi (Sleeping Negro).Scholars have offered various interpretations of the painting, often suggesting that Scipion is mourning over the death of an unknown person. Scholars also speculate that Cézanne may have initially included another figure in the painting in the area of the white mass, which he later painted over.The painting belonged to Monet, who owned thirteen other works by Cézanne. He kept this painting in his bedroom along with other favorite works. He considered it to be "un morceau de première force" ("a work of the greatest strength"). Originally, Monet acquired this canvas from Ambroise Vollard and subsequently passed to his son, Michel Monet, who sold it to the dealer Paul Rosenberg. The Museu de Arte in São Paulo purchased it from the Wildenstein Galleries in 1950.

1061_T

The Negro Scipion

Focus on The Negro Scipion and analyze the Comparison.

The Negro Scipion, with its thick brush strokes, is often linked with Cézanne's painting The Abduction, dated 1867. Due to its similarity in style, both in the type of model and in the style of long brush strokes and unique form, scholars assign the two paintings to the same date. The Abduction is one of Cézanne’s few pictures that bear a date, allowing scholars to more firmly secure the date of The Negro Scipion. Scholars regard the painting as one of three important works that Cézanne executed in either Paris or Aix in that year (The Negro Scipion, The Abduction, and Mary Magdalen).

1061_NT

The Negro Scipion

Focus on this artwork and analyze the Comparison.

The Negro Scipion, with its thick brush strokes, is often linked with Cézanne's painting The Abduction, dated 1867. Due to its similarity in style, both in the type of model and in the style of long brush strokes and unique form, scholars assign the two paintings to the same date. The Abduction is one of Cézanne’s few pictures that bear a date, allowing scholars to more firmly secure the date of The Negro Scipion. Scholars regard the painting as one of three important works that Cézanne executed in either Paris or Aix in that year (The Negro Scipion, The Abduction, and Mary Magdalen).

1062_T

All the Essentially Essential

In All the Essentially Essential, how is the abstract discussed?

All the Essentially Essential is a sculpture in Raffles Place Park, Singapore.

1062_NT

All the Essentially Essential

In this artwork, how is the abstract discussed?

All the Essentially Essential is a sculpture in Raffles Place Park, Singapore.

1063_T

All the Essentially Essential

Focus on All the Essentially Essential and explore the History.

The sculpture was sculpted with stainless steel by Tan Wee Lit. The sculpture is of a toy kit, featuring several items, including a briefcase, a stroller and a bicycle, and is meant to represent the "work-life balance that Singaporeans strive for". The sculpture is intentionally left incomplete, to represent that "people's vitality and aspirations are the most essential factors that make life complete". The sculpture won the CDL Singapore Sculpture Award in 2007 and was temporarily displayed at the Singapore Art Museum. The sculpture was moved to Raffles Place Park in 2013.

1063_NT

All the Essentially Essential

Focus on this artwork and explore the History.

The sculpture was sculpted with stainless steel by Tan Wee Lit. The sculpture is of a toy kit, featuring several items, including a briefcase, a stroller and a bicycle, and is meant to represent the "work-life balance that Singaporeans strive for". The sculpture is intentionally left incomplete, to represent that "people's vitality and aspirations are the most essential factors that make life complete". The sculpture won the CDL Singapore Sculpture Award in 2007 and was temporarily displayed at the Singapore Art Museum. The sculpture was moved to Raffles Place Park in 2013.

1064_T

Madonna of the Candelabra

Focus on Madonna of the Candelabra and explain the abstract.

The Madonna of the Candelabra is a Madonna painting by the Italian Renaissance artist Raphael, dating to about 1513-1514 and is in the collection of the Walters Art Museum in Baltimore. Painted during his Roman period, this tondo Madonna of the Virgin and Child employs a rare motif of flanking candelabra that was derived from representations of ancient Roman emperors. Through this reference to the rulers of antiquity, Raphael alludes to Christ's and Mary's roles as the king and queen of Heaven. Raphael was famed for his graceful style. which combined the study of classical sculpture and nature. The chiaroscuro effects (modeling in light and shade) and gentle coloring give the figures a soft, delicate appearance. The painting relies heavily on the participation of Raphael's workshop, and the two angels certainly were done by his assistants. This was the first Madonna painted by Raphael to enter a North American collection. It was purchased by Henry Walters in 1901.The central portion of the painting was issued as the traditional holiday first class Christmas stamp for 2011 by the United States Postal Service. The stamp was released on October 13, 2011, in New York, New York.

1064_NT

Madonna of the Candelabra

Focus on this artwork and explain the abstract.

The Madonna of the Candelabra is a Madonna painting by the Italian Renaissance artist Raphael, dating to about 1513-1514 and is in the collection of the Walters Art Museum in Baltimore. Painted during his Roman period, this tondo Madonna of the Virgin and Child employs a rare motif of flanking candelabra that was derived from representations of ancient Roman emperors. Through this reference to the rulers of antiquity, Raphael alludes to Christ's and Mary's roles as the king and queen of Heaven. Raphael was famed for his graceful style. which combined the study of classical sculpture and nature. The chiaroscuro effects (modeling in light and shade) and gentle coloring give the figures a soft, delicate appearance. The painting relies heavily on the participation of Raphael's workshop, and the two angels certainly were done by his assistants. This was the first Madonna painted by Raphael to enter a North American collection. It was purchased by Henry Walters in 1901.The central portion of the painting was issued as the traditional holiday first class Christmas stamp for 2011 by the United States Postal Service. The stamp was released on October 13, 2011, in New York, New York.

1065_T

Cupid Making His Bow

Explore the abstract of this artwork, Cupid Making His Bow.

Cupid Making His Bow (c. 1533–1535) is a painting by the Italian late Renaissance artist Parmigianino. It is housed in the Kunsthistorisches Museum, Vienna, Austria.

1065_NT

Cupid Making His Bow

Explore the abstract of this artwork.

Cupid Making His Bow (c. 1533–1535) is a painting by the Italian late Renaissance artist Parmigianino. It is housed in the Kunsthistorisches Museum, Vienna, Austria.

1066_T

Femme au béret et à la robe quadrillée (Marie-Thérèse Walter)

Focus on Femme au béret et à la robe quadrillée (Marie-Thérèse Walter) and discuss the abstract.

Femme au béret et à la robe quadrillée (Marie-Thérèse Walter) (Woman wearing a beret and checkered dress) is an oil-on-canvas painting by Pablo Picasso, which he created in 1937. It is a portrait of Marie-Thérèse Walter, Picasso's lover and muse during this period and was created with elements of Cubism. The painting signifies a transition in their relationship by combining Walter's profile with that of Picasso's new lover, the Surrealist photographer Dora Maar, with whom he began a relationship in 1936. This portrait was produced in the same year as Guernica and The Weeping Woman, a significant phase in Picasso's artistic career. On 28 February 2018, it was sold at Sotheby's auction for £49.8 million, making it one of the most expensive paintings ever sold at an auction in Europe.

1066_NT

Femme au béret et à la robe quadrillée (Marie-Thérèse Walter)

Focus on this artwork and discuss the abstract.

Femme au béret et à la robe quadrillée (Marie-Thérèse Walter) (Woman wearing a beret and checkered dress) is an oil-on-canvas painting by Pablo Picasso, which he created in 1937. It is a portrait of Marie-Thérèse Walter, Picasso's lover and muse during this period and was created with elements of Cubism. The painting signifies a transition in their relationship by combining Walter's profile with that of Picasso's new lover, the Surrealist photographer Dora Maar, with whom he began a relationship in 1936. This portrait was produced in the same year as Guernica and The Weeping Woman, a significant phase in Picasso's artistic career. On 28 February 2018, it was sold at Sotheby's auction for £49.8 million, making it one of the most expensive paintings ever sold at an auction in Europe.

1067_T

Femme au béret et à la robe quadrillée (Marie-Thérèse Walter)

How does Femme au béret et à la robe quadrillée (Marie-Thérèse Walter) elucidate its Background?

This portrait reflects the artist's evolving relationship with Marie-Thérèse Walter during this period of their relationship. Prior to producing this work, Picasso had depicted his relationship with Walter as a blissful partnership, illustrated by the many sensual portraits that he created of her in 1932, which has led to her being described as Picasso's "Golden Muse". However, this painting reveals a change in their relationship over the course of five years. By 1937, Walter was the mother of Picasso's daughter, Maya, and her status as his mistress was under threat with the introduction of Dora Maar as a new love in the artist's life.The painting was produced in 1937, a particularly significant year in Picasso's artistic career, in which he also produced Guernica and The Weeping Woman. These significant works were the result of a turbulent year defined by political unrest in Spain and the bombing of the town of Guernica. Produced in December 1937, this portrait has been viewed as a continuation of The Weeping Woman theme. Neil Cox remarked on the perceived connection between Picasso's turbulent personal life and the political upheaval of the period, stating, "For Picasso the question of 'modernity' was acute in the 1930s and 1940s, since modernity in this period meant a personal life, a nation, a Europe and indeed a world in crisis. This period in Picasso's art is marked by a succession of shattering events in his personal life that no doubt appeared to him mirrored by the disasters in the world at large." Picasso's response to these turbulent events was to focus all of his attention on the monumental work of Guernica at the beginning of 1937. Both Walter and Maar played a significant role in the creation of Guernica, with Walter appearing at least twice in the composition. Maar played a more practical role in the development of the work, as she not only documented its progress, but also assisted with its painting.

1067_NT

Femme au béret et à la robe quadrillée (Marie-Thérèse Walter)

How does this artwork elucidate its Background?

This portrait reflects the artist's evolving relationship with Marie-Thérèse Walter during this period of their relationship. Prior to producing this work, Picasso had depicted his relationship with Walter as a blissful partnership, illustrated by the many sensual portraits that he created of her in 1932, which has led to her being described as Picasso's "Golden Muse". However, this painting reveals a change in their relationship over the course of five years. By 1937, Walter was the mother of Picasso's daughter, Maya, and her status as his mistress was under threat with the introduction of Dora Maar as a new love in the artist's life.The painting was produced in 1937, a particularly significant year in Picasso's artistic career, in which he also produced Guernica and The Weeping Woman. These significant works were the result of a turbulent year defined by political unrest in Spain and the bombing of the town of Guernica. Produced in December 1937, this portrait has been viewed as a continuation of The Weeping Woman theme. Neil Cox remarked on the perceived connection between Picasso's turbulent personal life and the political upheaval of the period, stating, "For Picasso the question of 'modernity' was acute in the 1930s and 1940s, since modernity in this period meant a personal life, a nation, a Europe and indeed a world in crisis. This period in Picasso's art is marked by a succession of shattering events in his personal life that no doubt appeared to him mirrored by the disasters in the world at large." Picasso's response to these turbulent events was to focus all of his attention on the monumental work of Guernica at the beginning of 1937. Both Walter and Maar played a significant role in the creation of Guernica, with Walter appearing at least twice in the composition. Maar played a more practical role in the development of the work, as she not only documented its progress, but also assisted with its painting.

1068_T

Femme au béret et à la robe quadrillée (Marie-Thérèse Walter)

In the context of Femme au béret et à la robe quadrillée (Marie-Thérèse Walter), analyze the Marie-Thérèse Walter of the Background.

Picasso first met 17-year-old Walter on the street outside Galeries Lafayette in 1927. She was a respectable girl who lived with her mother and sisters in Maisons-Alfort, a suburb of Paris. At the time, Picasso was aged 47 and unhappily married to Olga Khoklova, a Russian ballerina. Picasso approached Walter and asked to paint her portrait. He said, "You have an interesting face, I would like to do a portrait of you. I am Picasso". Walter had no knowledge of who Picasso was, but was flattered by his attention. Within two weeks they had begun a secret affair that was reflected by a change in Picasso's artistic approach. During this period, he created many portraits of Walter, such as Le Repos, which were characterised by sinuous curves that convey her voluptuous form and his great passion for her as his mistress and muse. For Picasso, this new romance offered a kind of rebirth in his personal life, illustrated by symbolic bowls of fruit and flowers, which contrasted with the staid portraits of his wife that he rendered in a formal, neoclassical style. Walter described their relationship, stating, "My life with him was always secret, calm and peaceful. We said nothing to anyone. We were happy like that, and we did not ask anything more." John Richardson, Picasso's friend and biographer opined that, "Picasso was more in love than he had ever been". By 1928, images produced of Picasso's wife were now characterised by tortured forms and jagged lines that display her increasing rage and aggression. In 1934 Khoklova left Picasso and moved out of their apartment following an exhibition that revealed the secret relationship in a series of nude portraits of Walter. On Christmas Eve of 1934, Walter told Picasso that she was pregnant and he promised to get a divorce from Khoklova, which was filed six months later. On 5 September 1935, Walter gave birth to a daughter, Maya, which led to Picasso creating several works depicting his new family. They remained together for over ten years but never married. In the autumn of 1937, Picasso and his family moved to Le Tremblay-sur-Mauldre, but this year also marked the beginning of a new love in his life, in the person of Dora Maar.

1068_NT

Femme au béret et à la robe quadrillée (Marie-Thérèse Walter)

In the context of this artwork, analyze the Marie-Thérèse Walter of the Background.

Picasso first met 17-year-old Walter on the street outside Galeries Lafayette in 1927. She was a respectable girl who lived with her mother and sisters in Maisons-Alfort, a suburb of Paris. At the time, Picasso was aged 47 and unhappily married to Olga Khoklova, a Russian ballerina. Picasso approached Walter and asked to paint her portrait. He said, "You have an interesting face, I would like to do a portrait of you. I am Picasso". Walter had no knowledge of who Picasso was, but was flattered by his attention. Within two weeks they had begun a secret affair that was reflected by a change in Picasso's artistic approach. During this period, he created many portraits of Walter, such as Le Repos, which were characterised by sinuous curves that convey her voluptuous form and his great passion for her as his mistress and muse. For Picasso, this new romance offered a kind of rebirth in his personal life, illustrated by symbolic bowls of fruit and flowers, which contrasted with the staid portraits of his wife that he rendered in a formal, neoclassical style. Walter described their relationship, stating, "My life with him was always secret, calm and peaceful. We said nothing to anyone. We were happy like that, and we did not ask anything more." John Richardson, Picasso's friend and biographer opined that, "Picasso was more in love than he had ever been". By 1928, images produced of Picasso's wife were now characterised by tortured forms and jagged lines that display her increasing rage and aggression. In 1934 Khoklova left Picasso and moved out of their apartment following an exhibition that revealed the secret relationship in a series of nude portraits of Walter. On Christmas Eve of 1934, Walter told Picasso that she was pregnant and he promised to get a divorce from Khoklova, which was filed six months later. On 5 September 1935, Walter gave birth to a daughter, Maya, which led to Picasso creating several works depicting his new family. They remained together for over ten years but never married. In the autumn of 1937, Picasso and his family moved to Le Tremblay-sur-Mauldre, but this year also marked the beginning of a new love in his life, in the person of Dora Maar.

1069_T

Femme au béret et à la robe quadrillée (Marie-Thérèse Walter)

Describe the characteristics of the Dora Maar in Femme au béret et à la robe quadrillée (Marie-Thérèse Walter)'s Background.

Two months after the birth of Maya in 1935, Picasso attended the opening of a movie, where he was introduced to Dora Maar, by the French poet Paul Éluard. Born Henriette Théodora Markovitch, she was a talented photographer, an intellectual, and involved in the Surrealist movement. Maar initially trained as a painter in the 1920s but became interested in photography. By 1931, she had opened a studio and renamed herself Dora Maar. Maar and Picasso began a relationship and, in August 1936, Picasso spent time apart from Walter by taking a trip to Mougins with Maar alongside Paul Éluard and his wife, Roland Penrose and his wife, and Man Ray and his mistress. In September 1936, Walter was offered Picasso's home at Le Tremblay-sur-Mauldre, located 28 miles from Paris. This provided Picasso with the freedom to maintain both relationships over a period of three years. Over the course of their relationship, Picasso's portrayals of his mistress changed. Initially he depicted her as a nymph or a bird, but by 1937, his paintings had begun to portray her in tears, most notably in The Weeping Woman. As well as being emotionally fractious, Maar's relationship with Picasso was influential in terms of his artwork and political outlook. Frances Morris, Director of Tate Modern commented, "He trusted her. As much as being a sexual or emotional relationship, it was a collaborative one".Picasso made efforts to ensure that Walter and Maar would not meet, but eventually they did. According to Picasso, the tension between his two mistresses reached a crisis point in 1937, while he was in the process of finishing Guernica. Picasso related a story to Françoise Gilot of a day when both women had arrived at his studio at the same time and had begun arguing. In her memoir titled Life with Picasso, Gilot recalled that Picasso had said, "I kept on painting and they kept on arguing". Walter had demanded that Picasso should choose between them. Picasso stated, "I was satisfied with things as they were. I told them they'd have to fight it out for themselves. So they began to wrestle. It's one of my choicest memories". Picasso continued to maintain both relationships with his mistresses after the outbreak of World War II. Picasso spent the war in occupied Paris. By 1945, his relationship with Maar had come to an end. Picasso had subjected her to physical and emotional abuse and she consequently suffered a nervous breakdown. After the war, Picasso relocated to the South of France with Françoise Gilot, his new partner, with whom he had two children.

1069_NT

Femme au béret et à la robe quadrillée (Marie-Thérèse Walter)

Describe the characteristics of the Dora Maar in this artwork's Background.

Two months after the birth of Maya in 1935, Picasso attended the opening of a movie, where he was introduced to Dora Maar, by the French poet Paul Éluard. Born Henriette Théodora Markovitch, she was a talented photographer, an intellectual, and involved in the Surrealist movement. Maar initially trained as a painter in the 1920s but became interested in photography. By 1931, she had opened a studio and renamed herself Dora Maar. Maar and Picasso began a relationship and, in August 1936, Picasso spent time apart from Walter by taking a trip to Mougins with Maar alongside Paul Éluard and his wife, Roland Penrose and his wife, and Man Ray and his mistress. In September 1936, Walter was offered Picasso's home at Le Tremblay-sur-Mauldre, located 28 miles from Paris. This provided Picasso with the freedom to maintain both relationships over a period of three years. Over the course of their relationship, Picasso's portrayals of his mistress changed. Initially he depicted her as a nymph or a bird, but by 1937, his paintings had begun to portray her in tears, most notably in The Weeping Woman. As well as being emotionally fractious, Maar's relationship with Picasso was influential in terms of his artwork and political outlook. Frances Morris, Director of Tate Modern commented, "He trusted her. As much as being a sexual or emotional relationship, it was a collaborative one".Picasso made efforts to ensure that Walter and Maar would not meet, but eventually they did. According to Picasso, the tension between his two mistresses reached a crisis point in 1937, while he was in the process of finishing Guernica. Picasso related a story to Françoise Gilot of a day when both women had arrived at his studio at the same time and had begun arguing. In her memoir titled Life with Picasso, Gilot recalled that Picasso had said, "I kept on painting and they kept on arguing". Walter had demanded that Picasso should choose between them. Picasso stated, "I was satisfied with things as they were. I told them they'd have to fight it out for themselves. So they began to wrestle. It's one of my choicest memories". Picasso continued to maintain both relationships with his mistresses after the outbreak of World War II. Picasso spent the war in occupied Paris. By 1945, his relationship with Maar had come to an end. Picasso had subjected her to physical and emotional abuse and she consequently suffered a nervous breakdown. After the war, Picasso relocated to the South of France with Françoise Gilot, his new partner, with whom he had two children.

1070_T

Femme au béret et à la robe quadrillée (Marie-Thérèse Walter)

Focus on Femme au béret et à la robe quadrillée (Marie-Thérèse Walter) and explore the Provenance.

The painting was originally in the estate of the artist. It was then held in a private collection. On 28 February 2018, the painting was sold at Sotheby's auction for £49,827,000 to Harry Smith, the chairman of the art appraisal and advisory firm Gurr Johns. It was the most expensive painting ever sold at auction in Europe, and the second most expensive work of art, after Alberto Giacometti's 1861 sculpture The Walking Man.

1070_NT

Femme au béret et à la robe quadrillée (Marie-Thérèse Walter)

Focus on this artwork and explore the Provenance.

The painting was originally in the estate of the artist. It was then held in a private collection. On 28 February 2018, the painting was sold at Sotheby's auction for £49,827,000 to Harry Smith, the chairman of the art appraisal and advisory firm Gurr Johns. It was the most expensive painting ever sold at auction in Europe, and the second most expensive work of art, after Alberto Giacometti's 1861 sculpture The Walking Man.

1071_T

Parade de cirque

Focus on Parade de cirque and explain the Description.

Circus Sideshow is a large oil painting on canvas measuring 99.7 × 149.9 centimetres (39.3 × 59.0 in). Painted in the Divisionist style, the work employs pointillist dots of color (primarily violet-gray, blue-gray, orange, and green) and a play of lines governed by rules whose laws Seurat had studied. It depicts immobile figures outdoors under artificial lighting at the sideshow of the Circus Corvi at place de la Nation, a working-class quarter in eastern Paris. A row of cornet and trombone players in solemn formation are seen under the unreal evening lights of a parade. The work is dominated by a monotony of horizontal and vertical lines, suggesting the rhythms of Egyptian reliefs and frescoes. Though rather than indicating distance as Egyptian art (by changing scale), or classically (by foreshortening), Seurat establishes the position of his subjects through lighting. Those in the foreground are unlit, painted in dark blue, while those behind the gas jets are brilliantly lit. Seurat's view of this scene is so radically flattened that it is difficult to identify the composition's multiple levels. The golden section appears to govern its geometric structure, though modern consensus among art historians is that Seurat never used this divine proportion in his work.The final study of Parade, executed prior to the oil on canvas, is divided horizontally into fourths and vertically into sixths. The 4 : 6 ratio corresponds to the dimensions of the canvas, which is one and one-half times wider than its vertical dimension. An additional vertical axes was drawn by Seurat, which neither corresponds to the location of the figures, nor to the architectural construction of the work; neither do these axes correspond precisely to the golden section, 1 : 1.6, as might have been expected. Rather, they correspond to basic mathematical divisions (simple ratios that appear to approximate the golden section), as noted by Seurat with citations from Charles Henry. The entrance of the circus tent consists of ticket window and doors at the center of a platform atop six steps. On both sides of the doors (here painted green), musicians and acrobats perform a sideshow on the balustraded platform to entice passersby. Those interested in purchasing tickets from the ticket seller—the man and woman toward the bottom right of the painting—climb the central stairs. Ticket holders queue parallel to the sideshow stage. The diagonal line behind the trombonist is the handrail for the subsidiary stairs. A woman with a young girl is buying a ticket on the platform to the right of the ringmaster. Just as the musicians toward the left, they are immersed in the orange glow of nine gas jets (each possessing a perceptible blue-violet aura) that illuminate the platform. Five yellow-white globes of interior lamps are visible through the ticket windows. The conspicuous tree to the left bares the presence of a human figure.A boy with a ruffled collar stands performing in front of the platform at the top of the central stairs. Despite appearances, the door behind him is on a different plane from the ticket window. The rectangular structure behind the trombonist (to the right), defines the edge of the platform and shows the admission price. Above the poster is the gas pipe support beam. The trombonist stands shadowed on a pedestal (left of the central stairs) several meters in front of the platform, illuminated from the rear. While the tuba player is faceless, the red faces of the clarinetist and cornet players show that they stand on the gaslit platform.A 1990 examination of Circus Sideshow at the Metropolitan Museum of Art laboratory under light similar in color to that given off by gas lamps, revealed an "extraordinary transformation", writes art historian Robert Herbert: "Under the colored light the faces of the figures on the platform no longer appeared unnaturally orange but flesh color, the shadows on the trombonist and on the spectators were no longer bright ultramarine blue but black, and the entire painting glowed as if it were lit from behind, which, of course, is precisely the effect of contre-lumiere on which Seurat predicated the picture."

1071_NT

Parade de cirque

Focus on this artwork and explain the Description.

Circus Sideshow is a large oil painting on canvas measuring 99.7 × 149.9 centimetres (39.3 × 59.0 in). Painted in the Divisionist style, the work employs pointillist dots of color (primarily violet-gray, blue-gray, orange, and green) and a play of lines governed by rules whose laws Seurat had studied. It depicts immobile figures outdoors under artificial lighting at the sideshow of the Circus Corvi at place de la Nation, a working-class quarter in eastern Paris. A row of cornet and trombone players in solemn formation are seen under the unreal evening lights of a parade. The work is dominated by a monotony of horizontal and vertical lines, suggesting the rhythms of Egyptian reliefs and frescoes. Though rather than indicating distance as Egyptian art (by changing scale), or classically (by foreshortening), Seurat establishes the position of his subjects through lighting. Those in the foreground are unlit, painted in dark blue, while those behind the gas jets are brilliantly lit. Seurat's view of this scene is so radically flattened that it is difficult to identify the composition's multiple levels. The golden section appears to govern its geometric structure, though modern consensus among art historians is that Seurat never used this divine proportion in his work.The final study of Parade, executed prior to the oil on canvas, is divided horizontally into fourths and vertically into sixths. The 4 : 6 ratio corresponds to the dimensions of the canvas, which is one and one-half times wider than its vertical dimension. An additional vertical axes was drawn by Seurat, which neither corresponds to the location of the figures, nor to the architectural construction of the work; neither do these axes correspond precisely to the golden section, 1 : 1.6, as might have been expected. Rather, they correspond to basic mathematical divisions (simple ratios that appear to approximate the golden section), as noted by Seurat with citations from Charles Henry. The entrance of the circus tent consists of ticket window and doors at the center of a platform atop six steps. On both sides of the doors (here painted green), musicians and acrobats perform a sideshow on the balustraded platform to entice passersby. Those interested in purchasing tickets from the ticket seller—the man and woman toward the bottom right of the painting—climb the central stairs. Ticket holders queue parallel to the sideshow stage. The diagonal line behind the trombonist is the handrail for the subsidiary stairs. A woman with a young girl is buying a ticket on the platform to the right of the ringmaster. Just as the musicians toward the left, they are immersed in the orange glow of nine gas jets (each possessing a perceptible blue-violet aura) that illuminate the platform. Five yellow-white globes of interior lamps are visible through the ticket windows. The conspicuous tree to the left bares the presence of a human figure.A boy with a ruffled collar stands performing in front of the platform at the top of the central stairs. Despite appearances, the door behind him is on a different plane from the ticket window. The rectangular structure behind the trombonist (to the right), defines the edge of the platform and shows the admission price. Above the poster is the gas pipe support beam. The trombonist stands shadowed on a pedestal (left of the central stairs) several meters in front of the platform, illuminated from the rear. While the tuba player is faceless, the red faces of the clarinetist and cornet players show that they stand on the gaslit platform.A 1990 examination of Circus Sideshow at the Metropolitan Museum of Art laboratory under light similar in color to that given off by gas lamps, revealed an "extraordinary transformation", writes art historian Robert Herbert: "Under the colored light the faces of the figures on the platform no longer appeared unnaturally orange but flesh color, the shadows on the trombonist and on the spectators were no longer bright ultramarine blue but black, and the entire painting glowed as if it were lit from behind, which, of course, is precisely the effect of contre-lumiere on which Seurat predicated the picture."

1072_T

Parade de cirque

Explore the Background and reception of this artwork, Parade de cirque.

Itinerant fairs housed in temporary structures such as the Circus Corvi made seasonal appearances along the boulevards of Paris. Seurat's interest in these fairs produced several studies in anticipation of Parade de cirque, including a series of cafe-concert performances, performing saltimbanques or acrobats. The name Fernand Corvi appears on Seurat's small sketch for the ticket window.Gustave Kahn characterized Parade de cirque as "so willfully pallid and sad". The painting was overshadowed by the much larger Models (Les Poseuses) when first exhibited at the 1888 Salon des Indépendants. Subsequently neglected by Seurat himself, Parade was not included among the large canvases listed in his "ésthetique" of 1890.Robert Herbert writes of Parade:Falling uneasily between the huge, early plein-air paintings Baignade and La Grande Jatte and the late indoor scenes Chahut and Cirque, Parade has neither the grandeur of the former nor the posterlike memorability of the latter. Yet it nonetheless demands a central role in Seurat's concise oeuvre. Not only is it his first painting of a nocturnal scene and therefore an important stage in the development of the artist's new "chrono-luminarist" style, it is also his first painting to depict the performance of a popular entertainment, a genre—already developed in drawings—that would dominate the artist's large projects for the remainder of his brief career. Apart from issues of chronological priority, however, Parade also distinguishes itself as Seurat's most mysterious painting, a brooding masterpiece that reveals its meaning reluctantly, a disarmingly simple geometrical schema that conceals a complex spatial arrangement... The evocative depiction of ethereal, penumbral light is unquestionably the key feature of Seurat's Parade. With respect to the peculiar mood and appearance of Parade, art historian John Russell has proposed a literary inspiration, as opposed to a political or scientific basis; citing Arthur Rimbaud's poem a La parade, published in the Symbolist review La vogue, 13 May 1886. It had long been believed that Charles Henry's theories on the emotional and symbolic expression of lines, shapes and colors were at the root of Parade. Though, it wasn't until the 1890 exhibition of Le Chahut (two year after the completion of Parade) that critics remarked on a connection between the work of Seurat and the theories of Henry."No amount of geometry", write's Russell, "can hide the fact that this picture offers a criticism of society. But the criticism is a poet's not a politician's." If this were the case, Herbert points out, "it is unclear what the artist's message was." The subjects appear to be ordinary middle and working class spectator's and performers, without caricature of the type produced by Henri de Toulouse-Lautrec or 19th century satirists such as Paul Gavarni or Honoré Daumier.Mirroring Seurat's work, Rimbaud writes of the circus sideshow as a reflection of contemporary life: "their bantering or their terror lasts one minute, or whole months." Robert Herbert suggested an alternative poem that more closely parallels the mood of Parade, Jules Laforgue's Soir de carnaval: "Oh, life is too sad, incurably sad / At festivals here and there I have always sobbed: / 'Vanity, vanity, all is only vanity!' /—Then I think: where are the ashes of the psalmist?" Seurat almost certainly knew both poems, writes Herbert, "and either—or both—could have inspired him."Art historian Roger Fry, commenting on the unforeseen mystery of Parade, compared it to the paintings of Lautrec:Toulouse-Lautrec would have seized at once on all that was significant of the moral atmosphere, would have seized most of all on what satisfied his slightly morbid relish of depravity... But Seurat, one feels, saw it almost as one might suppose some visitant from another planet would have done. He saw it with this penetrating exactness of a gaze vacant of all direct understanding... Each figure seems to be so perfectly enclosed within its simplified contour, for, however precise and detailed Seurat is, his passion for geometricizing never deserts him—enclosed so completely, so shut off in its partition, that no other relation than a spatial and geometrical one is any longer possible. The syntax of actual life has been broken up and replaced by Seurat's own peculiar syntax with all its strange, remote and unforeseen implications. André Salmon included this painting among other works by Seurat that were misunderstood by his contemporaries and which demonstrated "profound intention".

1072_NT

Parade de cirque

Explore the Background and reception of this artwork.

Itinerant fairs housed in temporary structures such as the Circus Corvi made seasonal appearances along the boulevards of Paris. Seurat's interest in these fairs produced several studies in anticipation of Parade de cirque, including a series of cafe-concert performances, performing saltimbanques or acrobats. The name Fernand Corvi appears on Seurat's small sketch for the ticket window.Gustave Kahn characterized Parade de cirque as "so willfully pallid and sad". The painting was overshadowed by the much larger Models (Les Poseuses) when first exhibited at the 1888 Salon des Indépendants. Subsequently neglected by Seurat himself, Parade was not included among the large canvases listed in his "ésthetique" of 1890.Robert Herbert writes of Parade:Falling uneasily between the huge, early plein-air paintings Baignade and La Grande Jatte and the late indoor scenes Chahut and Cirque, Parade has neither the grandeur of the former nor the posterlike memorability of the latter. Yet it nonetheless demands a central role in Seurat's concise oeuvre. Not only is it his first painting of a nocturnal scene and therefore an important stage in the development of the artist's new "chrono-luminarist" style, it is also his first painting to depict the performance of a popular entertainment, a genre—already developed in drawings—that would dominate the artist's large projects for the remainder of his brief career. Apart from issues of chronological priority, however, Parade also distinguishes itself as Seurat's most mysterious painting, a brooding masterpiece that reveals its meaning reluctantly, a disarmingly simple geometrical schema that conceals a complex spatial arrangement... The evocative depiction of ethereal, penumbral light is unquestionably the key feature of Seurat's Parade. With respect to the peculiar mood and appearance of Parade, art historian John Russell has proposed a literary inspiration, as opposed to a political or scientific basis; citing Arthur Rimbaud's poem a La parade, published in the Symbolist review La vogue, 13 May 1886. It had long been believed that Charles Henry's theories on the emotional and symbolic expression of lines, shapes and colors were at the root of Parade. Though, it wasn't until the 1890 exhibition of Le Chahut (two year after the completion of Parade) that critics remarked on a connection between the work of Seurat and the theories of Henry."No amount of geometry", write's Russell, "can hide the fact that this picture offers a criticism of society. But the criticism is a poet's not a politician's." If this were the case, Herbert points out, "it is unclear what the artist's message was." The subjects appear to be ordinary middle and working class spectator's and performers, without caricature of the type produced by Henri de Toulouse-Lautrec or 19th century satirists such as Paul Gavarni or Honoré Daumier.Mirroring Seurat's work, Rimbaud writes of the circus sideshow as a reflection of contemporary life: "their bantering or their terror lasts one minute, or whole months." Robert Herbert suggested an alternative poem that more closely parallels the mood of Parade, Jules Laforgue's Soir de carnaval: "Oh, life is too sad, incurably sad / At festivals here and there I have always sobbed: / 'Vanity, vanity, all is only vanity!' /—Then I think: where are the ashes of the psalmist?" Seurat almost certainly knew both poems, writes Herbert, "and either—or both—could have inspired him."Art historian Roger Fry, commenting on the unforeseen mystery of Parade, compared it to the paintings of Lautrec:Toulouse-Lautrec would have seized at once on all that was significant of the moral atmosphere, would have seized most of all on what satisfied his slightly morbid relish of depravity... But Seurat, one feels, saw it almost as one might suppose some visitant from another planet would have done. He saw it with this penetrating exactness of a gaze vacant of all direct understanding... Each figure seems to be so perfectly enclosed within its simplified contour, for, however precise and detailed Seurat is, his passion for geometricizing never deserts him—enclosed so completely, so shut off in its partition, that no other relation than a spatial and geometrical one is any longer possible. The syntax of actual life has been broken up and replaced by Seurat's own peculiar syntax with all its strange, remote and unforeseen implications. André Salmon included this painting among other works by Seurat that were misunderstood by his contemporaries and which demonstrated "profound intention".

1073_T

Parade de cirque

Focus on Parade de cirque and discuss the Influence.

By 1904 Neo-Impressionism had evolved considerably, in a move away from nature, away from imitation, toward the distillation of essential geometric shapes and harmonious movements. These forms were considered superior to nature because they contained idea, representing the dominance of the artist over nature. Henri-Edmond Cross, Paul Signac, along with Henri Matisse, Jean Metzinger, Robert Delaunay, André Derain (of the younger generation) began to paint with large brushstrokes that could never blend in the eye of the observer, with pure bold colors (reds, blues, yellows, greens and magentas) "making them as free of the trammels of nature", writes Herbert, "as any painting then being done in Europe."The work of Paul Cézanne had been greatly influential during the expressionistic phase of proto-Cubism (between 1908 and 1910), while the work of Seurat, with its flatter, more linear structures captured the attention of the Cubists from 1911. Seurat had been the founder of Neo-Impressionism, its most innovative and fervent protagonist, and proved to be one of the most influential in the eyes of the emerging avant-garde; many of whom—such as Jean Metzinger, Robert Delaunay, Gino Severini and Piet Mondrian—transited through a Neo-Impressionist phase, prior to their Fauve, Cubist or Futurist endeavors. "With the advent of monochromatic Cubism in 1910–1911," writes Herbert, "questions of form displaced color in the artists' attention, and for these Seurat was more relevant. As a result of several exhibitions, his paintings and drawings were easily seen in Paris, and reproductions of his major compositions circulated widely among the Cubists.Pierre Courthion mentions Parade as "perhaps the sole work of 19th-century painting that unequivocally anticipates Cubism (and even Purism)".

1073_NT

Parade de cirque

Focus on this artwork and discuss the Influence.

By 1904 Neo-Impressionism had evolved considerably, in a move away from nature, away from imitation, toward the distillation of essential geometric shapes and harmonious movements. These forms were considered superior to nature because they contained idea, representing the dominance of the artist over nature. Henri-Edmond Cross, Paul Signac, along with Henri Matisse, Jean Metzinger, Robert Delaunay, André Derain (of the younger generation) began to paint with large brushstrokes that could never blend in the eye of the observer, with pure bold colors (reds, blues, yellows, greens and magentas) "making them as free of the trammels of nature", writes Herbert, "as any painting then being done in Europe."The work of Paul Cézanne had been greatly influential during the expressionistic phase of proto-Cubism (between 1908 and 1910), while the work of Seurat, with its flatter, more linear structures captured the attention of the Cubists from 1911. Seurat had been the founder of Neo-Impressionism, its most innovative and fervent protagonist, and proved to be one of the most influential in the eyes of the emerging avant-garde; many of whom—such as Jean Metzinger, Robert Delaunay, Gino Severini and Piet Mondrian—transited through a Neo-Impressionist phase, prior to their Fauve, Cubist or Futurist endeavors. "With the advent of monochromatic Cubism in 1910–1911," writes Herbert, "questions of form displaced color in the artists' attention, and for these Seurat was more relevant. As a result of several exhibitions, his paintings and drawings were easily seen in Paris, and reproductions of his major compositions circulated widely among the Cubists.Pierre Courthion mentions Parade as "perhaps the sole work of 19th-century painting that unequivocally anticipates Cubism (and even Purism)".

1074_T

Parade de cirque

How does Parade de cirque elucidate its Provenance?

The artist until 1891. Inherited by the artist's mother, Mme Ernestine Seurat, Paris, in 1891-92, until at least 1892; the artist's brother and brother-in-law, Emile Seurat and Léon Appert, Paris (until 1900; sold with another work for Fr 1,000 through Félix Fénéon to Bernheim-Jeune); Josse and Gaston Bernheim-Jeune, Paris (1900–c. 1929; sold to Reid & Lefevre); [Reid & Lefevre, London, in 1929; sold in January to Knoedler]; [M. Knoedler & Co., New York, London, and Paris, 1929–32, stock no. A610, sold in November 1932 to Clark]; Stephen C. Clark, New York (1932–d. 1960) his bequest to the Metropolitan Museum of Art, 1960.

1074_NT

Parade de cirque

How does this artwork elucidate its Provenance?

The artist until 1891. Inherited by the artist's mother, Mme Ernestine Seurat, Paris, in 1891-92, until at least 1892; the artist's brother and brother-in-law, Emile Seurat and Léon Appert, Paris (until 1900; sold with another work for Fr 1,000 through Félix Fénéon to Bernheim-Jeune); Josse and Gaston Bernheim-Jeune, Paris (1900–c. 1929; sold to Reid & Lefevre); [Reid & Lefevre, London, in 1929; sold in January to Knoedler]; [M. Knoedler & Co., New York, London, and Paris, 1929–32, stock no. A610, sold in November 1932 to Clark]; Stephen C. Clark, New York (1932–d. 1960) his bequest to the Metropolitan Museum of Art, 1960.

1075_T

Parade de cirque

Focus on Parade de cirque and analyze the Selected exhibitions.

Paris. Salon des Indépendants (4e exposition), Pavillon de la Ville de Paris, 22 March–3 May 1888, no. 614 (as "Parade de cirque," marked for sale). Brussels. Musée d'Art Moderne. Neuvième exposition annuelle des XX, 6 February–6 March 1892, no. 10 (lent by Mme Seurat). Paris. Salon des Indépendants (8e exposition), Pavillon de la Ville de Paris. 19 March–27 April 1892, no. 1084 (lent by Mme Seurat). Paris. Revue Blanche. Georges Seurat (1860 [sic]–1891): Œuvres peintes et dessinées, 19 March–5 April 1900, no. 32. Paris. Bernheim-Jeune. Georges Seurat (1859–1891), 14 December 1908 – 9 January 1909, no. 69 (lent by MM. J[osse]. and G[aston]. B[ernheim].-J[eune].). Paris. Théâtre de la Cigale. Soirée de Paris: Exposition l'art au théâtre, au music-hall, et au cirque, 17 May–30 June 1924, no. 38 (as "La Parade," lent by MM. Bernheim). Paris. Grand Palais des Champs-Élysées. Trente ans d'art indépendant: 1884–1914, 20 February–21 March 1926, no. 3216 (lent by MM. Bernheim-Jeune et cie.). Glasgow. Reid & Lefevre, Ltd. Ten Masterpieces by Nineteenth Century French Painters, April 1929, no. 8 (as "La Parade"). London. June–July 1929, no. 7 (as "La Parade"). New York. Museum of Modern Art. First Loan Exhibition: Cézanne, Gauguin, Seurat, van Gogh, 8 November–7 December 1929, no. 55 (as Side Show [La parade], lent by M. Knoedler and Company, New York, London, and Paris). Providence. Rhode Island School of Design. Modern French Art, 11–31 March 1930, no. 36 (lent by M. Knoedler & Co., New York). Paris. Galerie Georges Petit. Cent ans de peinture française, 15–30 June 1930, no. 31. New York. Knoedler Galleries. Masterpieces by Nineteenth Century French Painters, October–November 1930, no. 11. London. Royal Academy of Arts. French Art: 1200–1900, 4 January–12 March 1932, no. 552 (lent by Roland F. Knoedler) [commemorative cat., no. 509]. San Francisco. California Palace of the Legion of Honor. French Painting from the Fifteenth Century to the Present Day, 8 June–8 July 1934, no. 148 (lent by Mr. Stephen C. Clark, New York). Cleveland Museum of Art. Twentieth Anniversary Exhibition, 26 June–4 October 1936, no. 313 (lent by Mr. Stephen C. Clark, New York). New York. Museum of Modern Art. Art in Our Time, 10 May–30 September 1939, no. 76 (lent by Stephen C. Clark, New York). New York. World's Fair. Masterpieces of Art: European & American Paintings, 1500–1900, May–October 1940, no. 366 (lent by Mr. Stephen C. Clark, New York). New York. Century Association. Paintings from the Stephen C. Clark Collection, June 6–September 28, 1946. New York. Knoedler Galleries. Seurat, 1859–1891: Paintings and Drawings, 19 April–7 May 1949, no. 22 (lent by Stephen C. Clark, Esq.). New York. Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum. Neo-Impressionism, 9 February–7 April 1968, no. 82. New York. The Metropolitan Museum of Art. Masterpieces of Fifty Centuries, 15 November 1970 – 15 February 1971, no. 387 (as Invitation to the Side-Show [La parade]). Paris. Galeries Nationales du Grand Palais. Seurat, 1859–1891, 9 April–12 August 1991, no. 198. New York. Robert Lehman Collection. Neo-Impressionism: The Circle of Paul Signac, 1 October–31 December 2001, no catalogue.

1075_NT

Parade de cirque

Focus on this artwork and analyze the Selected exhibitions.

Paris. Salon des Indépendants (4e exposition), Pavillon de la Ville de Paris, 22 March–3 May 1888, no. 614 (as "Parade de cirque," marked for sale). Brussels. Musée d'Art Moderne. Neuvième exposition annuelle des XX, 6 February–6 March 1892, no. 10 (lent by Mme Seurat). Paris. Salon des Indépendants (8e exposition), Pavillon de la Ville de Paris. 19 March–27 April 1892, no. 1084 (lent by Mme Seurat). Paris. Revue Blanche. Georges Seurat (1860 [sic]–1891): Œuvres peintes et dessinées, 19 March–5 April 1900, no. 32. Paris. Bernheim-Jeune. Georges Seurat (1859–1891), 14 December 1908 – 9 January 1909, no. 69 (lent by MM. J[osse]. and G[aston]. B[ernheim].-J[eune].). Paris. Théâtre de la Cigale. Soirée de Paris: Exposition l'art au théâtre, au music-hall, et au cirque, 17 May–30 June 1924, no. 38 (as "La Parade," lent by MM. Bernheim). Paris. Grand Palais des Champs-Élysées. Trente ans d'art indépendant: 1884–1914, 20 February–21 March 1926, no. 3216 (lent by MM. Bernheim-Jeune et cie.). Glasgow. Reid & Lefevre, Ltd. Ten Masterpieces by Nineteenth Century French Painters, April 1929, no. 8 (as "La Parade"). London. June–July 1929, no. 7 (as "La Parade"). New York. Museum of Modern Art. First Loan Exhibition: Cézanne, Gauguin, Seurat, van Gogh, 8 November–7 December 1929, no. 55 (as Side Show [La parade], lent by M. Knoedler and Company, New York, London, and Paris). Providence. Rhode Island School of Design. Modern French Art, 11–31 March 1930, no. 36 (lent by M. Knoedler & Co., New York). Paris. Galerie Georges Petit. Cent ans de peinture française, 15–30 June 1930, no. 31. New York. Knoedler Galleries. Masterpieces by Nineteenth Century French Painters, October–November 1930, no. 11. London. Royal Academy of Arts. French Art: 1200–1900, 4 January–12 March 1932, no. 552 (lent by Roland F. Knoedler) [commemorative cat., no. 509]. San Francisco. California Palace of the Legion of Honor. French Painting from the Fifteenth Century to the Present Day, 8 June–8 July 1934, no. 148 (lent by Mr. Stephen C. Clark, New York). Cleveland Museum of Art. Twentieth Anniversary Exhibition, 26 June–4 October 1936, no. 313 (lent by Mr. Stephen C. Clark, New York). New York. Museum of Modern Art. Art in Our Time, 10 May–30 September 1939, no. 76 (lent by Stephen C. Clark, New York). New York. World's Fair. Masterpieces of Art: European & American Paintings, 1500–1900, May–October 1940, no. 366 (lent by Mr. Stephen C. Clark, New York). New York. Century Association. Paintings from the Stephen C. Clark Collection, June 6–September 28, 1946. New York. Knoedler Galleries. Seurat, 1859–1891: Paintings and Drawings, 19 April–7 May 1949, no. 22 (lent by Stephen C. Clark, Esq.). New York. Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum. Neo-Impressionism, 9 February–7 April 1968, no. 82. New York. The Metropolitan Museum of Art. Masterpieces of Fifty Centuries, 15 November 1970 – 15 February 1971, no. 387 (as Invitation to the Side-Show [La parade]). Paris. Galeries Nationales du Grand Palais. Seurat, 1859–1891, 9 April–12 August 1991, no. 198. New York. Robert Lehman Collection. Neo-Impressionism: The Circle of Paul Signac, 1 October–31 December 2001, no catalogue.

1076_T

Cornerstone (sculpture)

In Cornerstone (sculpture), how is the abstract discussed?

Cornerstone is a sculpture in Tanner Park, Southwark, London.

1076_NT

Cornerstone (sculpture)

In this artwork, how is the abstract discussed?

Cornerstone is a sculpture in Tanner Park, Southwark, London.

1077_T

Cornerstone (sculpture)

In the context of Cornerstone (sculpture), explain the 2013 of the Construction and history.

During a series of stone carving workshops on nearby Whites Grounds Estate, pieces of stone, were hand-carved by children and adult participants from Whites Grounds Estate itself and the wider community during the open public workshops in October, 2013. The pieces carved by over 100 public participants were then permanently assembled into this totemic monument alongside stone fragments of historic London including Southwark Cathedral, Westminster Abbey, Houses of Parliament and even bones from the River Thames.

1077_NT

Cornerstone (sculpture)

In the context of this artwork, explain the 2013 of the Construction and history.

During a series of stone carving workshops on nearby Whites Grounds Estate, pieces of stone, were hand-carved by children and adult participants from Whites Grounds Estate itself and the wider community during the open public workshops in October, 2013. The pieces carved by over 100 public participants were then permanently assembled into this totemic monument alongside stone fragments of historic London including Southwark Cathedral, Westminster Abbey, Houses of Parliament and even bones from the River Thames.

1078_T

Cornerstone (sculpture)

Explore the 2019 about the Construction and history of this artwork, Cornerstone (sculpture).

Cornerstone was led by the stonemason artist Austin Emery in directing over 100 public participants in stonecarving workshops to create individual sculptures that would be assembled into a larger unified sculpture. Bone used in the creation of the sculpture was gathered from the River Thames. Funding was raised on Spacehive for £86,081 (2019) along with funding coming from other partners like the Mayor of London that provide £50,000 (2019) and Southwark Council £7,500 (2019)

1078_NT

Cornerstone (sculpture)

Explore the 2019 about the Construction and history of this artwork.

Cornerstone was led by the stonemason artist Austin Emery in directing over 100 public participants in stonecarving workshops to create individual sculptures that would be assembled into a larger unified sculpture. Bone used in the creation of the sculpture was gathered from the River Thames. Funding was raised on Spacehive for £86,081 (2019) along with funding coming from other partners like the Mayor of London that provide £50,000 (2019) and Southwark Council £7,500 (2019)

1079_T

Portrait of Monsieur Pertuiset the Lion-Hunter

Focus on Portrait of Monsieur Pertuiset the Lion-Hunter and discuss the abstract.

Portrait of Monsieur Pertuiset the Lion-Hunter is an 1881 oil-on-canvas portrait painting of the French explorer and adventurer Eugène Pertuiset (1833–1909) by Édouard Manet, now in the São Paulo Art Museum.

1079_NT

Portrait of Monsieur Pertuiset the Lion-Hunter

Focus on this artwork and discuss the abstract.

Portrait of Monsieur Pertuiset the Lion-Hunter is an 1881 oil-on-canvas portrait painting of the French explorer and adventurer Eugène Pertuiset (1833–1909) by Édouard Manet, now in the São Paulo Art Museum.

1080_T

Portrait of Monsieur Pertuiset the Lion-Hunter

How does Portrait of Monsieur Pertuiset the Lion-Hunter elucidate its Background?

Eugène Pertuiset was a celebrated lion hunter who enjoyed considerable media attention and fame during the Second French Empire. In addition to being a big-game hunter, he was an engineer, collector of weapons and paintings, and was commissioned in 1873 by the Republic of Chile to lead an exploration of Tierra del Fuego. After crossing the Strait of Magellan, he made several expeditions into the interior, discovered coal deposits on Dawson Island and obtained a concession to establish a colony, which he intended to populate with settlers from France; however, the Chilean government withdrew from the project. Returning to Paris, he wrote colorful accounts of his adventures. Pertuiset posed for Manet on the Boulevard de Clichy in 1880, with the monumental portrait completed in 1881. Manet had long been acquainted with Eugène Pertuiset, who had purchased several of his paintings, and had found Pertuiset's half-heroic, half-burlesque character to be amusing. For his part, Pertuiset was also an amateur artist, and in 1884 submitted his own version of the portrait, titled The Lion Hunt, which was exhibited at the new Société des Artistes Indépendants in 1884.

1080_NT

Portrait of Monsieur Pertuiset the Lion-Hunter

How does this artwork elucidate its Background?

Eugène Pertuiset was a celebrated lion hunter who enjoyed considerable media attention and fame during the Second French Empire. In addition to being a big-game hunter, he was an engineer, collector of weapons and paintings, and was commissioned in 1873 by the Republic of Chile to lead an exploration of Tierra del Fuego. After crossing the Strait of Magellan, he made several expeditions into the interior, discovered coal deposits on Dawson Island and obtained a concession to establish a colony, which he intended to populate with settlers from France; however, the Chilean government withdrew from the project. Returning to Paris, he wrote colorful accounts of his adventures. Pertuiset posed for Manet on the Boulevard de Clichy in 1880, with the monumental portrait completed in 1881. Manet had long been acquainted with Eugène Pertuiset, who had purchased several of his paintings, and had found Pertuiset's half-heroic, half-burlesque character to be amusing. For his part, Pertuiset was also an amateur artist, and in 1884 submitted his own version of the portrait, titled The Lion Hunt, which was exhibited at the new Société des Artistes Indépendants in 1884.

1081_T

Portrait of Monsieur Pertuiset the Lion-Hunter

Focus on Portrait of Monsieur Pertuiset the Lion-Hunter and analyze the Reception.

The work places Pertuiset and a lion's body in a setting of trees with purple shadows, with the lion in the background, partially hidden by trees. Pertuiset, rather than striking a heroic pose as expected by his fans, is depicted on one knee, with a somewhat pensive expression. The setting is of course, imaginary, as Manet had never visited Africa or had witnessed a lion hunt, but the lion pelt may have been modeled after one Pertuiset acquired in a famed 1866 hunt. Manet exhibited Portrait of Monsieur Pertuiset the Lion-Hunter at the Paris Salon in 1881 where it received much condemnation from various critics who disliked its flat style, overuse of violet, and the originality of the pose. However, despite the negative reviews, Manet was awarded a medal for the work, the first official recognition of his career.

1081_NT

Portrait of Monsieur Pertuiset the Lion-Hunter

Focus on this artwork and analyze the Reception.

The work places Pertuiset and a lion's body in a setting of trees with purple shadows, with the lion in the background, partially hidden by trees. Pertuiset, rather than striking a heroic pose as expected by his fans, is depicted on one knee, with a somewhat pensive expression. The setting is of course, imaginary, as Manet had never visited Africa or had witnessed a lion hunt, but the lion pelt may have been modeled after one Pertuiset acquired in a famed 1866 hunt. Manet exhibited Portrait of Monsieur Pertuiset the Lion-Hunter at the Paris Salon in 1881 where it received much condemnation from various critics who disliked its flat style, overuse of violet, and the originality of the pose. However, despite the negative reviews, Manet was awarded a medal for the work, the first official recognition of his career.

1082_T

The Favourites of the Emperor Honorius

In The Favourites of the Emperor Honorius, how is the abstract discussed?

The Favourites of the Emperor Honorius is a painting by John William Waterhouse completed in 1883. The painting depicts Honorius feeding birds which are on the rug in front of him; the dark colours of the rug and his clothes define a space. Separated from him and the birds are the councillors seeking his attention, and who along with the attendant are dressed in paler shades.The Favourites of the Emperor Honorius is part of the collection of the Art Gallery of South Australia, which also owns Waterhouse's 1892 Circe Invidiosa.Honorius was named Western Emperor at the age of 10, after the death of his father Theodosius I. During his reign, from 393 to 423, the territory of Western Roman Empire was invaded by foreign tribes and the city of Rome was sacked by the Visigoths. Honorius is considered one of the weakest Roman emperors and one of the factors in the empire's demise. Waterhouse shows him here with his childhood favorite hobby, instead of promptly attending to affairs of state, and may be alluding to an apocryphal story, mentioned by Procopius in his History of the Wars where, on hearing the news that Rome had "perished", Honorius was initially shocked, thinking the news was in reference to a favourite chicken he had named "Roma".

1082_NT

The Favourites of the Emperor Honorius

In this artwork, how is the abstract discussed?

The Favourites of the Emperor Honorius is a painting by John William Waterhouse completed in 1883. The painting depicts Honorius feeding birds which are on the rug in front of him; the dark colours of the rug and his clothes define a space. Separated from him and the birds are the councillors seeking his attention, and who along with the attendant are dressed in paler shades.The Favourites of the Emperor Honorius is part of the collection of the Art Gallery of South Australia, which also owns Waterhouse's 1892 Circe Invidiosa.Honorius was named Western Emperor at the age of 10, after the death of his father Theodosius I. During his reign, from 393 to 423, the territory of Western Roman Empire was invaded by foreign tribes and the city of Rome was sacked by the Visigoths. Honorius is considered one of the weakest Roman emperors and one of the factors in the empire's demise. Waterhouse shows him here with his childhood favorite hobby, instead of promptly attending to affairs of state, and may be alluding to an apocryphal story, mentioned by Procopius in his History of the Wars where, on hearing the news that Rome had "perished", Honorius was initially shocked, thinking the news was in reference to a favourite chicken he had named "Roma".

1083_T

Fishermen Carrying a Drowned Man

Focus on Fishermen Carrying a Drowned Man and explore the abstract.

Fishermen Carrying a Drowned Man also known as The Shipwrecked Mariner is an 1861 oil-on-canvas painting by Dutch artist Jozef Israëls. The scene includes a group of people carrying a dead fisherman away from the water.

1083_NT

Fishermen Carrying a Drowned Man

Focus on this artwork and explore the abstract.

Fishermen Carrying a Drowned Man also known as The Shipwrecked Mariner is an 1861 oil-on-canvas painting by Dutch artist Jozef Israëls. The scene includes a group of people carrying a dead fisherman away from the water.

1084_T

Fishermen Carrying a Drowned Man

Focus on Fishermen Carrying a Drowned Man and explain the History.

Israëls spent time in Zandvoort and he documented the lives of fishermen and their families. The painting is one in a series of four paintings with the theme: death of a fisherman. This painting is the largest of the four. The painting was displayed at the 1861 Salon (Paris), in Antwerp and London during the 1860s. It was in a private collection in England after an 1862 exhibition. In 1910 it was donated to the National Gallery in London by Mrs Alexander Young fulfilling the wishes of her husband. The painting is also known as The Shipwrecked Mariner.

1084_NT

Fishermen Carrying a Drowned Man

Focus on this artwork and explain the History.

Israëls spent time in Zandvoort and he documented the lives of fishermen and their families. The painting is one in a series of four paintings with the theme: death of a fisherman. This painting is the largest of the four. The painting was displayed at the 1861 Salon (Paris), in Antwerp and London during the 1860s. It was in a private collection in England after an 1862 exhibition. In 1910 it was donated to the National Gallery in London by Mrs Alexander Young fulfilling the wishes of her husband. The painting is also known as The Shipwrecked Mariner.

1085_T

Fishermen Carrying a Drowned Man

Explore the Description of this artwork, Fishermen Carrying a Drowned Man.

The images of the people are dark and the subject of the painting is a huddled group carrying a dead fisherman away from the water's edge. The sky in the image is lighted and muted blue and silver. It is considered to be Funerary art and it is also a representation of self-sacrifice. The painting is an example of the style of realism.

1085_NT

Fishermen Carrying a Drowned Man

Explore the Description of this artwork.

The images of the people are dark and the subject of the painting is a huddled group carrying a dead fisherman away from the water's edge. The sky in the image is lighted and muted blue and silver. It is considered to be Funerary art and it is also a representation of self-sacrifice. The painting is an example of the style of realism.

1086_T

Venus de Milo

Focus on Venus de Milo and discuss the abstract.

The Venus de Milo ( də MY-loh, də MEE-loh; Ancient Greek: Ἀφροδίτη τῆς Μήλου, romanized: Aphrodítē tēs Mḗlou) or Aphrodite of Melos is an ancient Greek marble sculpture that was created during the Hellenistic period. It was rediscovered in 1820 on the island of Milos, Greece, and has been displayed at the Louvre Museum since 1821. Since the statue's discovery, it had become one of the most famous works of ancient Greek sculpture in the world. The Venus de Milo is believed to depict Aphrodite, the Greek goddess of love, whose Roman counterpart was Venus. Made of Parian marble, the statue is larger than life size, standing over 2 metres (6 ft 7 in) high. The statue is missing both arms. On the basis of a now-lost inscription found near the sculpture, it has been attributed to Alexandros from Antioch on the Maeander, though the name on the inscription is uncertain and its connection to the Venus is disputed. The original pose of the sculpture is unknown. It was originally identified as depicting Aphrodite holding the apple of discord as a marble hand holding an apple was found alongside the Venus; recent scientific analysis supports the identification of this hand as part of the sculpture. The Venus de Milo rapidly became a cornerstone of the Louvre's antiquities collection in the aftermath of the Napoleonic Wars, and its fame spread through distribution in photographs and three-dimensional copies. The statue inspired over 70 poems, influenced 19th-century art and the Surrealist movement in the early 20th century, and has been featured in various modern artistic projects, including film and advertising. However, following the work's attribution to the Hellenistic period, scholarly opinions have become more critical alongside a biased preference of written sources over visual in classical studies.

1086_NT

Venus de Milo

Focus on this artwork and discuss the abstract.

The Venus de Milo ( də MY-loh, də MEE-loh; Ancient Greek: Ἀφροδίτη τῆς Μήλου, romanized: Aphrodítē tēs Mḗlou) or Aphrodite of Melos is an ancient Greek marble sculpture that was created during the Hellenistic period. It was rediscovered in 1820 on the island of Milos, Greece, and has been displayed at the Louvre Museum since 1821. Since the statue's discovery, it had become one of the most famous works of ancient Greek sculpture in the world. The Venus de Milo is believed to depict Aphrodite, the Greek goddess of love, whose Roman counterpart was Venus. Made of Parian marble, the statue is larger than life size, standing over 2 metres (6 ft 7 in) high. The statue is missing both arms. On the basis of a now-lost inscription found near the sculpture, it has been attributed to Alexandros from Antioch on the Maeander, though the name on the inscription is uncertain and its connection to the Venus is disputed. The original pose of the sculpture is unknown. It was originally identified as depicting Aphrodite holding the apple of discord as a marble hand holding an apple was found alongside the Venus; recent scientific analysis supports the identification of this hand as part of the sculpture. The Venus de Milo rapidly became a cornerstone of the Louvre's antiquities collection in the aftermath of the Napoleonic Wars, and its fame spread through distribution in photographs and three-dimensional copies. The statue inspired over 70 poems, influenced 19th-century art and the Surrealist movement in the early 20th century, and has been featured in various modern artistic projects, including film and advertising. However, following the work's attribution to the Hellenistic period, scholarly opinions have become more critical alongside a biased preference of written sources over visual in classical studies.

1087_T

Venus de Milo

How does Venus de Milo elucidate its Description?

The Venus de Milo is an over 2 metres (6 ft 7 in) tall Parian marble statue of a Greek goddess, most likely Aphrodite, depicted with a bare torso and drapery over the lower half of her body. The figure stands with her weight on her right leg, and the left leg raised; her head is turned to the left. The statue is missing both arms, the left foot, and the earlobes. There is a filled hole below her right breast that originally contained a metal tenon that would have supported the right arm. The Venus' flesh is polished smooth, but chisel marks are still visible on other surfaces. The sculpture has been minimally restored: only the tip of the nose, lower lip, big toe on the right foot, and some of the drapery.Stylistically, the sculpture combines elements of classical and Hellenistic art. Features such as the small, regular eyes and mouth, and the strong brow and nose, are classical in style, while the shape of the torso and the deeply carved drapery are Hellenistic.

1087_NT

Venus de Milo

How does this artwork elucidate its Description?

The Venus de Milo is an over 2 metres (6 ft 7 in) tall Parian marble statue of a Greek goddess, most likely Aphrodite, depicted with a bare torso and drapery over the lower half of her body. The figure stands with her weight on her right leg, and the left leg raised; her head is turned to the left. The statue is missing both arms, the left foot, and the earlobes. There is a filled hole below her right breast that originally contained a metal tenon that would have supported the right arm. The Venus' flesh is polished smooth, but chisel marks are still visible on other surfaces. The sculpture has been minimally restored: only the tip of the nose, lower lip, big toe on the right foot, and some of the drapery.Stylistically, the sculpture combines elements of classical and Hellenistic art. Features such as the small, regular eyes and mouth, and the strong brow and nose, are classical in style, while the shape of the torso and the deeply carved drapery are Hellenistic.

1088_T

Venus de Milo

Focus on Venus de Milo and analyze the Discovery.

The Venus de Milo was discovered on 8 April 1820 by a Greek farmer on the island of Milos. Olivier Voutier, a French sailor interested in archaeology, witnessed the discovery and encouraged the farmer to continue digging. Voutier and the farmer uncovered two large pieces of the sculpture and a third, smaller piece. A fragment of an arm, a hand holding an apple, and two herms were also found alongside the statue. Two inscriptions were also apparently found with the Venus. One, transcribed by Dumont D'Urville, a French naval officer who arrived on Milos shortly after the discovery, commemorates a dedication by one Bakchios son of Satios, the assistant gymnasiarch. The other, recorded on a drawing made by Auguste Debay, preserves part of a sculptor's signature. Both inscriptions are now lost. Other sculptural fragments found around the same time include a third herm, two further arms, and a foot with sandal.Dumont D'Urville wrote an account of the find. According to his testimony, the Venus statue was found in a quadrangular niche. If this findspot were the original context for the Venus, the niche and the gymnasiarch's inscription suggests that the Venus de Milo was installed in the gymnasium of Melos. An alternative theory proposed by Salomon Reinach is that the findspot was instead the remains of a lime kiln, and that the other fragments had no connection to the Venus; this theory is dismissed by Christofilis Maggidis as having "no factual basis".After stopping in Melos, D'Urville's ship sailed to Constantinople, where he reported the find to the Comte de Marcellus, assistant to Charles François de Riffardeau, marquis de Rivière, the French ambassador. Rivière agreed that Marcellus should go to Melos to buy the statue. By the time Marcellus arrived at Melos, the farmer who discovered the statue had already received another offer to buy it, and it had been loaded onto a ship; the French intervened and Marcellus was able to buy the Venus. It was brought to France, where Louis XVIII had it installed in the Louvre. Contrary to the usual practice at the time, the Venus was not significantly restored but was exhibited in the state in which she was discovered.

1088_NT

Venus de Milo

Focus on this artwork and analyze the Discovery.

The Venus de Milo was discovered on 8 April 1820 by a Greek farmer on the island of Milos. Olivier Voutier, a French sailor interested in archaeology, witnessed the discovery and encouraged the farmer to continue digging. Voutier and the farmer uncovered two large pieces of the sculpture and a third, smaller piece. A fragment of an arm, a hand holding an apple, and two herms were also found alongside the statue. Two inscriptions were also apparently found with the Venus. One, transcribed by Dumont D'Urville, a French naval officer who arrived on Milos shortly after the discovery, commemorates a dedication by one Bakchios son of Satios, the assistant gymnasiarch. The other, recorded on a drawing made by Auguste Debay, preserves part of a sculptor's signature. Both inscriptions are now lost. Other sculptural fragments found around the same time include a third herm, two further arms, and a foot with sandal.Dumont D'Urville wrote an account of the find. According to his testimony, the Venus statue was found in a quadrangular niche. If this findspot were the original context for the Venus, the niche and the gymnasiarch's inscription suggests that the Venus de Milo was installed in the gymnasium of Melos. An alternative theory proposed by Salomon Reinach is that the findspot was instead the remains of a lime kiln, and that the other fragments had no connection to the Venus; this theory is dismissed by Christofilis Maggidis as having "no factual basis".After stopping in Melos, D'Urville's ship sailed to Constantinople, where he reported the find to the Comte de Marcellus, assistant to Charles François de Riffardeau, marquis de Rivière, the French ambassador. Rivière agreed that Marcellus should go to Melos to buy the statue. By the time Marcellus arrived at Melos, the farmer who discovered the statue had already received another offer to buy it, and it had been loaded onto a ship; the French intervened and Marcellus was able to buy the Venus. It was brought to France, where Louis XVIII had it installed in the Louvre. Contrary to the usual practice at the time, the Venus was not significantly restored but was exhibited in the state in which she was discovered.

1089_T

Venus de Milo

In the context of Venus de Milo, explore the Identification of the Interpretation.

The Venus de Milo is probably a sculpture of the goddess Aphrodite, but its fragmentary state makes secure identification difficult. The earliest written accounts of the sculpture, by a French captain and the French vice-consul on Melos, both identify it as representing Aphrodite holding the apple of discord, apparently on the basis of the hand holding an apple found with the sculpture. An alternative identification proposed by Reinach is that she represents the sea-goddess Amphitrite, and was originally grouped with a sculpture of Poseidon from Melos, discovered in 1878. Other proposed identifications include a Muse, Nemesis, or Sappho.The authorship and date of the Venus de Milo were both disputed from its discovery. Within a month of its acquisition by the Louvre, three French scholars had published papers on the statue, disagreeing on all aspects of its interpretation: Toussaint-Bernard Éméric-David thought it dated to c. 420 BC – c. 380 BC, between Phidias and Praxiteles; Quatremère de Quincy attributed it to the mid-fourth century and the circle of Praxiteles; and the Comte de Clarac thought it a later copy of a work by Praxiteles. The scholarly consensus in the 19th century was that the Venus dated to the fourth century BC. At the end of the 19th century, Adolf Furtwängler was the first to argue that it was in fact late Hellenistic, dating to c. 150 BC – c. 50 BC, and this dating continues to be widely accepted.One of the inscriptions discovered with the statue, which was drawn by Debay as fitting into the missing section of the statue's plinth, names the sculptor as [---]andros, son of [M]enides, of Antioch on the Maeander. The inscription must date to after 280 BC, when Antioch on the Maeander was founded; the lettering of the inscription suggests a date of 150–50 BC. Maggidis argues based on this inscription, as well as the style of the statue and the increasing prosperity of Melos in the period due to Roman involvement on the island which he suggests is a plausible context for the commissioning of the sculpture, that it probably dates to c. 150 BC – c. 110 BC. Rachel Kousser agrees with Furtwängler's dates for the sculpture. Marianne Hamiaux suggests c. 160 BC – c. 140 BC.The association of the fragmentary artist's signature with the sculpture, and thus the identification of the sculptor as Alexandros of Antioch, is not universally accepted. Kousser and Jean-Luc Martinez both question this connection. Kousser notes that though the plaque is shown fitting into the broken base of the Venus in Debay's drawing, the drawing shows no evidence of the sculpture's missing left foot which would have rested on it, while in Voutier's sketch of the finds the plaque is shown as the base of one of the herms found alongside the Venus. As the inscription is lost, its connection to the Venus cannot be either proven or disproven.Magiddis suggested that the Venus de Milo was carved by the same sculptor who also made the Poseidon of Melos. Isméni Trianti has suggested that three further sculptures found in Melos can be attributed to the same artist: two statues of women, and a colossal statue of a god.

1089_NT

Venus de Milo

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

The Venus de Milo is probably a sculpture of the goddess Aphrodite, but its fragmentary state makes secure identification difficult. The earliest written accounts of the sculpture, by a French captain and the French vice-consul on Melos, both identify it as representing Aphrodite holding the apple of discord, apparently on the basis of the hand holding an apple found with the sculpture. An alternative identification proposed by Reinach is that she represents the sea-goddess Amphitrite, and was originally grouped with a sculpture of Poseidon from Melos, discovered in 1878. Other proposed identifications include a Muse, Nemesis, or Sappho.The authorship and date of the Venus de Milo were both disputed from its discovery. Within a month of its acquisition by the Louvre, three French scholars had published papers on the statue, disagreeing on all aspects of its interpretation: Toussaint-Bernard Éméric-David thought it dated to c. 420 BC – c. 380 BC, between Phidias and Praxiteles; Quatremère de Quincy attributed it to the mid-fourth century and the circle of Praxiteles; and the Comte de Clarac thought it a later copy of a work by Praxiteles. The scholarly consensus in the 19th century was that the Venus dated to the fourth century BC. At the end of the 19th century, Adolf Furtwängler was the first to argue that it was in fact late Hellenistic, dating to c. 150 BC – c. 50 BC, and this dating continues to be widely accepted.One of the inscriptions discovered with the statue, which was drawn by Debay as fitting into the missing section of the statue's plinth, names the sculptor as [---]andros, son of [M]enides, of Antioch on the Maeander. The inscription must date to after 280 BC, when Antioch on the Maeander was founded; the lettering of the inscription suggests a date of 150–50 BC. Maggidis argues based on this inscription, as well as the style of the statue and the increasing prosperity of Melos in the period due to Roman involvement on the island which he suggests is a plausible context for the commissioning of the sculpture, that it probably dates to c. 150 BC – c. 110 BC. Rachel Kousser agrees with Furtwängler's dates for the sculpture. Marianne Hamiaux suggests c. 160 BC – c. 140 BC.The association of the fragmentary artist's signature with the sculpture, and thus the identification of the sculptor as Alexandros of Antioch, is not universally accepted. Kousser and Jean-Luc Martinez both question this connection. Kousser notes that though the plaque is shown fitting into the broken base of the Venus in Debay's drawing, the drawing shows no evidence of the sculpture's missing left foot which would have rested on it, while in Voutier's sketch of the finds the plaque is shown as the base of one of the herms found alongside the Venus. As the inscription is lost, its connection to the Venus cannot be either proven or disproven.Magiddis suggested that the Venus de Milo was carved by the same sculptor who also made the Poseidon of Melos. Isméni Trianti has suggested that three further sculptures found in Melos can be attributed to the same artist: two statues of women, and a colossal statue of a god.

1090_T

Venus de Milo

In the context of Venus de Milo, explain the Reconstructions of the Interpretation.

Without arms, it is unclear what the statue originally looked like. The original appearance of the Venus has been disputed since 1821, with de Clarac arguing that the Venus was a single figure holding an apple, whereas Quatremere held that she was part of a group, with her arms around another figure. Other proposed restorations have included the Venus holding wreaths, a dove, or spears.Wilhelm Fröhner suggested in 1876 that the Venus de Milo's right hand held the drapery slipping down from her hips, while the left held an apple; this theory was expanded on by Furtwängler. Kousser considers this the "most plausible" reconstruction. Scientific analyses conducted during restoration of the Venus in 2010 supported the theory that the arm fragment and hand holding the apple found alongside the sculpture were originally part of the Venus; Martinez argues that the identification of the sculpture as Venus holding an apple is thus definitively proved.Hamiaux suggests that the Venus de Milo is of the same sculptural type as the Capuan Venus and another sculpture of Aphrodite from Perge. She argues that all derive from the cult statue in the temple of Aphrodite on the Acrocorinth, which depicted Aphrodite admiring herself in a shield. Christine Mitchell Havelock, who believes the Capuan Venus was based on the Venus de Milo, by contrast considers the Melian sculpture "a fresh invention" of the Hellenistic period.

1090_NT

Venus de Milo

In the context of this artwork, explain the Reconstructions of the Interpretation.

Without arms, it is unclear what the statue originally looked like. The original appearance of the Venus has been disputed since 1821, with de Clarac arguing that the Venus was a single figure holding an apple, whereas Quatremere held that she was part of a group, with her arms around another figure. Other proposed restorations have included the Venus holding wreaths, a dove, or spears.Wilhelm Fröhner suggested in 1876 that the Venus de Milo's right hand held the drapery slipping down from her hips, while the left held an apple; this theory was expanded on by Furtwängler. Kousser considers this the "most plausible" reconstruction. Scientific analyses conducted during restoration of the Venus in 2010 supported the theory that the arm fragment and hand holding the apple found alongside the sculpture were originally part of the Venus; Martinez argues that the identification of the sculpture as Venus holding an apple is thus definitively proved.Hamiaux suggests that the Venus de Milo is of the same sculptural type as the Capuan Venus and another sculpture of Aphrodite from Perge. She argues that all derive from the cult statue in the temple of Aphrodite on the Acrocorinth, which depicted Aphrodite admiring herself in a shield. Christine Mitchell Havelock, who believes the Capuan Venus was based on the Venus de Milo, by contrast considers the Melian sculpture "a fresh invention" of the Hellenistic period.

1091_T

Venus de Milo

Explore the Display about the Interpretation of this artwork, Venus de Milo.

The Venus de Milo was initially installed in the Louvre in 1821; it was rapidly moved twice before finding a long-term home in the Salle du Tibre where it remained until 1848. From there it was moved to the Salle de l'Isis, where it remained until being removed from the museum in 1870 for protection during the Paris Commune. When the Salle de l'Isis was renovated in the 1880s, the Venus was given a new pedestal which allowed spectators to rotate the sculpture; at the same time the approach to the sculpture was filled with other ancient Venus statues.A proposal in 1919 to display the Venus alongside the Mona Lisa and Michelangelo's Dying Slave and Rebellious Slave was never carried out, but in 1936, the sculpture was once again moved to the Salle de la Vénus de Milo to accommodate the volume of visitors to the Louvre; the other Venus statues were removed to focus visitors on the Venus de Milo. At this time the route for visitors through the Louvre was modified to be more chronological, coming through galleries of archaic and classical sculpture before arriving in a gallery dedicated to the Hellenstic period; the Venus de Milo was placed between the classical and Hellenistic galleries. During the Second World War the sculpture was once again removed from the Louvre for safekeeping, and stored in the Château de Valençay. In 1964 it was exhibited in Tokyo and Kyoto; this is the only time the sculpture has left France since it was acquired by the Louvre. In 1972 an experiment was made with a new site for the sculpture, and it was temporarily moved to allow renovations in the 1980s and 1990s; by 1999 the volume of visitors to the Venus was causing problems and the Louvre authorities were considering returning the sculpture to its previous setting. In 2010 the sculpture was installed in its new setting, with the sculptural fragments discovered alongside it on display in the same room.

1091_NT

Venus de Milo

Explore the Display about the Interpretation of this artwork.

The Venus de Milo was initially installed in the Louvre in 1821; it was rapidly moved twice before finding a long-term home in the Salle du Tibre where it remained until 1848. From there it was moved to the Salle de l'Isis, where it remained until being removed from the museum in 1870 for protection during the Paris Commune. When the Salle de l'Isis was renovated in the 1880s, the Venus was given a new pedestal which allowed spectators to rotate the sculpture; at the same time the approach to the sculpture was filled with other ancient Venus statues.A proposal in 1919 to display the Venus alongside the Mona Lisa and Michelangelo's Dying Slave and Rebellious Slave was never carried out, but in 1936, the sculpture was once again moved to the Salle de la Vénus de Milo to accommodate the volume of visitors to the Louvre; the other Venus statues were removed to focus visitors on the Venus de Milo. At this time the route for visitors through the Louvre was modified to be more chronological, coming through galleries of archaic and classical sculpture before arriving in a gallery dedicated to the Hellenstic period; the Venus de Milo was placed between the classical and Hellenistic galleries. During the Second World War the sculpture was once again removed from the Louvre for safekeeping, and stored in the Château de Valençay. In 1964 it was exhibited in Tokyo and Kyoto; this is the only time the sculpture has left France since it was acquired by the Louvre. In 1972 an experiment was made with a new site for the sculpture, and it was temporarily moved to allow renovations in the 1980s and 1990s; by 1999 the volume of visitors to the Venus was causing problems and the Louvre authorities were considering returning the sculpture to its previous setting. In 2010 the sculpture was installed in its new setting, with the sculptural fragments discovered alongside it on display in the same room.

1092_T

Venus de Milo

Focus on Venus de Milo and discuss the Reception.

No ancient source can be securely identified as discussing the Venus de Milo, and there are neither enough surviving ancient statues, nor enough evidence about how ancient Greeks judged artistic quality, to judge how the sculpture would have been received in the ancient world. Pausanias, who described many of the great artworks he saw on his travels, apparently did not mention the Venus, and thus presumably did not consider it a great masterpiece. Today the Venus de Milo is perhaps the most famous ancient Greek statue in the world, seen by more than seven million visitors every year. It established itself as a key part of the Louvre's antiquities collection soon after its discovery. At this time, the Louvre had recently lost several major works following the Napoleonic Wars, as objects acquired by Napoleon were returned to their countries of origin. The Venus was soon one of the most famous antiquities in Europe; in the 19th century it was distributed in plaster casts, photographs, and bronze copies. A plaster cast was sent to the Berlin Academy in 1822, only a year after the Louvre acquired the Venus, and a cast was displayed at The Crystal Palace.The Venus de Milo has been the subject of both literature and the visual arts since its discovery. More than 70 poems about the Venus have been published. In the 19th century paintings of the Venus often depicted statuettes of the figure, for instance in Honoré Daumier's The Connoisseur. 19th-century artists also used the Venus as a model: Max Klinger based the Minerva in his Judgement of Paris on the Venus de Milo; Eugene Delacroix may have used it for Liberty Leading the People.In the early 20th century, the Venus de Milo caught the attention of the surrealist movement. Erwin Blumenfeld and Clarence Sinclair Bull both made photomontages based on the Venus. Max Ernst used the Venus in his "instruction manuals"; René Magritte painted a plaster copy of the Venus, making her body pink, her robe blue, and leaving the head white; and Salvador Dalì based several paintings and sculptures, including his painting The Hallucinogenic Toreador, on her. In contemporary art, Niki de Saint-Phalle has used a reproduction of the Venus in a performance, Yves Klein produced a copy in International Klein Blue, and artists including Arman, Clive Barker, and Jim Dine have all made sculptures inspired by the Venus.The iconic status of the Venus de Milo has meant that in the 20th century it has been used in film and advertising: a poster for the 1932 film Blonde Venus shows Marlene Dietrich as the Venus de Milo, while in 2003 Eva Green, wearing only a white sheet and black arm-length gloves, recreated the sculpture in The Dreamers. Actresses have frequently been compared to the Venus: an article in Photoplay in 1928 concluded the Joan Crawford was the Hollywood actress whose measurements most resembled the Venus de Milo, Clara Bow and Jean Harlow were both photographed as the Venus for magazines. Advertisements for Kellogg's cornflakes, an early speakerphone made by General Telephone & Electronics, Levi's jeans and Mercedes-Benz cars have all used the Venus.In contrast with the popular and artistic appreciation of the Venus, since Fürtwangler re-dated the sculpture to the Hellenistic period scholars have been more critical. In his History of Greek Art, Martin Robertson argues that the sculpture's reputation is due more to propaganda than to its own artistic merit. Scholars have concentrated on studying copies of classical sculpture mentioned in ancient sources, such as the Aphrodite of Knidos, than the Venus de Milo, even when those copies are generally considered to be technically inferior to the Venus; Elizabeth Prettejohn argues that this is due to classicists' bias towards written sources over visual ones.

1092_NT

Venus de Milo

Focus on this artwork and discuss the Reception.

No ancient source can be securely identified as discussing the Venus de Milo, and there are neither enough surviving ancient statues, nor enough evidence about how ancient Greeks judged artistic quality, to judge how the sculpture would have been received in the ancient world. Pausanias, who described many of the great artworks he saw on his travels, apparently did not mention the Venus, and thus presumably did not consider it a great masterpiece. Today the Venus de Milo is perhaps the most famous ancient Greek statue in the world, seen by more than seven million visitors every year. It established itself as a key part of the Louvre's antiquities collection soon after its discovery. At this time, the Louvre had recently lost several major works following the Napoleonic Wars, as objects acquired by Napoleon were returned to their countries of origin. The Venus was soon one of the most famous antiquities in Europe; in the 19th century it was distributed in plaster casts, photographs, and bronze copies. A plaster cast was sent to the Berlin Academy in 1822, only a year after the Louvre acquired the Venus, and a cast was displayed at The Crystal Palace.The Venus de Milo has been the subject of both literature and the visual arts since its discovery. More than 70 poems about the Venus have been published. In the 19th century paintings of the Venus often depicted statuettes of the figure, for instance in Honoré Daumier's The Connoisseur. 19th-century artists also used the Venus as a model: Max Klinger based the Minerva in his Judgement of Paris on the Venus de Milo; Eugene Delacroix may have used it for Liberty Leading the People.In the early 20th century, the Venus de Milo caught the attention of the surrealist movement. Erwin Blumenfeld and Clarence Sinclair Bull both made photomontages based on the Venus. Max Ernst used the Venus in his "instruction manuals"; René Magritte painted a plaster copy of the Venus, making her body pink, her robe blue, and leaving the head white; and Salvador Dalì based several paintings and sculptures, including his painting The Hallucinogenic Toreador, on her. In contemporary art, Niki de Saint-Phalle has used a reproduction of the Venus in a performance, Yves Klein produced a copy in International Klein Blue, and artists including Arman, Clive Barker, and Jim Dine have all made sculptures inspired by the Venus.The iconic status of the Venus de Milo has meant that in the 20th century it has been used in film and advertising: a poster for the 1932 film Blonde Venus shows Marlene Dietrich as the Venus de Milo, while in 2003 Eva Green, wearing only a white sheet and black arm-length gloves, recreated the sculpture in The Dreamers. Actresses have frequently been compared to the Venus: an article in Photoplay in 1928 concluded the Joan Crawford was the Hollywood actress whose measurements most resembled the Venus de Milo, Clara Bow and Jean Harlow were both photographed as the Venus for magazines. Advertisements for Kellogg's cornflakes, an early speakerphone made by General Telephone & Electronics, Levi's jeans and Mercedes-Benz cars have all used the Venus.In contrast with the popular and artistic appreciation of the Venus, since Fürtwangler re-dated the sculpture to the Hellenistic period scholars have been more critical. In his History of Greek Art, Martin Robertson argues that the sculpture's reputation is due more to propaganda than to its own artistic merit. Scholars have concentrated on studying copies of classical sculpture mentioned in ancient sources, such as the Aphrodite of Knidos, than the Venus de Milo, even when those copies are generally considered to be technically inferior to the Venus; Elizabeth Prettejohn argues that this is due to classicists' bias towards written sources over visual ones.

1093_T

Le pigeon aux petits pois

How does Le pigeon aux petits pois elucidate its abstract?

Le pigeon aux petit pois (English: Pigeon with peas), sometimes referred to as Dove with green peas, is a 1911 oil on canvas painting by Pablo Picasso. It is an example of Picasso's Cubist works and has an estimated value of €23 million. The painting was one of five artworks stolen from the Musée d'Art Moderne de la Ville de Paris on 20 May 2010, which together are valued at €100 million ($123 million). It has so far not been recovered and its whereabouts remain unknown.

1093_NT

Le pigeon aux petits pois

How does this artwork elucidate its abstract?

Le pigeon aux petit pois (English: Pigeon with peas), sometimes referred to as Dove with green peas, is a 1911 oil on canvas painting by Pablo Picasso. It is an example of Picasso's Cubist works and has an estimated value of €23 million. The painting was one of five artworks stolen from the Musée d'Art Moderne de la Ville de Paris on 20 May 2010, which together are valued at €100 million ($123 million). It has so far not been recovered and its whereabouts remain unknown.

1094_T

Le pigeon aux petits pois

Focus on Le pigeon aux petits pois and analyze the Background.

This painting was created during the first period of Cubism, known as Analytical Cubism. It began in 1907, when Picasso showed his first Cubist painting titled Les Demoiselles d’Avignon to Georges Braque. The painting was influenced by African tribal art and broke the traditional rules of Western painting. Picasso and Braque spent two years working on the new Cubist style in collaboration. In 1908, Braque created his own Cubist painting titled Large Nude. A year later in 1909, Picasso and Braque changed their focus from depicting people to still life. By 1912 they had begun to introduce words into their paintings. Analytical Cubism used geometric shapes to convey the forms of people and objects. Over time these geometric shapes became more prominent, creating a more abstract image. The subject was depicted in a fractured way and this presented a multi-dimensional viewpoint. The colour palette was intentionally limited to express this effect. Cubism offered the viewer a perspective in motion, as though viewing the subject from multiple angles at the same time.

1094_NT

Le pigeon aux petits pois

Focus on this artwork and analyze the Background.

This painting was created during the first period of Cubism, known as Analytical Cubism. It began in 1907, when Picasso showed his first Cubist painting titled Les Demoiselles d’Avignon to Georges Braque. The painting was influenced by African tribal art and broke the traditional rules of Western painting. Picasso and Braque spent two years working on the new Cubist style in collaboration. In 1908, Braque created his own Cubist painting titled Large Nude. A year later in 1909, Picasso and Braque changed their focus from depicting people to still life. By 1912 they had begun to introduce words into their paintings. Analytical Cubism used geometric shapes to convey the forms of people and objects. Over time these geometric shapes became more prominent, creating a more abstract image. The subject was depicted in a fractured way and this presented a multi-dimensional viewpoint. The colour palette was intentionally limited to express this effect. Cubism offered the viewer a perspective in motion, as though viewing the subject from multiple angles at the same time.

1095_T

Le pigeon aux petits pois

In Le pigeon aux petits pois, how is the Description discussed?

Le pigeon aux petit pois is an oil on canvas painting, which was created by Picasso in 1911. It is painted in the style of Cubism and features tones of ochre and brown. The painting has an estimated value of €23 million.

1095_NT

Le pigeon aux petits pois

In this artwork, how is the Description discussed?

Le pigeon aux petit pois is an oil on canvas painting, which was created by Picasso in 1911. It is painted in the style of Cubism and features tones of ochre and brown. The painting has an estimated value of €23 million.

1096_T

Le pigeon aux petits pois

Focus on Le pigeon aux petits pois and explore the Theft.

At 3:00 a.m. on 20 May 2010, a masked burglar broke into the Paris Museum of Modern Art by removing the glass from a window. Both the motion sensor and the alarm that should have been activated by the break-in were out of order. The theft was not discovered until the next morning. Police traced the perpetrator from an insider's tip and the burglar was identified as 49-year-old Vjéran Tomic, who had an existing criminal record. He was sentenced to eight years in prison and he and his two accomplices were ordered to pay a fine of €104 million. One of Tomic's accomplices, Yonathan Birn, who confessed to receiving the stolen goods, claimed that he threw the stolen artworks in the trash, however, the police doubt this assertion. In total, five artworks were stolen, including Le pigeon aux petit pois and works by Henri Matisse, Georges Braque, Fernand Léger and Amedeo Modigliani. The stolen paintings have never been found and together are valued at $100 million. The other four stolen paintings were Still Life with Chandeliers by Fernand Léger, Olive Tree near Estaque by Georges Braque, La Pastorale by Henri Matisse and Woman with a Fan by Amedeo Modigliani.Alice Farren-Bradley, of the Art Loss Register in London, described the theft as "one of the biggest art heists ever, considering the estimated value, the prominence of the artists and the high profile of the museum."

1096_NT

Le pigeon aux petits pois

Focus on this artwork and explore the Theft.

At 3:00 a.m. on 20 May 2010, a masked burglar broke into the Paris Museum of Modern Art by removing the glass from a window. Both the motion sensor and the alarm that should have been activated by the break-in were out of order. The theft was not discovered until the next morning. Police traced the perpetrator from an insider's tip and the burglar was identified as 49-year-old Vjéran Tomic, who had an existing criminal record. He was sentenced to eight years in prison and he and his two accomplices were ordered to pay a fine of €104 million. One of Tomic's accomplices, Yonathan Birn, who confessed to receiving the stolen goods, claimed that he threw the stolen artworks in the trash, however, the police doubt this assertion. In total, five artworks were stolen, including Le pigeon aux petit pois and works by Henri Matisse, Georges Braque, Fernand Léger and Amedeo Modigliani. The stolen paintings have never been found and together are valued at $100 million. The other four stolen paintings were Still Life with Chandeliers by Fernand Léger, Olive Tree near Estaque by Georges Braque, La Pastorale by Henri Matisse and Woman with a Fan by Amedeo Modigliani.Alice Farren-Bradley, of the Art Loss Register in London, described the theft as "one of the biggest art heists ever, considering the estimated value, the prominence of the artists and the high profile of the museum."

1097_T

Le pigeon aux petits pois

Focus on Le pigeon aux petits pois and explain the In popular culture.

A copy of the painting is displayed in the 2015 James Bond movie Spectre, where it hangs on the wall in Oberhauser’s Moroccan lair.

1097_NT

Le pigeon aux petits pois

Focus on this artwork and explain the In popular culture.

A copy of the painting is displayed in the 2015 James Bond movie Spectre, where it hangs on the wall in Oberhauser’s Moroccan lair.

1098_T

The Potato Eaters

Explore the Composition of this artwork, The Potato Eaters.

During March and the beginning of April 1885, Van Gogh sketched studies for the painting and corresponded with his brother Theo, who was not impressed with his current work nor the sketches Van Gogh sent him in Paris. He began working on The Potato Eaters while living with his parents in Nuenen, a rural town which was home to many farmers, labourers and weavers. He worked on the painting from 13 April until the beginning of May, when it was mostly done except for minor changes that he made with a small brush later the same year.Van Gogh said he wanted to depict peasants as they really were. He deliberately chose coarse and ugly models, thinking that they would be natural and unspoiled in his finished work.Writing to his sister Willemina two years later in Paris, Van Gogh still considered The Potato Eaters his most successful painting: "What I think about my own work is that the painting of the peasants eating potatoes that I did in Nuenen is after all the best thing I did". However, the work was criticized by his friend Anthon van Rappard soon after it was painted. This was a blow to Van Gogh's confidence as an emerging artist, and he wrote back to his friend, "you... had no right to condemn my work in the way you did" (July 1885), and later, "I am always doing what I can't do yet in order to learn how to do it." (August 1885).Vincent Van Gogh is known to have admired the Belgian painter Charles de Groux and in particular his work The blessing before supper. De Groux's work is a solemn depiction of a peasant family saying grace before supper. The painting was closely linked to Christian representations of the Last Supper. Van Gogh's The Potato Eaters was inspired by this work of de Groux and similar religious connotations can be identified in Van Gogh's work.

1098_NT

The Potato Eaters

Explore the Composition of this artwork.

During March and the beginning of April 1885, Van Gogh sketched studies for the painting and corresponded with his brother Theo, who was not impressed with his current work nor the sketches Van Gogh sent him in Paris. He began working on The Potato Eaters while living with his parents in Nuenen, a rural town which was home to many farmers, labourers and weavers. He worked on the painting from 13 April until the beginning of May, when it was mostly done except for minor changes that he made with a small brush later the same year.Van Gogh said he wanted to depict peasants as they really were. He deliberately chose coarse and ugly models, thinking that they would be natural and unspoiled in his finished work.Writing to his sister Willemina two years later in Paris, Van Gogh still considered The Potato Eaters his most successful painting: "What I think about my own work is that the painting of the peasants eating potatoes that I did in Nuenen is after all the best thing I did". However, the work was criticized by his friend Anthon van Rappard soon after it was painted. This was a blow to Van Gogh's confidence as an emerging artist, and he wrote back to his friend, "you... had no right to condemn my work in the way you did" (July 1885), and later, "I am always doing what I can't do yet in order to learn how to do it." (August 1885).Vincent Van Gogh is known to have admired the Belgian painter Charles de Groux and in particular his work The blessing before supper. De Groux's work is a solemn depiction of a peasant family saying grace before supper. The painting was closely linked to Christian representations of the Last Supper. Van Gogh's The Potato Eaters was inspired by this work of de Groux and similar religious connotations can be identified in Van Gogh's work.

1099_T

The Potato Eaters

How does The Potato Eaters elucidate its Lithograph?

Van Gogh made a lithograph of the composition The Potato Eaters before embarking on the painting proper. He sent impressions to his brother and, in a letter to a friend, wrote that he made the lithograph from memory in the space of a day.Van Gogh had first experimented with lithography in The Hague in 1882. Though he appreciated small scale graphic work and was an enthusiastic collector of English engravings he worked relatively little in graphic mediums. In a letter dated around 3 December 1882 he remarksI believe, though, that it would be a great mistake to imagine that such things as, for instance, the print The Grace (a family of woodcutters or peasants at table) were created at a stroke in their final form. No, in most cases the solidity and pith of the small is only obtained through much more serious study than is imagined by those who think lightly of the task of illustrating ... Anyway, some paintings in their huge frames look very substantial, and later one is surprised when they actually leave behind such an empty and dissatisfied feeling. On the other hand, one overlooks many an unpretentious woodcut or lithograph or etching now and then, but comes back to it and becomes more and more attached to it with time, and senses something great in it.

1099_NT

The Potato Eaters

How does this artwork elucidate its Lithograph?

Van Gogh made a lithograph of the composition The Potato Eaters before embarking on the painting proper. He sent impressions to his brother and, in a letter to a friend, wrote that he made the lithograph from memory in the space of a day.Van Gogh had first experimented with lithography in The Hague in 1882. Though he appreciated small scale graphic work and was an enthusiastic collector of English engravings he worked relatively little in graphic mediums. In a letter dated around 3 December 1882 he remarksI believe, though, that it would be a great mistake to imagine that such things as, for instance, the print The Grace (a family of woodcutters or peasants at table) were created at a stroke in their final form. No, in most cases the solidity and pith of the small is only obtained through much more serious study than is imagined by those who think lightly of the task of illustrating ... Anyway, some paintings in their huge frames look very substantial, and later one is surprised when they actually leave behind such an empty and dissatisfied feeling. On the other hand, one overlooks many an unpretentious woodcut or lithograph or etching now and then, but comes back to it and becomes more and more attached to it with time, and senses something great in it.

1100_T

The Potato Eaters

Focus on The Potato Eaters and analyze the Influence of the Hague School.

Van Gogh is often associated in people's minds with the Post-Impressionist movement, but in fact his artistic roots lay much closer to home in the artists of the Hague School such as Anton Mauve and Jozef Israëls. In a letter to his brother Theo written mid-June 1884, Vincent remarks:When I hear you talk about a lot of new names, it's not always possible for me to understand when I've seen absolutely nothing by them. And from what you said about 'Impressionism', I’ve grasped that it's something different from what I thought it was, but it's still not entirely clear to me what one should understand by it. But for my part, I find so tremendously much in Israëls, for instance, that I'm not particularly curious about or eager for something different or newer. Before Vincent painted The Potato Eaters, Israëls had already treated the same subject in his A Peasant Family at the Table and, judging from a comment in a letter to Theo 11 March 1882, Vincent had seen this (or at least a variation of it) and had been inspired to produce his own version of it. Compositionally, the two are very similar: in both paintings the composition of the painting is centered by a figure whose back is turned to the viewer. As well as an interest gained by A Peasant Family at the Table, Vincent had an appreciation for a simpler lifestyle. Vincent was known to disregard the finer things, once writing in a letter to his brother Theo:When I receive money, even if I've fasted, isn't for food, but is even stronger for painting [...] meanwhile the lifeline I cling to is my breakfast with the people where I live, and a cup of coffee and bread in the cremerie in the evening... Van Gogh seemed to emotionally identify with the middle class, although he was from a family who were quite well-off. The subject was that of the harsh reality of life in the working class. He also simply admired the sustainability of the potato, or aardappel in Dutch. Aardappel literally translates to "earth apple," which paints an idea of a simpler, hearty lifestyle.

1100_NT

The Potato Eaters

Focus on this artwork and analyze the Influence of the Hague School.

Van Gogh is often associated in people's minds with the Post-Impressionist movement, but in fact his artistic roots lay much closer to home in the artists of the Hague School such as Anton Mauve and Jozef Israëls. In a letter to his brother Theo written mid-June 1884, Vincent remarks:When I hear you talk about a lot of new names, it's not always possible for me to understand when I've seen absolutely nothing by them. And from what you said about 'Impressionism', I’ve grasped that it's something different from what I thought it was, but it's still not entirely clear to me what one should understand by it. But for my part, I find so tremendously much in Israëls, for instance, that I'm not particularly curious about or eager for something different or newer. Before Vincent painted The Potato Eaters, Israëls had already treated the same subject in his A Peasant Family at the Table and, judging from a comment in a letter to Theo 11 March 1882, Vincent had seen this (or at least a variation of it) and had been inspired to produce his own version of it. Compositionally, the two are very similar: in both paintings the composition of the painting is centered by a figure whose back is turned to the viewer. As well as an interest gained by A Peasant Family at the Table, Vincent had an appreciation for a simpler lifestyle. Vincent was known to disregard the finer things, once writing in a letter to his brother Theo:When I receive money, even if I've fasted, isn't for food, but is even stronger for painting [...] meanwhile the lifeline I cling to is my breakfast with the people where I live, and a cup of coffee and bread in the cremerie in the evening... Van Gogh seemed to emotionally identify with the middle class, although he was from a family who were quite well-off. The subject was that of the harsh reality of life in the working class. He also simply admired the sustainability of the potato, or aardappel in Dutch. Aardappel literally translates to "earth apple," which paints an idea of a simpler, hearty lifestyle.