Datasets:

naist-nlp

/

ExpArt

like 3

18801_T

The Day Dream (Rossetti)

In The Day Dream (Rossetti), how is the Background discussed?

During 1878 Rossetti completed a chalk sketch of Morris, his secret lover, whom he had met at the Theatre Royal, Drury Lane, in 1857. She was the model for several of his well-known paintings, including Proserpine. The drawing was displayed above the mantlepiece in Rossetti's studio. Initially the painting was to be called Monna Primavera, or Vanna Primavera, possibly inspired by La Vita Nuova, a narrative that captivated Rossetti and was the basis for earlier of his works of art. Rossetti was also a poet and penned sonnets to accompany several of his paintings; the last composition in his series entitled Sonnets for Pictures is associated with this painting. The sonnet reads:Rossetti was not initially fully satisfied with the painting and he made several revisions to it. He wrote to Morris apologising for copying the feet of another woman into the picture. An earlier painting of Morris, entitled The Salutation of Beatrice, had similarly used a different model's hands in the final version.

18801_NT

The Day Dream (Rossetti)

In this artwork, how is the Background discussed?

During 1878 Rossetti completed a chalk sketch of Morris, his secret lover, whom he had met at the Theatre Royal, Drury Lane, in 1857. She was the model for several of his well-known paintings, including Proserpine. The drawing was displayed above the mantlepiece in Rossetti's studio. Initially the painting was to be called Monna Primavera, or Vanna Primavera, possibly inspired by La Vita Nuova, a narrative that captivated Rossetti and was the basis for earlier of his works of art. Rossetti was also a poet and penned sonnets to accompany several of his paintings; the last composition in his series entitled Sonnets for Pictures is associated with this painting. The sonnet reads:Rossetti was not initially fully satisfied with the painting and he made several revisions to it. He wrote to Morris apologising for copying the feet of another woman into the picture. An earlier painting of Morris, entitled The Salutation of Beatrice, had similarly used a different model's hands in the final version.

18802_T

The Day Dream (Rossetti)

Focus on The Day Dream (Rossetti) and explore the Description.

Morris is in a seated position on the bough of a sycamore tree. In her hand is a small stem of honeysuckle – a token of love in the Victorian era – that may be an indication of the secret affair the artist was immersed in with her at the time. Unusually for Rossetti work during this time – this is one of his last paintings – the model is pictured full length. The painting is signed "D. Rossetti 1880" on the lower right.The scene is a representation of a young woman shaded by the sycamore tree's leaves. Above her head and around her the tree branches are depicted almost embracing her, or as if she was emerging from the tree itself, almost as a dryad, or tree nymph. She is portrayed clad all in green, her silk dress is a romantic wide and loose silk robe, flowing in graceful folds down, blending in with the tree's leaves, in a way that connects the subject and her surroundings visually. She is immersed in her daydreams, turning her gaze downwards, away from the viewer, towards something unseen or perhaps only perceived by her. The depiction of the young, elegant woman in her shelter surrounded by the branches, adds to the secretive feeling of the painting, maybe indicating the furtiveness of the affair or a clandestine meeting place. In the shelter it is dark, but around her shoulder there is light, light blue compartments against a dark green background, signalling that it is daytime.

18802_NT

The Day Dream (Rossetti)

Focus on this artwork and explore the Description.

Morris is in a seated position on the bough of a sycamore tree. In her hand is a small stem of honeysuckle – a token of love in the Victorian era – that may be an indication of the secret affair the artist was immersed in with her at the time. Unusually for Rossetti work during this time – this is one of his last paintings – the model is pictured full length. The painting is signed "D. Rossetti 1880" on the lower right.The scene is a representation of a young woman shaded by the sycamore tree's leaves. Above her head and around her the tree branches are depicted almost embracing her, or as if she was emerging from the tree itself, almost as a dryad, or tree nymph. She is portrayed clad all in green, her silk dress is a romantic wide and loose silk robe, flowing in graceful folds down, blending in with the tree's leaves, in a way that connects the subject and her surroundings visually. She is immersed in her daydreams, turning her gaze downwards, away from the viewer, towards something unseen or perhaps only perceived by her. The depiction of the young, elegant woman in her shelter surrounded by the branches, adds to the secretive feeling of the painting, maybe indicating the furtiveness of the affair or a clandestine meeting place. In the shelter it is dark, but around her shoulder there is light, light blue compartments against a dark green background, signalling that it is daytime.

18803_T

The Day Dream (Rossetti)

Focus on The Day Dream (Rossetti) and explain the Exhibitions and provenance.

It was left to the Victoria and Albert Museum by Constantine Alexander Ionides in 1900. Ionides had commissioned Rossetti to undertake the work in 1879 for seven hundred guineas. Rossetti and Ionides corresponded throughout the duration of the work on the painting; when it was almost completed on 18 March 1880 Rossetti wrote saying: "[it] will be beyond question as good a thing as I ever did." He also gave explicit instructions as to where the picture was to be positioned, including details as to the height from the floor and the direction from which the light should hit it.

18803_NT

The Day Dream (Rossetti)

Focus on this artwork and explain the Exhibitions and provenance.

It was left to the Victoria and Albert Museum by Constantine Alexander Ionides in 1900. Ionides had commissioned Rossetti to undertake the work in 1879 for seven hundred guineas. Rossetti and Ionides corresponded throughout the duration of the work on the painting; when it was almost completed on 18 March 1880 Rossetti wrote saying: "[it] will be beyond question as good a thing as I ever did." He also gave explicit instructions as to where the picture was to be positioned, including details as to the height from the floor and the direction from which the light should hit it.

18804_T

Ramon Casas and Pere Romeu in an Automobile

Explore the abstract of this artwork, Ramon Casas and Pere Romeu in an Automobile.

Ramon Casas and Pere Romeu in an Automobile is an oil-on-canvas painting by Spanish painter Ramon Casas, created in 1901. It is exhibited at the National Art Museum of Catalonia in Barcelona.

18804_NT

Ramon Casas and Pere Romeu in an Automobile

Explore the abstract of this artwork.

Ramon Casas and Pere Romeu in an Automobile is an oil-on-canvas painting by Spanish painter Ramon Casas, created in 1901. It is exhibited at the National Art Museum of Catalonia in Barcelona.

18805_T

Ramon Casas and Pere Romeu in an Automobile

Focus on Ramon Casas and Pere Romeu in an Automobile and discuss the Description.

The painting depicts the artist and his friend, the businessman Pere Romeu (1862–1908), in a red automobile. Casas is sitting at the wheel and the two men are wearing hats and large furs. Each one also has a pipe in his mouth. In front of the car, the artist's dog Ziem stands on a basket and scouts for an oncoming carriage. The speed is emphasized by the positions of the two drivers and the movement of his wheels. The talent of Casas as one of the great poster artists of Catalan modernism can be noticed in the imagery of the painting.This canvas actually replaced another one by Casas, with the same men riding on a tandem, in 1901, at the decoration of the art café "Els Quatre Gats", usually attended by both of them, which they had co-founded and was a stronghold of modernism in Barcelona. The two paintings came to symbolize the transition between the old (the tandem bicycle) and the new (the automobile), and both have become synonymous with Catalan modernism.

18805_NT

Ramon Casas and Pere Romeu in an Automobile

Focus on this artwork and discuss the Description.

The painting depicts the artist and his friend, the businessman Pere Romeu (1862–1908), in a red automobile. Casas is sitting at the wheel and the two men are wearing hats and large furs. Each one also has a pipe in his mouth. In front of the car, the artist's dog Ziem stands on a basket and scouts for an oncoming carriage. The speed is emphasized by the positions of the two drivers and the movement of his wheels. The talent of Casas as one of the great poster artists of Catalan modernism can be noticed in the imagery of the painting.This canvas actually replaced another one by Casas, with the same men riding on a tandem, in 1901, at the decoration of the art café "Els Quatre Gats", usually attended by both of them, which they had co-founded and was a stronghold of modernism in Barcelona. The two paintings came to symbolize the transition between the old (the tandem bicycle) and the new (the automobile), and both have become synonymous with Catalan modernism.

18806_T

J. E. B. Stuart Monument

How does J. E. B. Stuart Monument elucidate its abstract?

The J. E. B. Stuart Monument is a deconstructed monument to Confederate general J. E. B. Stuart at the head of historic Monument Avenue in Richmond, Virginia, which was dedicated in 1907. The equestrian statue of General Stuart was removed from its pedestal and placed into storage on July 7, 2020 after having stood there for 113 years. The removal was in response to nationally reported events of police brutality and a corresponding emergency declaration in Virginia. The granite pedestal, which stood empty for nineteen months, was finally dismantled in February 2022.

18806_NT

J. E. B. Stuart Monument

How does this artwork elucidate its abstract?

The J. E. B. Stuart Monument is a deconstructed monument to Confederate general J. E. B. Stuart at the head of historic Monument Avenue in Richmond, Virginia, which was dedicated in 1907. The equestrian statue of General Stuart was removed from its pedestal and placed into storage on July 7, 2020 after having stood there for 113 years. The removal was in response to nationally reported events of police brutality and a corresponding emergency declaration in Virginia. The granite pedestal, which stood empty for nineteen months, was finally dismantled in February 2022.

18807_T

J. E. B. Stuart Monument

Focus on J. E. B. Stuart Monument and analyze the History.

The statue, sculpted by Frederick Moynihan of New York, was the second monument unveiled on Monument Avenue, in 1907, and was inspired by the statue of British Lieutenant General Sir James Outram in Kolkata, India. Stuart is turned in the saddle facing east while the horse faces north. The horse had one hoof lifted which, though likely a stylistic choice by the artist has been believed by local legend and based on other statues of the period to denote that Stuart was wounded in his last battle. Two lifted hooves would indicate a death in the heat of battle. (Stuart survived his wound but died days later.)Plans for the Stuart statue were first discussed publicly as early as 1875; however the competition was not held until 1903. Fitzhugh Lee again chaired the selection committee, as he had for the Lee Monument. The site location was chosen in 1904. At the same time plans for the third monument, to Jefferson Davis, were being planned for further west at Monument Avenue and Cedar Street. The dual unveiling drew crowds even larger than for the Lee unveiling. Crowds were estimated between 80,000 and 200,000, including 18,000 veteran attendees who camped out for the week.

18807_NT

J. E. B. Stuart Monument

Focus on this artwork and analyze the History.

The statue, sculpted by Frederick Moynihan of New York, was the second monument unveiled on Monument Avenue, in 1907, and was inspired by the statue of British Lieutenant General Sir James Outram in Kolkata, India. Stuart is turned in the saddle facing east while the horse faces north. The horse had one hoof lifted which, though likely a stylistic choice by the artist has been believed by local legend and based on other statues of the period to denote that Stuart was wounded in his last battle. Two lifted hooves would indicate a death in the heat of battle. (Stuart survived his wound but died days later.)Plans for the Stuart statue were first discussed publicly as early as 1875; however the competition was not held until 1903. Fitzhugh Lee again chaired the selection committee, as he had for the Lee Monument. The site location was chosen in 1904. At the same time plans for the third monument, to Jefferson Davis, were being planned for further west at Monument Avenue and Cedar Street. The dual unveiling drew crowds even larger than for the Lee unveiling. Crowds were estimated between 80,000 and 200,000, including 18,000 veteran attendees who camped out for the week.

18808_T

J. E. B. Stuart Monument

Describe the characteristics of the Removal in J. E. B. Stuart Monument's History.

The Confederate memorials of Monument Avenue again came under scrutiny amid national protests and demonstrations against alleged racism, following the murder of George Floyd in Minneapolis, Minnesota on May 25, 2020. After the amendment of the state law on the removal of Confederate war memorials, Governor Ralph Northam announced the imminent removal of the Robert E. Lee Monument, which is located on state land. On June 3, 2020, Richmond Mayor Levar Stoney announced he would introduce an ordinance on July 1 to have the J. E. B. Stuart Monument removed in additional to three other Confederate monuments, all located on city land. The Stuart equestrian statue was removed from its pedestal on July 7, 2020. The statue was then placed in storage with its location of subsequent display or other fate to be at a determined later date. In February 2022, the vacant pedestal was also removed.

18808_NT

J. E. B. Stuart Monument

Describe the characteristics of the Removal in this artwork's History.

The Confederate memorials of Monument Avenue again came under scrutiny amid national protests and demonstrations against alleged racism, following the murder of George Floyd in Minneapolis, Minnesota on May 25, 2020. After the amendment of the state law on the removal of Confederate war memorials, Governor Ralph Northam announced the imminent removal of the Robert E. Lee Monument, which is located on state land. On June 3, 2020, Richmond Mayor Levar Stoney announced he would introduce an ordinance on July 1 to have the J. E. B. Stuart Monument removed in additional to three other Confederate monuments, all located on city land. The Stuart equestrian statue was removed from its pedestal on July 7, 2020. The statue was then placed in storage with its location of subsequent display or other fate to be at a determined later date. In February 2022, the vacant pedestal was also removed.

18809_T

Bust of George Rogers Clark

Focus on Bust of George Rogers Clark and explore the abstract.

George Rogers Clark is a plaster bust made by American artist David McLary. Dated 1985, the sculpture depicts American Revolutionary War hero and frontiersman George Rogers Clark. The bust is located in an alcove on the third floor of the Indiana Statehouse in Indianapolis, United States. The bust measures 32 inches (81 cm) by 20 inches (51 cm) by 15 inches (38 cm) and sets upon a wooden base measuring approximately 6 inches (15 cm) by 19 inches (48 cm) by 24.25 inches (61.6 cm).

18809_NT

Bust of George Rogers Clark

Focus on this artwork and explore the abstract.

George Rogers Clark is a plaster bust made by American artist David McLary. Dated 1985, the sculpture depicts American Revolutionary War hero and frontiersman George Rogers Clark. The bust is located in an alcove on the third floor of the Indiana Statehouse in Indianapolis, United States. The bust measures 32 inches (81 cm) by 20 inches (51 cm) by 15 inches (38 cm) and sets upon a wooden base measuring approximately 6 inches (15 cm) by 19 inches (48 cm) by 24.25 inches (61.6 cm).

18810_T

Bust of George Rogers Clark

Focus on Bust of George Rogers Clark and explain the Description.

In a frontier-style fringe shirt with lace-up collar, George Rogers Clark looks off to his right. He wears a cowboy hat with the proper left of its brim rolled up. The surface of the bust is rough with a seemingly unrefined style.On the posterior of the proper right shoulder is the artists' engraving which says: DAVID MCLARY / 1985 / INDIANA STATE MUSEUM The brass plaque on the wooden base reads: GEORGE ROGERS CLARK / 1752–1818 / INDIANA STATEHOUSE COLLECTION

18810_NT

Bust of George Rogers Clark

Focus on this artwork and explain the Description.

In a frontier-style fringe shirt with lace-up collar, George Rogers Clark looks off to his right. He wears a cowboy hat with the proper left of its brim rolled up. The surface of the bust is rough with a seemingly unrefined style.On the posterior of the proper right shoulder is the artists' engraving which says: DAVID MCLARY / 1985 / INDIANA STATE MUSEUM The brass plaque on the wooden base reads: GEORGE ROGERS CLARK / 1752–1818 / INDIANA STATEHOUSE COLLECTION

18811_T

Bust of George Rogers Clark

Explore the Historical background of this artwork, Bust of George Rogers Clark.

This bust was sculpted by David McLary in 1985, an Indianapolis-based artist and employee of the Indiana State Museum. Using a casting process a mold was made of the sculpture and from this mold a preliminary cast was made. After the cast went through a refining process a second mold was made from the preliminary cast. It is from this second cast that six other busts were cast and finished in a variety of fashions. There were eight total casts. Other than the sculpture in the Indiana Statehouse, only two of the casts' whereabouts are known. One bust was presented to the George Rogers Clark Elementary School in Clarksville, Indiana. Upon the request of former Councilman John Minta, one bust was then presented to the Clarksville Town Hall.

18811_NT

Bust of George Rogers Clark

Explore the Historical background of this artwork.

This bust was sculpted by David McLary in 1985, an Indianapolis-based artist and employee of the Indiana State Museum. Using a casting process a mold was made of the sculpture and from this mold a preliminary cast was made. After the cast went through a refining process a second mold was made from the preliminary cast. It is from this second cast that six other busts were cast and finished in a variety of fashions. There were eight total casts. Other than the sculpture in the Indiana Statehouse, only two of the casts' whereabouts are known. One bust was presented to the George Rogers Clark Elementary School in Clarksville, Indiana. Upon the request of former Councilman John Minta, one bust was then presented to the Clarksville Town Hall.

18812_T

Self-Portrait (Annibale Carracci)

Focus on Self-Portrait (Annibale Carracci) and discuss the abstract.

Self-Portrait is a 1593 oil on canvas painting by Annibale Carracci, now in the Galleria Nazionale di Parma. It is dated 17 April 1593 on the top left of the canvas.

18812_NT

Self-Portrait (Annibale Carracci)

Focus on this artwork and discuss the abstract.

Self-Portrait is a 1593 oil on canvas painting by Annibale Carracci, now in the Galleria Nazionale di Parma. It is dated 17 April 1593 on the top left of the canvas.

18813_T

Self-Portrait (Annibale Carracci)

How does Self-Portrait (Annibale Carracci) elucidate its History?

Based on the signed date of the painting, Carracci would have been 33 years old. That time was the period of his greatest artistic success: Carracci had just completed Story of the Foundation of Rome with his cousin Ludovico Carracci for the Palazzo Magnani in Bologna. Several years later in 1595, he moved to Rome. The reason for this self-portrait is unknown, whether Carracci completed it for himself or a person he cared about. The painting entered the Galleria Nazionale di Parma after its acquisition by Margherita Dall'Aglio, widow of Bodoni, in December 1841. Quintavalle interpreted the written date of the portrait's completion as "4 di Aprile 1593." Later, that interpretation was corrected by art historian Posner as "17 di Aprile 1593."The painting has always been titled as a self-portrait, based on oral tradition. As reported by Anna Ottavi Cavina, there are a number of 17th-century Carracci prints and drawings that depict his practice of self-portraiture.

18813_NT

Self-Portrait (Annibale Carracci)

How does this artwork elucidate its History?

Based on the signed date of the painting, Carracci would have been 33 years old. That time was the period of his greatest artistic success: Carracci had just completed Story of the Foundation of Rome with his cousin Ludovico Carracci for the Palazzo Magnani in Bologna. Several years later in 1595, he moved to Rome. The reason for this self-portrait is unknown, whether Carracci completed it for himself or a person he cared about. The painting entered the Galleria Nazionale di Parma after its acquisition by Margherita Dall'Aglio, widow of Bodoni, in December 1841. Quintavalle interpreted the written date of the portrait's completion as "4 di Aprile 1593." Later, that interpretation was corrected by art historian Posner as "17 di Aprile 1593."The painting has always been titled as a self-portrait, based on oral tradition. As reported by Anna Ottavi Cavina, there are a number of 17th-century Carracci prints and drawings that depict his practice of self-portraiture.

18814_T

Self-Portrait (Annibale Carracci)

Focus on Self-Portrait (Annibale Carracci) and analyze the Description.

Annibale Carracci is depicted as a half bust, close-up, with a wide-brimmed felt hat and wearing a dark tabard. The composition is cropped to concentrate attention on his face: his short hair, intense gaze, and the confident expression emerge from a neutral background. Studies have compared this self-portrait with that of Annibale's brother Agostino Carracci, now at the Uffizi, and how their self-portraits show the different characters of the two artists. The Annibale's self-portrait is "contemptuous of all exterior decoration, with enough to go around ... not very clean ... with a coat messily wrapped", while the Agostino's depicts an intellectual with refined features, a musician, and a poet.

18814_NT

Self-Portrait (Annibale Carracci)

Focus on this artwork and analyze the Description.

Annibale Carracci is depicted as a half bust, close-up, with a wide-brimmed felt hat and wearing a dark tabard. The composition is cropped to concentrate attention on his face: his short hair, intense gaze, and the confident expression emerge from a neutral background. Studies have compared this self-portrait with that of Annibale's brother Agostino Carracci, now at the Uffizi, and how their self-portraits show the different characters of the two artists. The Annibale's self-portrait is "contemptuous of all exterior decoration, with enough to go around ... not very clean ... with a coat messily wrapped", while the Agostino's depicts an intellectual with refined features, a musician, and a poet.

18815_T

The Last Judgment (Michelangelo)

In The Last Judgment (Michelangelo), how is the Description discussed?

Where traditional compositions generally contrast an ordered, harmonious heavenly world above with the tumultuous events taking place in the earthly zone below, in Michelangelo's conception the arrangement and posing of the figures across the entire painting give an impression of agitation and excitement, and even in the upper parts there is "a profound disturbance, tension and commotion" in the figures. Sydney J. Freedberg interprets their "complex responses" as "those of giant powers here made powerless, bound by racking spiritual anxiety", as their role of intercessors with the deity had come to an end, and perhaps they regret some of the verdicts. There is an impression that all the groups of figures are circling the central figure of Christ in a huge rotary movement.At the centre of the work is Christ, shown as the individual verdicts of the Last Judgment are pronounced; he looks down towards the damned. He is beardless, and "compounded from antique conceptions of Hercules, Apollo, and Jupiter Fulminator", probably, in particular, the Belvedere Apollo, brought to the Vatican by Pope Julius II. However, there are parallels for his pose in earlier Last Judgments, especially one in the Camposanto of Pisa, which Michelangelo would have known; here the raised hand is part of a gesture of ostentatio vulnerum ("display of the wounds"), where the resurrected Christ reveals the wounds of his Crucifixion, which can be seen on Michelangelo's figure.To the left of Christ is his mother, Virgin Mary, who turns her head to look down towards the Saved, though her pose also suggests resignation. It appears that the moment has passed for her to exercise her traditional role of pleading on behalf of the dead; with John the Baptist this Deesis is a regular motif in earlier compositions. Preparatory drawings show her standing and facing Christ with arms outstretched, in a more traditional intercessory posture. Surrounding Christ are large numbers of figures, the saints and the rest of the elect. On a similar scale to Christ are John the Baptist on the left, and on the right Saint Peter, holding the keys of Heaven and perhaps offering them back to Christ, as they will no longer be needed. Several of the main saints appear to be showing Christ their attributes, the evidence of their martyrdom. This used to be interpreted as the saints calling for the damnation of those who had not served the cause of Christ, but other interpretations have become more common, including that the saints are themselves not certain of their own verdicts, and try at the last moment to remind Christ of their sufferings. Other prominent saints include Saint Bartholomew below Peter, holding the attribute of his martyrdom, his own flayed skin. The face on the skin is usually recognized as being a self-portrait of Michelangelo. St. Lawrence is also present, along with the gridiron on which he was roasted. Also depicted is St. Catherine with a portion of the wheel on which she was broken. Many others, even of the larger saints, are difficult to identify. Ascanio Condivi, Michelangelo's tame authorized biographer, says that all Twelve Apostles are shown around Christ, "but he does not attempt to name them and would probably have had a difficult time doing so". In the upper right corner, in the group ascending to heaven, there are three male couples embracing and kissing.The movements of the resurrected reflect the traditional pattern. They arise from their graves at bottom left, and some continue upwards, helped in several cases by angels in the air (mostly without wings) or others on clouds, pulling them up. Others, the damned, apparently pass over to the right, though none are quite shown doing so; there is a zone in the lower middle that is empty of persons. A boat rowed by an aggressive Charon, who ferried souls to the Underworld in classical mythology (and Dante), brings them to land beside the entrance to Hell; his threatening them with his oar is a direct borrowing from Dante. Satan, the traditional Christian devil, is not shown but another classical figure, Minos, supervises the admission of the Damned into Hell; this was his role in Dante's Inferno. He is generally agreed to have been given the features of Biagio da Cesena, a critic of Michelangelo in the Papal court.In the centre above Charon is a group of angels on clouds, seven blowing trumpets (as in the Book of Revelation), others holding books that record the names of the Saved and Damned. To their right is a larger figure who has just realized that he is damned, and appears paralyzed with horror. Two devils are pulling him downwards. To the right of this devils pull down others; some are being pushed down by angels above them.

18815_NT

The Last Judgment (Michelangelo)

In this artwork, how is the Description discussed?

Where traditional compositions generally contrast an ordered, harmonious heavenly world above with the tumultuous events taking place in the earthly zone below, in Michelangelo's conception the arrangement and posing of the figures across the entire painting give an impression of agitation and excitement, and even in the upper parts there is "a profound disturbance, tension and commotion" in the figures. Sydney J. Freedberg interprets their "complex responses" as "those of giant powers here made powerless, bound by racking spiritual anxiety", as their role of intercessors with the deity had come to an end, and perhaps they regret some of the verdicts. There is an impression that all the groups of figures are circling the central figure of Christ in a huge rotary movement.At the centre of the work is Christ, shown as the individual verdicts of the Last Judgment are pronounced; he looks down towards the damned. He is beardless, and "compounded from antique conceptions of Hercules, Apollo, and Jupiter Fulminator", probably, in particular, the Belvedere Apollo, brought to the Vatican by Pope Julius II. However, there are parallels for his pose in earlier Last Judgments, especially one in the Camposanto of Pisa, which Michelangelo would have known; here the raised hand is part of a gesture of ostentatio vulnerum ("display of the wounds"), where the resurrected Christ reveals the wounds of his Crucifixion, which can be seen on Michelangelo's figure.To the left of Christ is his mother, Virgin Mary, who turns her head to look down towards the Saved, though her pose also suggests resignation. It appears that the moment has passed for her to exercise her traditional role of pleading on behalf of the dead; with John the Baptist this Deesis is a regular motif in earlier compositions. Preparatory drawings show her standing and facing Christ with arms outstretched, in a more traditional intercessory posture. Surrounding Christ are large numbers of figures, the saints and the rest of the elect. On a similar scale to Christ are John the Baptist on the left, and on the right Saint Peter, holding the keys of Heaven and perhaps offering them back to Christ, as they will no longer be needed. Several of the main saints appear to be showing Christ their attributes, the evidence of their martyrdom. This used to be interpreted as the saints calling for the damnation of those who had not served the cause of Christ, but other interpretations have become more common, including that the saints are themselves not certain of their own verdicts, and try at the last moment to remind Christ of their sufferings. Other prominent saints include Saint Bartholomew below Peter, holding the attribute of his martyrdom, his own flayed skin. The face on the skin is usually recognized as being a self-portrait of Michelangelo. St. Lawrence is also present, along with the gridiron on which he was roasted. Also depicted is St. Catherine with a portion of the wheel on which she was broken. Many others, even of the larger saints, are difficult to identify. Ascanio Condivi, Michelangelo's tame authorized biographer, says that all Twelve Apostles are shown around Christ, "but he does not attempt to name them and would probably have had a difficult time doing so". In the upper right corner, in the group ascending to heaven, there are three male couples embracing and kissing.The movements of the resurrected reflect the traditional pattern. They arise from their graves at bottom left, and some continue upwards, helped in several cases by angels in the air (mostly without wings) or others on clouds, pulling them up. Others, the damned, apparently pass over to the right, though none are quite shown doing so; there is a zone in the lower middle that is empty of persons. A boat rowed by an aggressive Charon, who ferried souls to the Underworld in classical mythology (and Dante), brings them to land beside the entrance to Hell; his threatening them with his oar is a direct borrowing from Dante. Satan, the traditional Christian devil, is not shown but another classical figure, Minos, supervises the admission of the Damned into Hell; this was his role in Dante's Inferno. He is generally agreed to have been given the features of Biagio da Cesena, a critic of Michelangelo in the Papal court.In the centre above Charon is a group of angels on clouds, seven blowing trumpets (as in the Book of Revelation), others holding books that record the names of the Saved and Damned. To their right is a larger figure who has just realized that he is damned, and appears paralyzed with horror. Two devils are pulling him downwards. To the right of this devils pull down others; some are being pushed down by angels above them.

18816_T

The Last Judgment (Michelangelo)

Focus on The Last Judgment (Michelangelo) and explore the Choice of subject.

The Last Judgment was a traditional subject for large church frescos, but it was unusual to place it at the east end, over the altar. The traditional position was on the west wall, over the main doors at the back of a church, so that the congregation took this reminder of their options away with them on leaving. It might be either painted on the interior, as for example by Giotto at the Arena Chapel, or in a sculpted tympanum on the exterior. However, a number of late medieval panel paintings, mostly altarpieces, were based on the subject with similar compositions, although adapted to a horizontal picture space. These include the Beaune Altarpiece by Rogier van der Weyden and ones by artists such as Fra Angelico, Hans Memling and Hieronymus Bosch. Many aspects of Michelangelo's composition reflect the well-established traditional Western depiction, but with a fresh and original approach.Most traditional versions have a figure of Christ in Majesty in about the same position as Michelangelo's, and even larger than his, with a greater disproportion in scale to the other figures. As here, compositions contain large numbers of figures, divided between angels and saints around Christ at the top, and the dead being judged below. Typically there is a strong contrast between the ordered ranks of figures in the top part, and chaotic and frenzied activity below, especially on the right side that leads to Hell. The procession of the judged usually begins at the bottom (viewer's) left, as here, as the resurrected rise from their graves and move towards judgment. Some pass judgment and continue upwards to join the company in heaven, while others pass over to Christ's left hand and then downwards towards Hell in the bottom right corner (compositions had difficulty incorporating Purgatory visually). The damned may be shown naked, as a mark of their humiliation as devils carry them off, and sometimes the newly-resurrected too, but angels and those in Heaven are fully dressed, their clothing a main clue to the identity of groups and individuals.

18816_NT

The Last Judgment (Michelangelo)

Focus on this artwork and explore the Choice of subject.

The Last Judgment was a traditional subject for large church frescos, but it was unusual to place it at the east end, over the altar. The traditional position was on the west wall, over the main doors at the back of a church, so that the congregation took this reminder of their options away with them on leaving. It might be either painted on the interior, as for example by Giotto at the Arena Chapel, or in a sculpted tympanum on the exterior. However, a number of late medieval panel paintings, mostly altarpieces, were based on the subject with similar compositions, although adapted to a horizontal picture space. These include the Beaune Altarpiece by Rogier van der Weyden and ones by artists such as Fra Angelico, Hans Memling and Hieronymus Bosch. Many aspects of Michelangelo's composition reflect the well-established traditional Western depiction, but with a fresh and original approach.Most traditional versions have a figure of Christ in Majesty in about the same position as Michelangelo's, and even larger than his, with a greater disproportion in scale to the other figures. As here, compositions contain large numbers of figures, divided between angels and saints around Christ at the top, and the dead being judged below. Typically there is a strong contrast between the ordered ranks of figures in the top part, and chaotic and frenzied activity below, especially on the right side that leads to Hell. The procession of the judged usually begins at the bottom (viewer's) left, as here, as the resurrected rise from their graves and move towards judgment. Some pass judgment and continue upwards to join the company in heaven, while others pass over to Christ's left hand and then downwards towards Hell in the bottom right corner (compositions had difficulty incorporating Purgatory visually). The damned may be shown naked, as a mark of their humiliation as devils carry them off, and sometimes the newly-resurrected too, but angels and those in Heaven are fully dressed, their clothing a main clue to the identity of groups and individuals.

18817_T

The Last Judgment (Michelangelo)

Focus on The Last Judgment (Michelangelo) and explain the Before starting.

The project was a long time in gestation. It was probably first proposed in 1533, but was not then attractive to Michelangelo. A number of letters and other sources describe the original subject as a "Resurrection", but it seems most likely that this was always meant in the sense of the General Resurrection of the Dead, followed in Christian eschatology by the Last Judgment, rather than the Resurrection of Jesus. Other scholars believe there was indeed a substitution of the more sombre final subject, reflecting the emerging mood of the Counter-Reformation, and an increase in the area of the wall to be covered. A number of Michelangelo's drawings from the early 1530s develop a Resurrection of Jesus.Vasari, alone among contemporary sources, says that originally Michelangelo intended to paint the other end wall with a Fall of the Rebel Angels to match. By April 1535 the preparation of the wall was begun, but it was over a year before painting began. Michelangelo stipulated the filling-in of two narrow windows, the removal of three cornices, and building the surface increasingly forward as it rises, to give a single uninterrupted wall surface slightly leaning out, by about 11 inches over the height of the fresco.The preparation of the wall led to the end of more than twenty years of friendship between Michelangelo and Sebastiano del Piombo, who tried to persuade the Pope and Michelangelo to do the painting in his preferred technique of oil on plaster, and managed to get the smooth plaster finish needed for this applied. It is possible that around this stage the idea was floated that Sebastiano would do the actual painting, to Michelangelo's designs, as they had collaborated nearly 20 years earlier. After, according to Vasari, some months of passivity, Michelangelo furiously insisted that it should be in fresco, and had the wall re-plastered in the rough arriccio needed as a base for fresco. It was on this occasion that he famously said that oil painting was "an art for women and for leisurely and idle people like Fra Sebastiano".The new fresco required, unlike his Sistine Chapel ceiling, considerable destruction of existing art. There was an altarpiece of the Assumption of Mary by Pietro Perugino above the altar, for which a drawing survives in the Albertina, flanked by tapestries to designs by Raphael; these, of course, could just be used elsewhere. Above this zone, there were two paintings from the 15th-century cycles of Moses and Christ which still occupy the middle zone of the side walls. These were probably Perugino's Finding of Moses and the Adoration of the Kings, beginning both cycles. Above them were the first of the series of standing popes in niches, including Saint Peter himself, probably as well as a Saint Paul and a central figure of Christ. Finally, the project required the destruction of two lunettes with the first two Ancestors of Christ from Michelangelo's own ceiling scheme. However, some of these works may have already been damaged by an accident in April 1525, when the altar curtains went on fire; the damage done to the wall is unclear. The structure of the chapel, built in a great hurry in the 1470s, had given trouble from the start, with frequent cracks appearing. At Christmas in 1525 a Swiss Guard was killed while entering the chapel with the pope when the stone lintel to the doorway split and fell on him. The site is on sandy soil, draining a large area, and the preceding "Great Chapel" had had similar problems.The new scheme for the altar wall and other changes necessitated by structural problems led to a loss of symmetry and "continuity of window-rhythms and cornices", as well as some of the most important parts of the previous iconographical schemes. As shown by drawings, the initial conception for the Last Judgment was to leave the existing altarpiece and work round it, stopping the composition below the frescos of Moses and Christ.The Sistine Chapel was dedicated to the Assumption of the Virgin, which had been the subject of Perugino's altarpiece. Once it was decided to remove this, it appears that a tapestry of the Coronation of the Virgin, a subject often linked to the Assumption, was commissioned, which was hung above the altar for important liturgical occasions in the 18th century, and perhaps from the 1540s until then. The tapestry has a vertical format (it is 4.3 by 3 metres (14.1 by 9.8 ft)), and is still in the Vatican Museums. A print of 1582 shows the chapel in use, with a large cloth of roughly this shape hanging behind the altar, and a canopy over it. The cloth is shown as plain, but the artist also omits the paintings below the ceiling, and may well not have been present himself, but working from prints and descriptions.

18817_NT

The Last Judgment (Michelangelo)

Focus on this artwork and explain the Before starting.

The project was a long time in gestation. It was probably first proposed in 1533, but was not then attractive to Michelangelo. A number of letters and other sources describe the original subject as a "Resurrection", but it seems most likely that this was always meant in the sense of the General Resurrection of the Dead, followed in Christian eschatology by the Last Judgment, rather than the Resurrection of Jesus. Other scholars believe there was indeed a substitution of the more sombre final subject, reflecting the emerging mood of the Counter-Reformation, and an increase in the area of the wall to be covered. A number of Michelangelo's drawings from the early 1530s develop a Resurrection of Jesus.Vasari, alone among contemporary sources, says that originally Michelangelo intended to paint the other end wall with a Fall of the Rebel Angels to match. By April 1535 the preparation of the wall was begun, but it was over a year before painting began. Michelangelo stipulated the filling-in of two narrow windows, the removal of three cornices, and building the surface increasingly forward as it rises, to give a single uninterrupted wall surface slightly leaning out, by about 11 inches over the height of the fresco.The preparation of the wall led to the end of more than twenty years of friendship between Michelangelo and Sebastiano del Piombo, who tried to persuade the Pope and Michelangelo to do the painting in his preferred technique of oil on plaster, and managed to get the smooth plaster finish needed for this applied. It is possible that around this stage the idea was floated that Sebastiano would do the actual painting, to Michelangelo's designs, as they had collaborated nearly 20 years earlier. After, according to Vasari, some months of passivity, Michelangelo furiously insisted that it should be in fresco, and had the wall re-plastered in the rough arriccio needed as a base for fresco. It was on this occasion that he famously said that oil painting was "an art for women and for leisurely and idle people like Fra Sebastiano".The new fresco required, unlike his Sistine Chapel ceiling, considerable destruction of existing art. There was an altarpiece of the Assumption of Mary by Pietro Perugino above the altar, for which a drawing survives in the Albertina, flanked by tapestries to designs by Raphael; these, of course, could just be used elsewhere. Above this zone, there were two paintings from the 15th-century cycles of Moses and Christ which still occupy the middle zone of the side walls. These were probably Perugino's Finding of Moses and the Adoration of the Kings, beginning both cycles. Above them were the first of the series of standing popes in niches, including Saint Peter himself, probably as well as a Saint Paul and a central figure of Christ. Finally, the project required the destruction of two lunettes with the first two Ancestors of Christ from Michelangelo's own ceiling scheme. However, some of these works may have already been damaged by an accident in April 1525, when the altar curtains went on fire; the damage done to the wall is unclear. The structure of the chapel, built in a great hurry in the 1470s, had given trouble from the start, with frequent cracks appearing. At Christmas in 1525 a Swiss Guard was killed while entering the chapel with the pope when the stone lintel to the doorway split and fell on him. The site is on sandy soil, draining a large area, and the preceding "Great Chapel" had had similar problems.The new scheme for the altar wall and other changes necessitated by structural problems led to a loss of symmetry and "continuity of window-rhythms and cornices", as well as some of the most important parts of the previous iconographical schemes. As shown by drawings, the initial conception for the Last Judgment was to leave the existing altarpiece and work round it, stopping the composition below the frescos of Moses and Christ.The Sistine Chapel was dedicated to the Assumption of the Virgin, which had been the subject of Perugino's altarpiece. Once it was decided to remove this, it appears that a tapestry of the Coronation of the Virgin, a subject often linked to the Assumption, was commissioned, which was hung above the altar for important liturgical occasions in the 18th century, and perhaps from the 1540s until then. The tapestry has a vertical format (it is 4.3 by 3 metres (14.1 by 9.8 ft)), and is still in the Vatican Museums. A print of 1582 shows the chapel in use, with a large cloth of roughly this shape hanging behind the altar, and a canopy over it. The cloth is shown as plain, but the artist also omits the paintings below the ceiling, and may well not have been present himself, but working from prints and descriptions.

18818_T

The Last Judgment (Michelangelo)

In the context of The Last Judgment (Michelangelo), discuss the Religious objections of the Reception and later changes.

The Last Judgment became controversial as soon as it was seen, with disputes between critics in the Catholic Counter-Reformation and supporters of the genius of the artist and the style of the painting. Michelangelo was accused of being insensitive to proper decorum, in respect of nudity and other aspects of the work, and of pursuing artistic effect over following the scriptural description of the event.On a preview visit with Paul III, before the work was complete, the pope's Master of Ceremonies Biagio da Cesena is reported by Vasari as saying that: "it was most disgraceful that in so sacred a place there should have been depicted all those nude figures, exposing themselves so shamefully, and that it was no work for a papal chapel but rather for the public baths and taverns". Michelangelo immediately worked Cesena's face from memory into the scene as Minos, judge of the underworld (far bottom-right corner of the painting) with donkey ears (i.e. indicating foolishness), while his nudity is covered by a coiled snake. It is said that when Cesena complained to the Pope, the pontiff joked that his jurisdiction did not extend to Hell, so the portrait would have to remain. Pope Paul III himself was attacked by some for commissioning and protecting the work, and came under pressure to alter if not entirely remove the Last Judgment, which continued under his successors. There were objections to the mixing of figures from pagan mythology into depictions of Christian subject matter. Besides the figures of Charon and Minos and wingless angels, the very classicized Christ was suspect: beardless Christs had in fact only finally disappeared from Christian art some four centuries earlier, but Michelangelo's figure is unmistakably Apollonian.Further objections related to failures to follow the scriptural references. The angels blowing trumpets are all in one group, whereas in the Book of Revelation they are sent to "the four corners of the earth". Christ is not seated on a throne, contrary to Scripture. Such draperies as Michelangelo painted are often shown as blown by wind, but it was claimed that all weather would cease on the Day of Judgment. The resurrected are in mixed condition, some skeletons but most appearing with their flesh intact. All these objections were eventually collected in a book, the Due Dialogi published just after Michelangelo's death in 1564, by the Dominican theologian Giovanni Andrea Gilio (da Fabriano), who had become one of several theologians policing art during and after the Council of Trent. As well as theological objections, Gilio objected to artistic devices like foreshortening that puzzled or distracted untrained viewers. The copy by Marcello Venusti added the dove of the Holy Spirit above Christ, perhaps in response to Gilio's complaint that Michelangelo should have shown all the Trinity. Two decades after the fresco was completed, the final session of the Council of Trent in 1563 finally enacted a form of words that reflected the Counter-Reformation attitudes to art that had been growing in strength in the Church for some decades. The Council's decree (drafted at the last minute and generally very short and inexplicit) reads in part: Every superstition shall be removed, ... all lasciviousness be avoided; in such wise that figures shall not be painted or adorned with a beauty exciting to lust, ... there be nothing seen that is disorderly, or that is unbecomingly or confusedly arranged, nothing that is profane, nothing indecorous, seeing that holiness becometh the house of God. And that these things may be the more faithfully observed, the holy Synod ordains, that no one be allowed to place, or cause to be placed, any unusual image, in any place, or church, howsoever exempted, except that image have been approved of by the bishop. There was an explicit decree that: "The pictures in the Apostolic Chapel should be covered over, and those in other churches should be destroyed, if they display anything that is obscene or clearly false".The defences by Vasari and others of the painting evidently made some impact on clerical thinking. In 1573, when Paolo Veronese was summoned before the Venetian Inquisition to justify his inclusion of "buffoons, drunken Germans, dwarfs, and other such absurdities" in what was then called a painting of the Last Supper (later renamed as The Feast in the House of Levi), he tried to implicate Michelangelo in a comparable breach of decorum, but was promptly rebuffed by the inquisitors, as the transcript records: Q. Does it seem suitable to you, in the Last Supper of our Lord, to represent buffoons, drunken Germans, dwarfs, and other such absurdities? A. Certainly not. Q. Then why have you done it? A. I did it on the supposition that those people were outside the room in which the Supper was taking place. Q. Do you not know that in Germany and other countries infested by heresy, it is habitual, by means of pictures full of absurdities, to vilify and turn to ridicule the things of the Holy Catholic Church, in order to teach false doctrine to ignorant people who have no common sense? A. I agree that it is wrong, but I repeat what I have said, that it is my duty to follow the examples given me by my masters. Q. Well, what did your masters paint? Things of this kind, perhaps? A. In Rome, in the Pope's Chapel, Michelangelo has represented Our Lord, His Mother, Saint John, Saint Peter, and the celestial court; and he has represented all these personages nude, including the Virgin Mary [this last not true], and in various attitudes not inspired by the most profound religious feeling. Q. Do you not understand that in representing the Last Judgment, in which it is a mistake to suppose that clothes are worn, there was no reason for painting any? But in these figures what is there that is not inspired by the Holy Spirit? There are neither buffoons, dogs, weapons, nor other absurdities. ...

18818_NT

The Last Judgment (Michelangelo)

In the context of this artwork, discuss the Religious objections of the Reception and later changes.

The Last Judgment became controversial as soon as it was seen, with disputes between critics in the Catholic Counter-Reformation and supporters of the genius of the artist and the style of the painting. Michelangelo was accused of being insensitive to proper decorum, in respect of nudity and other aspects of the work, and of pursuing artistic effect over following the scriptural description of the event.On a preview visit with Paul III, before the work was complete, the pope's Master of Ceremonies Biagio da Cesena is reported by Vasari as saying that: "it was most disgraceful that in so sacred a place there should have been depicted all those nude figures, exposing themselves so shamefully, and that it was no work for a papal chapel but rather for the public baths and taverns". Michelangelo immediately worked Cesena's face from memory into the scene as Minos, judge of the underworld (far bottom-right corner of the painting) with donkey ears (i.e. indicating foolishness), while his nudity is covered by a coiled snake. It is said that when Cesena complained to the Pope, the pontiff joked that his jurisdiction did not extend to Hell, so the portrait would have to remain. Pope Paul III himself was attacked by some for commissioning and protecting the work, and came under pressure to alter if not entirely remove the Last Judgment, which continued under his successors. There were objections to the mixing of figures from pagan mythology into depictions of Christian subject matter. Besides the figures of Charon and Minos and wingless angels, the very classicized Christ was suspect: beardless Christs had in fact only finally disappeared from Christian art some four centuries earlier, but Michelangelo's figure is unmistakably Apollonian.Further objections related to failures to follow the scriptural references. The angels blowing trumpets are all in one group, whereas in the Book of Revelation they are sent to "the four corners of the earth". Christ is not seated on a throne, contrary to Scripture. Such draperies as Michelangelo painted are often shown as blown by wind, but it was claimed that all weather would cease on the Day of Judgment. The resurrected are in mixed condition, some skeletons but most appearing with their flesh intact. All these objections were eventually collected in a book, the Due Dialogi published just after Michelangelo's death in 1564, by the Dominican theologian Giovanni Andrea Gilio (da Fabriano), who had become one of several theologians policing art during and after the Council of Trent. As well as theological objections, Gilio objected to artistic devices like foreshortening that puzzled or distracted untrained viewers. The copy by Marcello Venusti added the dove of the Holy Spirit above Christ, perhaps in response to Gilio's complaint that Michelangelo should have shown all the Trinity. Two decades after the fresco was completed, the final session of the Council of Trent in 1563 finally enacted a form of words that reflected the Counter-Reformation attitudes to art that had been growing in strength in the Church for some decades. The Council's decree (drafted at the last minute and generally very short and inexplicit) reads in part: Every superstition shall be removed, ... all lasciviousness be avoided; in such wise that figures shall not be painted or adorned with a beauty exciting to lust, ... there be nothing seen that is disorderly, or that is unbecomingly or confusedly arranged, nothing that is profane, nothing indecorous, seeing that holiness becometh the house of God. And that these things may be the more faithfully observed, the holy Synod ordains, that no one be allowed to place, or cause to be placed, any unusual image, in any place, or church, howsoever exempted, except that image have been approved of by the bishop. There was an explicit decree that: "The pictures in the Apostolic Chapel should be covered over, and those in other churches should be destroyed, if they display anything that is obscene or clearly false".The defences by Vasari and others of the painting evidently made some impact on clerical thinking. In 1573, when Paolo Veronese was summoned before the Venetian Inquisition to justify his inclusion of "buffoons, drunken Germans, dwarfs, and other such absurdities" in what was then called a painting of the Last Supper (later renamed as The Feast in the House of Levi), he tried to implicate Michelangelo in a comparable breach of decorum, but was promptly rebuffed by the inquisitors, as the transcript records: Q. Does it seem suitable to you, in the Last Supper of our Lord, to represent buffoons, drunken Germans, dwarfs, and other such absurdities? A. Certainly not. Q. Then why have you done it? A. I did it on the supposition that those people were outside the room in which the Supper was taking place. Q. Do you not know that in Germany and other countries infested by heresy, it is habitual, by means of pictures full of absurdities, to vilify and turn to ridicule the things of the Holy Catholic Church, in order to teach false doctrine to ignorant people who have no common sense? A. I agree that it is wrong, but I repeat what I have said, that it is my duty to follow the examples given me by my masters. Q. Well, what did your masters paint? Things of this kind, perhaps? A. In Rome, in the Pope's Chapel, Michelangelo has represented Our Lord, His Mother, Saint John, Saint Peter, and the celestial court; and he has represented all these personages nude, including the Virgin Mary [this last not true], and in various attitudes not inspired by the most profound religious feeling. Q. Do you not understand that in representing the Last Judgment, in which it is a mistake to suppose that clothes are worn, there was no reason for painting any? But in these figures what is there that is not inspired by the Holy Spirit? There are neither buffoons, dogs, weapons, nor other absurdities. ...

18819_T

The Last Judgment (Michelangelo)

In The Last Judgment (Michelangelo), how is the Revisions of the Reception and later changes elucidated?

Some action to meet the criticism and enact the decision of the council had become inevitable, and the genitalia in the fresco were painted over with drapery by the Mannerist painter Daniele da Volterra, probably mostly after Michelangelo died in 1564. Daniele was "a sincere and fervent admirer of Michelangelo" who kept his changes to a minimum, and had to be ordered to go back and add more, and for his trouble got the nickname "Il Braghettone", meaning "the breeches maker". He also chiseled away and entirely repainted the larger part of Saint Catherine and the entire figure of Saint Blaise behind her. This was done because in the original version Blaise had appeared to look at Catherine's naked behind, and because to some observers the position of their bodies suggested sexual intercourse. The repainted version shows Blaise looking away from Saint Catherine, upward towards Christ. His work, beginning in the upper parts of the wall, was interrupted when Pope Pius IV died in December 1565 and the chapel needed to be free of scaffolding for the funeral and conclave to elect the next pope. El Greco had made a helpful offer to repaint the entire wall with a fresco that was "modest and decent, and no less well painted than the other". Further campaigns of overpainting, often "less discreet or respectful", followed in later reigns, and "the threat of total destruction ... re-surfaced in the pontificates of Pius V, Gregory XIII, and probably again of Clement VIII". According to Anthony Blunt, "rumours were current in 1936 that Pius XI intended to continue the work". In total, nearly 40 figures had drapery added, apart from the two repainted. These additions were in "dry" fresco, which made them easier to remove in the most recent restoration (1990–1994), when about 15 were removed, from those added after 1600. It was decided to leave 16th-century changes.At a relatively early date, probably in the 16th century, a strip of about 18 inches was lost across the whole width of the bottom of the fresco, as the altar and its backing was modified.

18819_NT

The Last Judgment (Michelangelo)

In this artwork, how is the Revisions of the Reception and later changes elucidated?

Some action to meet the criticism and enact the decision of the council had become inevitable, and the genitalia in the fresco were painted over with drapery by the Mannerist painter Daniele da Volterra, probably mostly after Michelangelo died in 1564. Daniele was "a sincere and fervent admirer of Michelangelo" who kept his changes to a minimum, and had to be ordered to go back and add more, and for his trouble got the nickname "Il Braghettone", meaning "the breeches maker". He also chiseled away and entirely repainted the larger part of Saint Catherine and the entire figure of Saint Blaise behind her. This was done because in the original version Blaise had appeared to look at Catherine's naked behind, and because to some observers the position of their bodies suggested sexual intercourse. The repainted version shows Blaise looking away from Saint Catherine, upward towards Christ. His work, beginning in the upper parts of the wall, was interrupted when Pope Pius IV died in December 1565 and the chapel needed to be free of scaffolding for the funeral and conclave to elect the next pope. El Greco had made a helpful offer to repaint the entire wall with a fresco that was "modest and decent, and no less well painted than the other". Further campaigns of overpainting, often "less discreet or respectful", followed in later reigns, and "the threat of total destruction ... re-surfaced in the pontificates of Pius V, Gregory XIII, and probably again of Clement VIII". According to Anthony Blunt, "rumours were current in 1936 that Pius XI intended to continue the work". In total, nearly 40 figures had drapery added, apart from the two repainted. These additions were in "dry" fresco, which made them easier to remove in the most recent restoration (1990–1994), when about 15 were removed, from those added after 1600. It was decided to leave 16th-century changes.At a relatively early date, probably in the 16th century, a strip of about 18 inches was lost across the whole width of the bottom of the fresco, as the altar and its backing was modified.

18820_T

The Last Judgment (Michelangelo)

When looking at the Reception and later changes of The Last Judgment (Michelangelo), how do you discuss its Artistic criticism's Contemporary?

Contemporary As well as the criticism on moral and religious grounds, there was from the start considerable criticism based on purely aesthetic considerations, which had hardly been seen at all in initial reactions to Michelangelo's Sistine Chapel ceiling. Two key figures in the first wave of criticism were Pietro Aretino and his friend Lodovico Dolce, a prolific Venetian humanist. Aretino had made considerable efforts to become as close to Michelangelo as he was to Titian, but had always been rebuffed; "in 1545 his patience gave way, and he wrote to Michelangelo that letter on the Last Judgment which is now famous as an example of insincere prudishness", a letter written with a view to publication. Aretino had not in fact seen the finished painting, and based his criticisms on one of the prints that had been quickly brought to market. He "purports to represent the simple folk" in this new wider audience. However, it appears that at least the print-buying public preferred the uncensored version of the paintings, as most prints showed this well into the 17th century.Vasari responded to this and other criticisms in the 1st edition of his Life of Michelangelo in 1550. Dolce followed up in 1557, the year after Aretino died, with a published dialogue, L'Aretino, almost certainly a collaborative effort with his friend. Many of the arguments of the theologian critics are repeated, but now in the name of decorum rather than religion, emphasizing that the particular and very prominent location of the fresco made the amount of nudity unacceptable; a convenient argument for Aretino, some of whose projects were frankly pornographic, but intended for private audiences. Dolce also complains that Michelangelo's female figures are hard to distinguish from males, and his figures show "anatomical exhibitionism", criticisms many have echoed.On these points, a long-lasting rhetorical comparison of Michelangelo and Raphael developed, in which even supporters of Michelangelo such as Vasari participated. Raphael is held up as the exemplar of all the grace and decorum found lacking in Michelangelo, whose outstanding quality was called by Vasari his terribiltà, the awesome, sublime or (the literal meaning) terror-inducing quality of his art. Vasari came to partly share this view by the time of the expanded 2nd edition of his Lives, published in 1568, though he explicitly defended the fresco on several points raised by the attackers (without mentioning them), such as the decorum of the fresco and "amazing diversity of the figures", and asserted it was "directly inspired by God", and a credit to the Pope and his "future renown".

18820_NT

The Last Judgment (Michelangelo)

When looking at the Reception and later changes of this artwork, how do you discuss its Artistic criticism's Contemporary?

Contemporary As well as the criticism on moral and religious grounds, there was from the start considerable criticism based on purely aesthetic considerations, which had hardly been seen at all in initial reactions to Michelangelo's Sistine Chapel ceiling. Two key figures in the first wave of criticism were Pietro Aretino and his friend Lodovico Dolce, a prolific Venetian humanist. Aretino had made considerable efforts to become as close to Michelangelo as he was to Titian, but had always been rebuffed; "in 1545 his patience gave way, and he wrote to Michelangelo that letter on the Last Judgment which is now famous as an example of insincere prudishness", a letter written with a view to publication. Aretino had not in fact seen the finished painting, and based his criticisms on one of the prints that had been quickly brought to market. He "purports to represent the simple folk" in this new wider audience. However, it appears that at least the print-buying public preferred the uncensored version of the paintings, as most prints showed this well into the 17th century.Vasari responded to this and other criticisms in the 1st edition of his Life of Michelangelo in 1550. Dolce followed up in 1557, the year after Aretino died, with a published dialogue, L'Aretino, almost certainly a collaborative effort with his friend. Many of the arguments of the theologian critics are repeated, but now in the name of decorum rather than religion, emphasizing that the particular and very prominent location of the fresco made the amount of nudity unacceptable; a convenient argument for Aretino, some of whose projects were frankly pornographic, but intended for private audiences. Dolce also complains that Michelangelo's female figures are hard to distinguish from males, and his figures show "anatomical exhibitionism", criticisms many have echoed.On these points, a long-lasting rhetorical comparison of Michelangelo and Raphael developed, in which even supporters of Michelangelo such as Vasari participated. Raphael is held up as the exemplar of all the grace and decorum found lacking in Michelangelo, whose outstanding quality was called by Vasari his terribiltà, the awesome, sublime or (the literal meaning) terror-inducing quality of his art. Vasari came to partly share this view by the time of the expanded 2nd edition of his Lives, published in 1568, though he explicitly defended the fresco on several points raised by the attackers (without mentioning them), such as the decorum of the fresco and "amazing diversity of the figures", and asserted it was "directly inspired by God", and a credit to the Pope and his "future renown".

18821_T

The Last Judgment (Michelangelo)

Focusing on the Reception and later changes of The Last Judgment (Michelangelo), explore the Modern about the Artistic criticism.

Modern In many respects, modern art historians discuss the same aspects of the work as 16th-century writers: the general grouping of the figures and rendering of space and movement, the distinctive depiction of anatomy, the nudity and use of colour, and sometimes the theological implications of the fresco. However, Bernadine Barnes points out that no 16th-century critic echoes in the slightest the view of Anthony Blunt that: "This fresco is the work of a man shaken out of his secure position, no longer at ease with the world, and unable to face it directly. Michelangelo does not now deal directly with the visible beauty of the physical world." At the time, continues Barnes, "it was censured as the work of an arrogant man, and it was justified as a work that made celestial figures more beautiful than natural". Many other modern critics take approaches similar to Blunt's, emphasizing Michelangelo's "tendency away from the material and towards the things of the spirit" in his last decades.In theology, the Second Coming of Christ ended space and time. Despite this, "Michelangelo’s curious representation of space", where "the characters inhabit individual spaces that cannot be combined consistently", is often commented on.Quite apart from the question of decorum, the rendering of anatomy has been often discussed. Writing of "energy" in the nude figure, Kenneth Clark has: The twist into depth, the struggle to escape from the here and now of the picture plane, which had always distinguished Michelangelo from the Greeks, became the dominating rhythm of his later works. That colossal nightmare, the Last Judgment, is made up of such struggles. It is the most overpowering accumulation in all art of bodies in violent movement" Of the figure of Christ, Clark says: "Michelangelo has not tried to resist that strange compulsion which made him thicken a torso until it is almost square."S.J. Freedberg commented that "The vast repertory of anatomies that Michelangelo conceived for the Last Judgment seems often to have been determined more by the requirements of art than by compelling needs of meaning, ... meant not just to entertain but to overpower us with their effects. Often, too, the figures assume attitudes of which a major sense is one of ornament." He notes that the two frescos in the Cappella Paolina, Michelangelo's last paintings begun in November 1542 almost immediately after the Last Judgment, show from the start a major change in style, away from grace and aesthetic effect to an exclusive concern with illustrating the narrative, with no regard for beauty.

18821_NT

The Last Judgment (Michelangelo)

Focusing on the Reception and later changes of this artwork, explore the Modern about the Artistic criticism.

Modern In many respects, modern art historians discuss the same aspects of the work as 16th-century writers: the general grouping of the figures and rendering of space and movement, the distinctive depiction of anatomy, the nudity and use of colour, and sometimes the theological implications of the fresco. However, Bernadine Barnes points out that no 16th-century critic echoes in the slightest the view of Anthony Blunt that: "This fresco is the work of a man shaken out of his secure position, no longer at ease with the world, and unable to face it directly. Michelangelo does not now deal directly with the visible beauty of the physical world." At the time, continues Barnes, "it was censured as the work of an arrogant man, and it was justified as a work that made celestial figures more beautiful than natural". Many other modern critics take approaches similar to Blunt's, emphasizing Michelangelo's "tendency away from the material and towards the things of the spirit" in his last decades.In theology, the Second Coming of Christ ended space and time. Despite this, "Michelangelo’s curious representation of space", where "the characters inhabit individual spaces that cannot be combined consistently", is often commented on.Quite apart from the question of decorum, the rendering of anatomy has been often discussed. Writing of "energy" in the nude figure, Kenneth Clark has: The twist into depth, the struggle to escape from the here and now of the picture plane, which had always distinguished Michelangelo from the Greeks, became the dominating rhythm of his later works. That colossal nightmare, the Last Judgment, is made up of such struggles. It is the most overpowering accumulation in all art of bodies in violent movement" Of the figure of Christ, Clark says: "Michelangelo has not tried to resist that strange compulsion which made him thicken a torso until it is almost square."S.J. Freedberg commented that "The vast repertory of anatomies that Michelangelo conceived for the Last Judgment seems often to have been determined more by the requirements of art than by compelling needs of meaning, ... meant not just to entertain but to overpower us with their effects. Often, too, the figures assume attitudes of which a major sense is one of ornament." He notes that the two frescos in the Cappella Paolina, Michelangelo's last paintings begun in November 1542 almost immediately after the Last Judgment, show from the start a major change in style, away from grace and aesthetic effect to an exclusive concern with illustrating the narrative, with no regard for beauty.

18822_T

The Last Judgment (Michelangelo)

Focus on The Last Judgment (Michelangelo) and explain the Restoration (1980–1994).

Early appreciations of the fresco had focused on the colours, especially in small details, but over the centuries the build-up of dirt on the surface had largely hidden these. The built-out wall led to extra deposition of soot from candles on the altar. In 1953 (admittedly in November) Bernard Berenson put in his diary: "The ceiling looks dark, gloomy. The Last Judgment even more so; ... how difficult to make up our minds that these Sistine frescoes are nowadays scarcely enjoyable in the original and much more so in photographs".The fresco was restored along with the Sistine vault between 1980 and 1994 under the supervision of Fabrizio Mancinelli, the curator of post-classical collections of the Vatican Museums and Gianluigi Colalucci, head restorer at the Vatican laboratory. During the course of the restoration, about half of the censorship of the "Fig-Leaf Campaign" was removed. Numerous pieces of buried details, caught under the smoke and grime of scores of years, were revealed after the restoration. It was discovered that the fresco of Biagio de Cesena as Minos with donkey ears was being bitten in the genitalia by a coiled snake.

18822_NT

The Last Judgment (Michelangelo)

Focus on this artwork and explain the Restoration (1980–1994).

Early appreciations of the fresco had focused on the colours, especially in small details, but over the centuries the build-up of dirt on the surface had largely hidden these. The built-out wall led to extra deposition of soot from candles on the altar. In 1953 (admittedly in November) Bernard Berenson put in his diary: "The ceiling looks dark, gloomy. The Last Judgment even more so; ... how difficult to make up our minds that these Sistine frescoes are nowadays scarcely enjoyable in the original and much more so in photographs".The fresco was restored along with the Sistine vault between 1980 and 1994 under the supervision of Fabrizio Mancinelli, the curator of post-classical collections of the Vatican Museums and Gianluigi Colalucci, head restorer at the Vatican laboratory. During the course of the restoration, about half of the censorship of the "Fig-Leaf Campaign" was removed. Numerous pieces of buried details, caught under the smoke and grime of scores of years, were revealed after the restoration. It was discovered that the fresco of Biagio de Cesena as Minos with donkey ears was being bitten in the genitalia by a coiled snake.

18823_T

The Last Judgment (Michelangelo)

Explore the Inserted self-portrait of this artwork, The Last Judgment (Michelangelo).

Most writers agree that Michelangelo depicted his own face in the flayed skin of Saint Bartholomew (see the illustration above). Edgar Wind saw this as "a prayer for redemption, that through the ugliness the outward man might be thrown off, and the inward man resurrected pure", in a Neoplatonist mood, one that Aretino detected and objected to. One of Michelangelo's poems had used the metaphor of a snake shedding its old skin for his hope for a new life after his death. Bernadine Barnes writes that "recent viewers ... have found in [the flayed skin] evidence of Michelangelo's self-doubt, since the lifeless skin is held precariously over Hell. However, no sixteenth-century critic noticed it [as Michelangelo's face]."The bearded figure of Saint Bartholomew holding the skin was sometimes thought to have the features of Aretino, but open conflict between Michelangelo and Aretino did not occur until 1545, several years after the fresco's completion. "Even Aretino's good friend Vasari did not recognize him."

18823_NT

The Last Judgment (Michelangelo)

Explore the Inserted self-portrait of this artwork.

Most writers agree that Michelangelo depicted his own face in the flayed skin of Saint Bartholomew (see the illustration above). Edgar Wind saw this as "a prayer for redemption, that through the ugliness the outward man might be thrown off, and the inward man resurrected pure", in a Neoplatonist mood, one that Aretino detected and objected to. One of Michelangelo's poems had used the metaphor of a snake shedding its old skin for his hope for a new life after his death. Bernadine Barnes writes that "recent viewers ... have found in [the flayed skin] evidence of Michelangelo's self-doubt, since the lifeless skin is held precariously over Hell. However, no sixteenth-century critic noticed it [as Michelangelo's face]."The bearded figure of Saint Bartholomew holding the skin was sometimes thought to have the features of Aretino, but open conflict between Michelangelo and Aretino did not occur until 1545, several years after the fresco's completion. "Even Aretino's good friend Vasari did not recognize him."

18824_T

National Velvet (McEnroe)

How does National Velvet (McEnroe) elucidate its abstract?

National Velvet is a sculpture by John McEnroe, installed at the base of Denver's 16th Street Pedestrian Bridge, in the U.S. state of Colorado.

18824_NT

National Velvet (McEnroe)

How does this artwork elucidate its abstract?

National Velvet is a sculpture by John McEnroe, installed at the base of Denver's 16th Street Pedestrian Bridge, in the U.S. state of Colorado.

18825_T

The Grands Boulevards

Focus on The Grands Boulevards and analyze the abstract.

The Grands Boulevards is an oil on canvas painting by Pierre-Auguste Renoir, painted in 1875. The painting illustrates a busy Paris boulevard, showing the effects of industrialisation and Haussmannisation. The image is housed at the Philadelphia Museum of Art. It is considered Renoir's most famous view of Paris.

18825_NT

The Grands Boulevards

Focus on this artwork and analyze the abstract.

The Grands Boulevards is an oil on canvas painting by Pierre-Auguste Renoir, painted in 1875. The painting illustrates a busy Paris boulevard, showing the effects of industrialisation and Haussmannisation. The image is housed at the Philadelphia Museum of Art. It is considered Renoir's most famous view of Paris.

18826_T

The Grands Boulevards

In The Grands Boulevards, how is the Background discussed?

Many of the great Impressionists were inspired by the vibrant, urban scenes of Paris. In the 1850s and 1860s, Paris was transformed into a modern metropolis by the urban planner, Georges-Eugène Haussmann. His massive urban renewal of the city resulted in a new layout dominated by wide boulevards, lined with uniform stone buildings, and open park spaces, which is still evident today. Renoir's painting The Grands Boulevards depicts one of the city's newest and most fashionable districts, where middle-class Parisian society would stroll at leisure.Renoir moved to Paris at the age of four, when his family moved there from the town of Limoges. He spent a large part of his life living there and loved the city dearly, stating, "In the streets of Paris I felt at home."

18826_NT

The Grands Boulevards

In this artwork, how is the Background discussed?

Many of the great Impressionists were inspired by the vibrant, urban scenes of Paris. In the 1850s and 1860s, Paris was transformed into a modern metropolis by the urban planner, Georges-Eugène Haussmann. His massive urban renewal of the city resulted in a new layout dominated by wide boulevards, lined with uniform stone buildings, and open park spaces, which is still evident today. Renoir's painting The Grands Boulevards depicts one of the city's newest and most fashionable districts, where middle-class Parisian society would stroll at leisure.Renoir moved to Paris at the age of four, when his family moved there from the town of Limoges. He spent a large part of his life living there and loved the city dearly, stating, "In the streets of Paris I felt at home."

18827_T

The Grands Boulevards

Focus on The Grands Boulevards and explore the Description.

Renoir’s The Grands Boulevards illustrates Haussman's renovation of Paris by depicting the wide, paved street and the large concrete building to the right of the painting. The boulevard is teeming with life; not only does the painting illustrate all classes, but it emphasises the flâneurs. Renoir’s emphasis moves away from the human figure and towards the lighting's effect on the image. The painting shows the clothes worn by the people on the boulevard in detail, from which their social class can be inferred, but their individuality is hidden because Renoir chooses not to show any details of their faces. Instead, his focus is on the effect of sunshine on the buildings and trees. The painting shows great detail in the shadows created by the sun shining on the trees, the shadows created by the people, and the shadow of the horse-drawn carriage. Throughout the painting it is evident that Renoir was influenced by Impressionism. The characteristics of Impressionism that can be seen in Renoir’s work are short brush strokes and a seemingly out of focus view.

18827_NT

The Grands Boulevards

Focus on this artwork and explore the Description.

Renoir’s The Grands Boulevards illustrates Haussman's renovation of Paris by depicting the wide, paved street and the large concrete building to the right of the painting. The boulevard is teeming with life; not only does the painting illustrate all classes, but it emphasises the flâneurs. Renoir’s emphasis moves away from the human figure and towards the lighting's effect on the image. The painting shows the clothes worn by the people on the boulevard in detail, from which their social class can be inferred, but their individuality is hidden because Renoir chooses not to show any details of their faces. Instead, his focus is on the effect of sunshine on the buildings and trees. The painting shows great detail in the shadows created by the sun shining on the trees, the shadows created by the people, and the shadow of the horse-drawn carriage. Throughout the painting it is evident that Renoir was influenced by Impressionism. The characteristics of Impressionism that can be seen in Renoir’s work are short brush strokes and a seemingly out of focus view.

18828_T

Penitent Magdalene (Artemisia Gentileschi)

Focus on Penitent Magdalene (Artemisia Gentileschi) and explain the abstract.

Penitent Magdalene is a painting by the Italian artist Artemisia Gentileschi. It hangs in Seville Cathedral. It has probably been in the cathedral since the late 17th century. She returned to the subject later in the 1620s in Mary Magdalene as Melancholy.

18828_NT

Penitent Magdalene (Artemisia Gentileschi)

Focus on this artwork and explain the abstract.

Penitent Magdalene is a painting by the Italian artist Artemisia Gentileschi. It hangs in Seville Cathedral. It has probably been in the cathedral since the late 17th century. She returned to the subject later in the 1620s in Mary Magdalene as Melancholy.

18829_T

Penitent Magdalene (Artemisia Gentileschi)

Explore the Provenance of this artwork, Penitent Magdalene (Artemisia Gentileschi).

The painting's first home was the collection of Fernando Enriquez Afan de Ribera, the 3rd Duke of Alcala, from 1626 to 1637. He purchased the painting in Rome while he was ambassador to the Holy See during 1625-1626. In 1626, he became viceroy of Naples, and then later returned to Seville in 1631.

18829_NT

Penitent Magdalene (Artemisia Gentileschi)

Explore the Provenance of this artwork.

The painting's first home was the collection of Fernando Enriquez Afan de Ribera, the 3rd Duke of Alcala, from 1626 to 1637. He purchased the painting in Rome while he was ambassador to the Holy See during 1625-1626. In 1626, he became viceroy of Naples, and then later returned to Seville in 1631.

18830_T

Madonna and Child with a Man

Focus on Madonna and Child with a Man and discuss the abstract.

Madonna and Child with a Man or Madonna and Child with a Male Figure is an oil painting on panel of c. 1503–04 by Bramantino in the Pinacoteca di Brera in Milan, which it entered in 1896. The painting had previously been in the collection of cardinal Cesare Monti, left to the Archdiocese of Milan in 1650. Its previous provenance is unknown, though its small dimensions suggest that it was intended for private devotion.X-ray examination of the work has shown that the male figure to the left was repainted from Saint Joseph into a portrait, possibly of the artist's most important patron Gian Giacomo Trivulzio, by comparison with the portrait on Trivulzio's sarcophagus in the Trivulzio Chapel in the church of San Nazaro in Brolo.

18830_NT

Madonna and Child with a Man

Focus on this artwork and discuss the abstract.

Madonna and Child with a Man or Madonna and Child with a Male Figure is an oil painting on panel of c. 1503–04 by Bramantino in the Pinacoteca di Brera in Milan, which it entered in 1896. The painting had previously been in the collection of cardinal Cesare Monti, left to the Archdiocese of Milan in 1650. Its previous provenance is unknown, though its small dimensions suggest that it was intended for private devotion.X-ray examination of the work has shown that the male figure to the left was repainted from Saint Joseph into a portrait, possibly of the artist's most important patron Gian Giacomo Trivulzio, by comparison with the portrait on Trivulzio's sarcophagus in the Trivulzio Chapel in the church of San Nazaro in Brolo.

18831_T

Danseuse (Csaky)

How does Danseuse (Csaky) elucidate its abstract?

Danseuse, also known as Femme à l'éventail, or Femme à la cruche, is an early Cubist, Proto-Art Deco sculpture created in 1912 by the Hungarian avant-garde sculptor Joseph Csaky (1888–1971). This black and white photograph from the Csaky family archives shows a frontal view of the original 1912 plaster. Danseuse was exhibited in Paris at the 1912 Salon d'Automne (n. 405), an exhibition that provoked a succès de scandale and resulted in a xenophobic and anti-modernist quarrel in the French National Assembly. The sculpture was then exhibited at the 1914 Salon des Indépendants entitled Femme à l'éventail (n. 813); and at Galerie Moos, Geneva, 1920, entitled Femme à la cruche.

18831_NT

Danseuse (Csaky)

How does this artwork elucidate its abstract?

Danseuse, also known as Femme à l'éventail, or Femme à la cruche, is an early Cubist, Proto-Art Deco sculpture created in 1912 by the Hungarian avant-garde sculptor Joseph Csaky (1888–1971). This black and white photograph from the Csaky family archives shows a frontal view of the original 1912 plaster. Danseuse was exhibited in Paris at the 1912 Salon d'Automne (n. 405), an exhibition that provoked a succès de scandale and resulted in a xenophobic and anti-modernist quarrel in the French National Assembly. The sculpture was then exhibited at the 1914 Salon des Indépendants entitled Femme à l'éventail (n. 813); and at Galerie Moos, Geneva, 1920, entitled Femme à la cruche.

18832_T

Danseuse (Csaky)

Focus on Danseuse (Csaky) and analyze the Description.

Danseuse is a plaster sculpture carved in a vertical format. The work represents a woman standing or dancing nude with a folded fan in her left hand and her right knee leaning on a vase. The sculpture, known from an early photograph, is executed in a highly Cubist syntax, in opposition to the softness and curvilinearity of Nabis, Symbolist or Art Nouveau forms.The figure, at first glance delicate, feminine, wearing a necklace, graceful with a classical allure, is constructed with a series of faceted planar forms that together form a tight cohesive structure. The head, with its stylish coiffure, and the models facial features are simply constructed with only a few surface planes juxtaposed at seemingly right angles. Even the vase, upon close examination, appears treated in geometric terms, its sphericity broken by an angular cut to the right, barely visible in the photograph. The treatment of Csaky's Danseuse, as other works by the artist executed between 1910 and 1913, suggests, as Albert Elsen notes, that Csaky had looked not only at Picasso's earlier painting and sculpture, but also at African tribal masks whose exaggerated features and simplified design accommodated the need to be seen at a distance and to evoke strong feeling.Just as in Csaky's Groupe de femmes (1911–12), Danseuse already showed a new way of representing the human figure, an unwillingness to revert to classical, academic or traditional methods of representation. The complex angular syntax visible in Danseuse was born out of a growing sense of contemporary dynamism, out of rhythm, balance, harmony and out of the powerful geometric qualities of Egyptian art, African art, early Cycladic art, Gothic art, of Pierre Puvis de Chavannes, Auguste Rodin, Gustave Courbet, Paul Gauguin, Georges Seurat and Paul Cézanne, all of whom Csaky greatly admired.

18832_NT

Danseuse (Csaky)

Focus on this artwork and analyze the Description.

Danseuse is a plaster sculpture carved in a vertical format. The work represents a woman standing or dancing nude with a folded fan in her left hand and her right knee leaning on a vase. The sculpture, known from an early photograph, is executed in a highly Cubist syntax, in opposition to the softness and curvilinearity of Nabis, Symbolist or Art Nouveau forms.The figure, at first glance delicate, feminine, wearing a necklace, graceful with a classical allure, is constructed with a series of faceted planar forms that together form a tight cohesive structure. The head, with its stylish coiffure, and the models facial features are simply constructed with only a few surface planes juxtaposed at seemingly right angles. Even the vase, upon close examination, appears treated in geometric terms, its sphericity broken by an angular cut to the right, barely visible in the photograph. The treatment of Csaky's Danseuse, as other works by the artist executed between 1910 and 1913, suggests, as Albert Elsen notes, that Csaky had looked not only at Picasso's earlier painting and sculpture, but also at African tribal masks whose exaggerated features and simplified design accommodated the need to be seen at a distance and to evoke strong feeling.Just as in Csaky's Groupe de femmes (1911–12), Danseuse already showed a new way of representing the human figure, an unwillingness to revert to classical, academic or traditional methods of representation. The complex angular syntax visible in Danseuse was born out of a growing sense of contemporary dynamism, out of rhythm, balance, harmony and out of the powerful geometric qualities of Egyptian art, African art, early Cycladic art, Gothic art, of Pierre Puvis de Chavannes, Auguste Rodin, Gustave Courbet, Paul Gauguin, Georges Seurat and Paul Cézanne, all of whom Csaky greatly admired.

18833_T

Danseuse (Csaky)

In Danseuse (Csaky), how is the Salon d'Automne, 1912 discussed?

The 1912 Automne exhibition, held in Paris at the Grand Palais des Champs-Elysées from 1 October to 8 November resulted in a xenophobe and anti-modernist quarrel in the National Assembly (France). The group of artists now recognized as Cubists, among which several non-French citizens exhibited, were regrouped into the same room: Salle XI. The Cubist room was packed full with spectators, as others waited in line to get in, recalled Albert Gleizes. The resistance to both foreigners and avant-garde art was part of a more profound crises: that of defining modern French art in the wake of Impressionism centered in Paris. Placed into question was the modern ideology elaborated upon since the late 19th century. What had begun as a question of aesthetics quickly turned political during the Cubist exhibition. The critic Louis Vauxcelles (in Les Arts..., 1912) was most implicated in the deliberations. On 3 December 1912 the polemic reached the Chambre des députés and was debated at the French National Assembly.The scandal prompted the critic Roger Allard to defend the Cubists in the journal La Côte, pointing out that it wasn't the first time the Salon d'Automne—a venue to promote modern art—came under attack by city officials, the Institute, and members of the Conseil. And it would not be the last either.

18833_NT

Danseuse (Csaky)

In this artwork, how is the Salon d'Automne, 1912 discussed?

The 1912 Automne exhibition, held in Paris at the Grand Palais des Champs-Elysées from 1 October to 8 November resulted in a xenophobe and anti-modernist quarrel in the National Assembly (France). The group of artists now recognized as Cubists, among which several non-French citizens exhibited, were regrouped into the same room: Salle XI. The Cubist room was packed full with spectators, as others waited in line to get in, recalled Albert Gleizes. The resistance to both foreigners and avant-garde art was part of a more profound crises: that of defining modern French art in the wake of Impressionism centered in Paris. Placed into question was the modern ideology elaborated upon since the late 19th century. What had begun as a question of aesthetics quickly turned political during the Cubist exhibition. The critic Louis Vauxcelles (in Les Arts..., 1912) was most implicated in the deliberations. On 3 December 1912 the polemic reached the Chambre des députés and was debated at the French National Assembly.The scandal prompted the critic Roger Allard to defend the Cubists in the journal La Côte, pointing out that it wasn't the first time the Salon d'Automne—a venue to promote modern art—came under attack by city officials, the Institute, and members of the Conseil. And it would not be the last either.

18834_T

Danseuse (Csaky)

In the context of Danseuse (Csaky), explore the Works exhibited in Salle XI, the Cubist room of the Salon d'Automne, 1912.

Joseph Csaky exhibited the sculptures Danseuse (Femme à l'éventail, or Femme à la cruche) no. 405 (location unknown), Groupe de femmes, 1911-1912 (location unknown), Portrait de M.S.H., no. 91 (location unknown) Albert Gleizes, l'Homme au Balcon (Man on a Balcony, Portrait of Dr. Théo Morinaud) 1912 (Philadelphia Museum of Art), also exhibited at the Armory show, New York, Chicago, Boston, 1913. Jean Metzinger entered three works: Dancer in a café (entitled Danseuse), La Plume Jaune (The Yellow Feather), Femme à l'Éventail (Woman with a Fan) (Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum, New York), hung in the decorative arts section inside La Maison Cubiste (the Cubist House). Francis Picabia, 1912, La Source (The Spring) (Museum of Modern Art, New York) Fernand Léger exhibited La Femme en Bleu (Woman in Blue), 1912 (Kunstmuseum, Basel) and Le passage à niveau (The Level Crossing), 1912 (Fondation Beyeler, Riehen, Switzerland)Roger de La Fresnaye, Les Baigneuse (The bathers) 1912 (The National Gallery, Washington) and Les joueurs de cartes (Card Players) Henri Le Fauconnier, The Huntsman (Haags Gemeentemuseum, The Hague, Netherlands) and Les Montagnards attaqués par des ours (Mountaineers Attacked by Bears) 1912 (Museum of Art, Rhode Island School of Design). André Lhote, Le jugement de Paris, 1912 (Private collection) František Kupka, Amorpha, Fugue à deux couleurs (Fugue in Two Colors), 1912 (Narodni Galerie, Prague), and Amorpha Chromatique Chaude. Alexander Archipenko, Family Life, 1912, sculpture Amedeo Modigliani, exhibited four sculptures of elongated and highly stylized heads Raymond Duchamp-Villon, La Maison Cubiste (The Cubist House), Projet d'Hotel, Façade architecturale, 1912

18834_NT

Danseuse (Csaky)

In the context of this artwork, explore the Works exhibited in Salle XI, the Cubist room of the Salon d'Automne, 1912.

Joseph Csaky exhibited the sculptures Danseuse (Femme à l'éventail, or Femme à la cruche) no. 405 (location unknown), Groupe de femmes, 1911-1912 (location unknown), Portrait de M.S.H., no. 91 (location unknown) Albert Gleizes, l'Homme au Balcon (Man on a Balcony, Portrait of Dr. Théo Morinaud) 1912 (Philadelphia Museum of Art), also exhibited at the Armory show, New York, Chicago, Boston, 1913. Jean Metzinger entered three works: Dancer in a café (entitled Danseuse), La Plume Jaune (The Yellow Feather), Femme à l'Éventail (Woman with a Fan) (Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum, New York), hung in the decorative arts section inside La Maison Cubiste (the Cubist House). Francis Picabia, 1912, La Source (The Spring) (Museum of Modern Art, New York) Fernand Léger exhibited La Femme en Bleu (Woman in Blue), 1912 (Kunstmuseum, Basel) and Le passage à niveau (The Level Crossing), 1912 (Fondation Beyeler, Riehen, Switzerland)Roger de La Fresnaye, Les Baigneuse (The bathers) 1912 (The National Gallery, Washington) and Les joueurs de cartes (Card Players) Henri Le Fauconnier, The Huntsman (Haags Gemeentemuseum, The Hague, Netherlands) and Les Montagnards attaqués par des ours (Mountaineers Attacked by Bears) 1912 (Museum of Art, Rhode Island School of Design). André Lhote, Le jugement de Paris, 1912 (Private collection) František Kupka, Amorpha, Fugue à deux couleurs (Fugue in Two Colors), 1912 (Narodni Galerie, Prague), and Amorpha Chromatique Chaude. Alexander Archipenko, Family Life, 1912, sculpture Amedeo Modigliani, exhibited four sculptures of elongated and highly stylized heads Raymond Duchamp-Villon, La Maison Cubiste (The Cubist House), Projet d'Hotel, Façade architecturale, 1912

18835_T

Danseuse (Csaky)

Focus on Danseuse (Csaky) and explain the Salon des Indépendants, 1914.

At the Salon des Indépendants, held in Paris 1 to 30 March 1914, composed of many Orphist works of large dimension and took place in one of the largest rooms on the ground floor of the Grand Palais des Champs-Elysées: Robert Delaunay, Sonia Delaunay, Patrick Henry Bruce and Arthur Burdett Frost were largely represented.Csaky exhibited Femme à l'éventail, plaster n. 5092 under the number 813 of the catalog, along with two busts, executed in a highly Cubist facture. Several years later, Marcel Duchamp, speaking about his own experience during the revolutionary years in the history of art of the 20th century, presented Joseph Csaky as "belonging to a group of sculptors who, before 1914, imparted a new direction in their work. The theory of Cubism was then a trampoline that permitted the propulsion towards unexplored regions and Csaky, even if influenced by Cubism, developed his own concepts on the treatment of space. His first works appeared more theoretical and intellectual than his later works when he oriented his personal development towards atmospheric structures."Reviewing the 1914 Indépendants in an article entitled Le Salon, published in the periodical Montparnasse, André Salmon, who usually considered works the Indépendants 'true mediocrity of the pupils of l'art officiel', encouraged his readers to visit the year's salon to discover 'true modernity'. To justify his claim he reproduce a large photograph of Csaky's 1913 Head.

18835_NT

Danseuse (Csaky)

Focus on this artwork and explain the Salon des Indépendants, 1914.

At the Salon des Indépendants, held in Paris 1 to 30 March 1914, composed of many Orphist works of large dimension and took place in one of the largest rooms on the ground floor of the Grand Palais des Champs-Elysées: Robert Delaunay, Sonia Delaunay, Patrick Henry Bruce and Arthur Burdett Frost were largely represented.Csaky exhibited Femme à l'éventail, plaster n. 5092 under the number 813 of the catalog, along with two busts, executed in a highly Cubist facture. Several years later, Marcel Duchamp, speaking about his own experience during the revolutionary years in the history of art of the 20th century, presented Joseph Csaky as "belonging to a group of sculptors who, before 1914, imparted a new direction in their work. The theory of Cubism was then a trampoline that permitted the propulsion towards unexplored regions and Csaky, even if influenced by Cubism, developed his own concepts on the treatment of space. His first works appeared more theoretical and intellectual than his later works when he oriented his personal development towards atmospheric structures."Reviewing the 1914 Indépendants in an article entitled Le Salon, published in the periodical Montparnasse, André Salmon, who usually considered works the Indépendants 'true mediocrity of the pupils of l'art officiel', encouraged his readers to visit the year's salon to discover 'true modernity'. To justify his claim he reproduce a large photograph of Csaky's 1913 Head.

18836_T

Statue of Casimir Pulaski (Milwaukee)

Focus on Statue of Casimir Pulaski (Milwaukee) and discuss the abstract.

Count Casimir Pulaski is a public artwork by American artist Joseph Kiselewski located in Pulaski Park, which is in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, United States. The bronze statue is a 6-foot, full-length portrait of Count Casimir Pulaski standing atop a 17-foot granite pedestal.

18836_NT

Statue of Casimir Pulaski (Milwaukee)

Focus on this artwork and discuss the abstract.

Count Casimir Pulaski is a public artwork by American artist Joseph Kiselewski located in Pulaski Park, which is in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, United States. The bronze statue is a 6-foot, full-length portrait of Count Casimir Pulaski standing atop a 17-foot granite pedestal.

18837_T

Statue of Casimir Pulaski (Milwaukee)

How does Statue of Casimir Pulaski (Milwaukee) elucidate its Description?

Count Casimir Pulaski consists of a cast bronze full-length portrait of the count dressed in uniform and unsheathing a sword from his proper left side. The sculpture is covered in a blue-green patina and stands on a white cut granite base. There are various inscriptions on the statue and its base. The proper left side of the bronze base reads: J. Kisielewski (sic). One side of the stone base reads: To the memory of Gen. Casimir Pulaski made glorious by his life and death 1746 1779. Another side reads: Erected- 1931. The third side reads: Pulaski. The fourth side of the stone base reads: Na. Wieczna. Parniec. Iczesc. Naszego. Rodaka Kazimierza. Pulaskiego Pulacy. W. Milwaukee. The sculpture is administered by the Milwaukee County, Department of Parks, Recreation and Culture.

18837_NT

Statue of Casimir Pulaski (Milwaukee)

How does this artwork elucidate its Description?

Count Casimir Pulaski consists of a cast bronze full-length portrait of the count dressed in uniform and unsheathing a sword from his proper left side. The sculpture is covered in a blue-green patina and stands on a white cut granite base. There are various inscriptions on the statue and its base. The proper left side of the bronze base reads: J. Kisielewski (sic). One side of the stone base reads: To the memory of Gen. Casimir Pulaski made glorious by his life and death 1746 1779. Another side reads: Erected- 1931. The third side reads: Pulaski. The fourth side of the stone base reads: Na. Wieczna. Parniec. Iczesc. Naszego. Rodaka Kazimierza. Pulaskiego Pulacy. W. Milwaukee. The sculpture is administered by the Milwaukee County, Department of Parks, Recreation and Culture.

18838_T

Statue of Casimir Pulaski (Milwaukee)

Focus on Statue of Casimir Pulaski (Milwaukee) and analyze the Historical information.

Pulaski was born in Warsaw, Poland, on March 6, 1745. He fought with his father against the Russian and Prussian influence over Poland. When their efforts failed, Pulaski was outlawed by the Russians for his actions. He met Benjamin Franklin in Paris and was enthralled by the idea of a new country fighting for its freedom, offering his services to help America in the battle. Franklin wrote Pulaski a letter of introduction to General George Washington, and Pulaski sailed to America, arriving in Philadelphia in 1777. He distinguished himself as a brilliant military technician, prompting Congress to put him as the head of the newly established Cavalry. Pulaski thus became known as the Father of the American Cavalry. "It was on October 9, 1779 during the Battle of Savannah, that General Pulaski, charging into battle on horseback, fell to the ground mortally wounded by the blast of a cannon. Pulaski's enemies were so impressed by his courage that they spared him the musket and permitted him to be carried from the battlefield." He died on October 15, 1779. In Milwaukee, the Polish Army Veterans Post No. 3 decided to recognize Pulaski's 150th anniversary. The Polish-language newspaper and 10 Polish-American civic organizations contributed to the funds needed for the sculpture. Although an equestrian statue would have been more appropriate to honor Pulaski, the Great Depression prevented the Veterans from raising more than $12,000. This amount was perfect for a full-length figure of the general. The board of directors of the Pulaski Monument Association proceeded to choose Kiselewski's model of the statue that stands today.

18838_NT

Statue of Casimir Pulaski (Milwaukee)

Focus on this artwork and analyze the Historical information.

Pulaski was born in Warsaw, Poland, on March 6, 1745. He fought with his father against the Russian and Prussian influence over Poland. When their efforts failed, Pulaski was outlawed by the Russians for his actions. He met Benjamin Franklin in Paris and was enthralled by the idea of a new country fighting for its freedom, offering his services to help America in the battle. Franklin wrote Pulaski a letter of introduction to General George Washington, and Pulaski sailed to America, arriving in Philadelphia in 1777. He distinguished himself as a brilliant military technician, prompting Congress to put him as the head of the newly established Cavalry. Pulaski thus became known as the Father of the American Cavalry. "It was on October 9, 1779 during the Battle of Savannah, that General Pulaski, charging into battle on horseback, fell to the ground mortally wounded by the blast of a cannon. Pulaski's enemies were so impressed by his courage that they spared him the musket and permitted him to be carried from the battlefield." He died on October 15, 1779. In Milwaukee, the Polish Army Veterans Post No. 3 decided to recognize Pulaski's 150th anniversary. The Polish-language newspaper and 10 Polish-American civic organizations contributed to the funds needed for the sculpture. Although an equestrian statue would have been more appropriate to honor Pulaski, the Great Depression prevented the Veterans from raising more than $12,000. This amount was perfect for a full-length figure of the general. The board of directors of the Pulaski Monument Association proceeded to choose Kiselewski's model of the statue that stands today.

18839_T

Exhibition of Leningrad artists (Russian Museum, 1960)

In Exhibition of Leningrad artists (Russian Museum, 1960), how is the History and Organization discussed?

For the organization and preparation of Exhibition of 1960 was formed specially Exhibition Committee which consisted of 49 the most authoritative art-experts. Exhibition Catalog was published. In total, the Exhibition displayed almost 950 works of art of painters, sculptors, graphics, artists of theater and cinema, masters of arts and crafts. At whole Exhibition attended over 600 artists of the Leningrad.

18839_NT

Exhibition of Leningrad artists (Russian Museum, 1960)

In this artwork, how is the History and Organization discussed?

For the organization and preparation of Exhibition of 1960 was formed specially Exhibition Committee which consisted of 49 the most authoritative art-experts. Exhibition Catalog was published. In total, the Exhibition displayed almost 950 works of art of painters, sculptors, graphics, artists of theater and cinema, masters of arts and crafts. At whole Exhibition attended over 600 artists of the Leningrad.

18840_T

Exhibition of Leningrad artists (Russian Museum, 1960)

Focus on Exhibition of Leningrad artists (Russian Museum, 1960) and explore the Contributed Artworks.

For the Exhibition were selected art works created in 1959-1960, also some earlier works. All they were exhibited in the first time. Some of them were subsequently found in the collections of Soviet Art museums, as well as domestic and foreign galleries and collectors. Historical painting was presented of "Homecoming" by Zlata Bizova, "Victory Salute in Moscow" by Mikhail Bobyshov, "Melodies Caucasus" by Nikolai Brandt, "A Letter from Motherland" by Vladimir Chekalov, "Sons of the Russia" by Oleg Eremeev, "Rummage" by Mikhail Kaneev, "Lenin and Komsomols" by Marc Klionsky, "In 1941 year", "Missing in action" by Boris Lavrenko, "Private soldier of October Revolution" by Anatoli Levitin, "Listen to Lenin" by Piotr Litvinsky, "A new host" by Oleg Lomakin, "Seeing" by Galina Rumiantseva, "Spring of the Great Break" by Alexander Sokolov, "Appeal of Hiroshima" by Leonid Tkachenko, "Tale about Siege of Leningrad" by Yuri Tulin, "Stepan Razin", "The Builders of the Volkhov Hydroelectric Station" by Boris Ugarov, "In the mansion of Mathilde Kschessinska" by Anatoli Vasiliev, "Where is the truth?" by Nina Veselova, and others.Portrait was presented of "Natasha", "Girl on the stone" by Irina Baldina, "Governess" by Nikolai Baskakov, "Portrait of A. Belova" by Yuri Belov, "Portrait of Daughter" by Olga Bogaevskaya, "Portrait of sculptor Igor Krestovsky", "Portrait of actress Alexandra Zavialova" by Piotr Buchkin, "Ship Repairers" by Engels Kozlov, "Portrait of a factory worker N. Shilina" by Marina Kozlovskaya, "A Workwoman", "Katya Baltina, from a team of workers finishers" by Boris Korneev, "Portrait of A. Shennikov, academician" by Elena Kostenko, "Portrait of Scientist", "Portrait of V. Rudenko, worker of Kirov Plant" by Valeria Larina, "A Loader", "Portrait of N. Laskovskaya" by Anatoli Levitin, "Miner", "Portrait of actor Leonid Vivien", "Female portrait", "Young Mainer", "A Head of Miner", "Portrait of student" by Mikhail Trufanov, "Portrait of Dombrovsky, diver of the Baltic Fleet" by Anatoli Vasiliev, "Mikhail Dolgov, chairman of the kolkhoz" by Nina Veselova, and others.Genre painting was presented of "Asphalting" by Piotr Alberti, "At the St Peter and Paul Fortress" by Evgenia Antipova, "Spring in kolkhoz", "Return of the Herd" by Leonid Baykov, "From school to the work" by Nikolai Baskakov, "Launching of the tanker "Beijing"" by Vsevolod Bazhenov, "Guests" by Olga Bogaevskaya, "Fishermen's Island" by Lev Bogomolets, "Grain growers" by Piotr Buchkin, "On the roads of Karelia" by Nikolai Galakhov, "Farewell" by Elena Gorokhova, "Enthusiasts" by Oleg Eremeev, "Geologists" by Alexei Eriomin, "Girls" by Tatiana Kopnina, "Three" by Maya Kopitseva, "Development of the North" by Boris Korneev, "The Factory district", "Kindergarten" by Alexander Koroviakov, "To the new edge" by Anatoli Levitin, "Quiet time" by Galina Rumiantseva, "Timber rafting in Arkhangelsk", "Timber Storage" by Yuri Shablikin, "Forging shop" by Nadezhda Shteinmiller, "Road Builders" by Victor Teterin, "Here will be a road" by Mikhail Tkachev, "Seamstresses" by Valery Vatenin, "Spring of drivers" by Nina Veselova, and others.Landscape and Cityscape were presented of "Blue Night", "After the rain" by Taisia Afonina, "Neva industrial" by Vsevolod Bazhenov, "Kirov Stadium in Leningrad", "Moscow Kremlin in winter" by Mikhail Bobyshov, "A Morning", "Storm" by Lev Bogomolets, "Summer Morning" by Nikolai Brandt, "Summer" by Dmitry Buchkin, "Northern Spring", "A Village in Siberia" by Nikolai Galakhov, "On the Volkhov River", "Rostov The Great", "Bridge over Velikaya River" by Ivan Godlevsky, "In South-East Crimea", "Crimea. At the old brook" by Vladimir Gorb, "April Day" by Abram Grushko, "Lanskoy Highway" by Marina Kozlovskaya, "After the rain" by Vladimir Krantz, "At the Vasilievsky Island" by Yaroslav Krestovsky, "On the Neva River" by Ivan Lavsky, "Boats on the shore" by Yuri Shablikin, "Summer Garden in October" by Alexander Shmidt, "Spring in the Garden", "White Night in Khibiny" by Boris Shamanov, "Twilight", "Winter day", "Bridge over canal", "Yacht-club" by Nadezhda Shteinmiller, "Circus in Winter" by Alexander Stolbov, "In Sunny Day" by Victor Teterin, "Mach Sun", "Early Spring", "Aspen in winter", "Turns green", "Evening. The Lilac hour", "October. The First Snow" by Nikolai Timkov, "Park" by Yuri Tulin, "First Snow", "Herd", "A Village on the Angara River", "Baykal Lake" by Ivan Varichev, "A Midday", "After the rain", "Novgorod evening" by Rostislav Vovkushevsky, "Krukov Canal in Leningrad", "Moyka River" by German Yegoshin, "Morning", "Baykal motive", "On the shore of Angara River" by Vecheslav Zagonek, "Spring on Malaya Okhta", "On the Msta River", "Winter" by Sergei Zakharov, "Yachts at a mooring", "Yachts go to the Seaside" by Elena Zhukova, and others.Still life paintings were presented of "Still life" by Evgenia Antipova, "Karelian Still life" by Irina Baldina, "Still life" by Olga Bogaevskaya, "Oranges, Lemons, and Pineapple" by Vladimir Gorb, "Young Apple Tree", "Bananas", "Potato. Still life", "Autumn Bird Cherry", "Tea-table" by Maya Kopitseva, "Wildflowers", "Quince and Grapes", "Apple-tree branch", "Autumn Bouquet", "Peaches and melons" by Victor Teterin, "Red and White flowers" by Nina Veselova, "Gifts of the land" by Rostislav Vovkushevsky, "Still life" by Ruben Zakharian, "Still life" by Sergei Zakharov, and others.

18840_NT

Exhibition of Leningrad artists (Russian Museum, 1960)

Focus on this artwork and explore the Contributed Artworks.

For the Exhibition were selected art works created in 1959-1960, also some earlier works. All they were exhibited in the first time. Some of them were subsequently found in the collections of Soviet Art museums, as well as domestic and foreign galleries and collectors. Historical painting was presented of "Homecoming" by Zlata Bizova, "Victory Salute in Moscow" by Mikhail Bobyshov, "Melodies Caucasus" by Nikolai Brandt, "A Letter from Motherland" by Vladimir Chekalov, "Sons of the Russia" by Oleg Eremeev, "Rummage" by Mikhail Kaneev, "Lenin and Komsomols" by Marc Klionsky, "In 1941 year", "Missing in action" by Boris Lavrenko, "Private soldier of October Revolution" by Anatoli Levitin, "Listen to Lenin" by Piotr Litvinsky, "A new host" by Oleg Lomakin, "Seeing" by Galina Rumiantseva, "Spring of the Great Break" by Alexander Sokolov, "Appeal of Hiroshima" by Leonid Tkachenko, "Tale about Siege of Leningrad" by Yuri Tulin, "Stepan Razin", "The Builders of the Volkhov Hydroelectric Station" by Boris Ugarov, "In the mansion of Mathilde Kschessinska" by Anatoli Vasiliev, "Where is the truth?" by Nina Veselova, and others.Portrait was presented of "Natasha", "Girl on the stone" by Irina Baldina, "Governess" by Nikolai Baskakov, "Portrait of A. Belova" by Yuri Belov, "Portrait of Daughter" by Olga Bogaevskaya, "Portrait of sculptor Igor Krestovsky", "Portrait of actress Alexandra Zavialova" by Piotr Buchkin, "Ship Repairers" by Engels Kozlov, "Portrait of a factory worker N. Shilina" by Marina Kozlovskaya, "A Workwoman", "Katya Baltina, from a team of workers finishers" by Boris Korneev, "Portrait of A. Shennikov, academician" by Elena Kostenko, "Portrait of Scientist", "Portrait of V. Rudenko, worker of Kirov Plant" by Valeria Larina, "A Loader", "Portrait of N. Laskovskaya" by Anatoli Levitin, "Miner", "Portrait of actor Leonid Vivien", "Female portrait", "Young Mainer", "A Head of Miner", "Portrait of student" by Mikhail Trufanov, "Portrait of Dombrovsky, diver of the Baltic Fleet" by Anatoli Vasiliev, "Mikhail Dolgov, chairman of the kolkhoz" by Nina Veselova, and others.Genre painting was presented of "Asphalting" by Piotr Alberti, "At the St Peter and Paul Fortress" by Evgenia Antipova, "Spring in kolkhoz", "Return of the Herd" by Leonid Baykov, "From school to the work" by Nikolai Baskakov, "Launching of the tanker "Beijing"" by Vsevolod Bazhenov, "Guests" by Olga Bogaevskaya, "Fishermen's Island" by Lev Bogomolets, "Grain growers" by Piotr Buchkin, "On the roads of Karelia" by Nikolai Galakhov, "Farewell" by Elena Gorokhova, "Enthusiasts" by Oleg Eremeev, "Geologists" by Alexei Eriomin, "Girls" by Tatiana Kopnina, "Three" by Maya Kopitseva, "Development of the North" by Boris Korneev, "The Factory district", "Kindergarten" by Alexander Koroviakov, "To the new edge" by Anatoli Levitin, "Quiet time" by Galina Rumiantseva, "Timber rafting in Arkhangelsk", "Timber Storage" by Yuri Shablikin, "Forging shop" by Nadezhda Shteinmiller, "Road Builders" by Victor Teterin, "Here will be a road" by Mikhail Tkachev, "Seamstresses" by Valery Vatenin, "Spring of drivers" by Nina Veselova, and others.Landscape and Cityscape were presented of "Blue Night", "After the rain" by Taisia Afonina, "Neva industrial" by Vsevolod Bazhenov, "Kirov Stadium in Leningrad", "Moscow Kremlin in winter" by Mikhail Bobyshov, "A Morning", "Storm" by Lev Bogomolets, "Summer Morning" by Nikolai Brandt, "Summer" by Dmitry Buchkin, "Northern Spring", "A Village in Siberia" by Nikolai Galakhov, "On the Volkhov River", "Rostov The Great", "Bridge over Velikaya River" by Ivan Godlevsky, "In South-East Crimea", "Crimea. At the old brook" by Vladimir Gorb, "April Day" by Abram Grushko, "Lanskoy Highway" by Marina Kozlovskaya, "After the rain" by Vladimir Krantz, "At the Vasilievsky Island" by Yaroslav Krestovsky, "On the Neva River" by Ivan Lavsky, "Boats on the shore" by Yuri Shablikin, "Summer Garden in October" by Alexander Shmidt, "Spring in the Garden", "White Night in Khibiny" by Boris Shamanov, "Twilight", "Winter day", "Bridge over canal", "Yacht-club" by Nadezhda Shteinmiller, "Circus in Winter" by Alexander Stolbov, "In Sunny Day" by Victor Teterin, "Mach Sun", "Early Spring", "Aspen in winter", "Turns green", "Evening. The Lilac hour", "October. The First Snow" by Nikolai Timkov, "Park" by Yuri Tulin, "First Snow", "Herd", "A Village on the Angara River", "Baykal Lake" by Ivan Varichev, "A Midday", "After the rain", "Novgorod evening" by Rostislav Vovkushevsky, "Krukov Canal in Leningrad", "Moyka River" by German Yegoshin, "Morning", "Baykal motive", "On the shore of Angara River" by Vecheslav Zagonek, "Spring on Malaya Okhta", "On the Msta River", "Winter" by Sergei Zakharov, "Yachts at a mooring", "Yachts go to the Seaside" by Elena Zhukova, and others.Still life paintings were presented of "Still life" by Evgenia Antipova, "Karelian Still life" by Irina Baldina, "Still life" by Olga Bogaevskaya, "Oranges, Lemons, and Pineapple" by Vladimir Gorb, "Young Apple Tree", "Bananas", "Potato. Still life", "Autumn Bird Cherry", "Tea-table" by Maya Kopitseva, "Wildflowers", "Quince and Grapes", "Apple-tree branch", "Autumn Bouquet", "Peaches and melons" by Victor Teterin, "Red and White flowers" by Nina Veselova, "Gifts of the land" by Rostislav Vovkushevsky, "Still life" by Ruben Zakharian, "Still life" by Sergei Zakharov, and others.

18841_T

Magna Carta (An Embroidery)

Focus on Magna Carta (An Embroidery) and explain the abstract.

Magna Carta (An Embroidery) is a 2015 work by English installation artist Cornelia Parker. The artwork is an embroidered representation of the complete text and images of an online encyclopedia article for Magna Carta, as it appeared in English Wikipedia on 15 June 2014, the 799th anniversary of the document.

18841_NT

Magna Carta (An Embroidery)

Focus on this artwork and explain the abstract.

Magna Carta (An Embroidery) is a 2015 work by English installation artist Cornelia Parker. The artwork is an embroidered representation of the complete text and images of an online encyclopedia article for Magna Carta, as it appeared in English Wikipedia on 15 June 2014, the 799th anniversary of the document.

18842_T

Magna Carta (An Embroidery)

Explore the Embroiderers of this artwork, Magna Carta (An Embroidery).

Parker invited some 200 people to hand-stitch portions of the work including prison inmates, civil rights campaigners, MPs, lawyers, barons and artists. Much of the work was done by 36 prisoners from 13 different prisons in England, under the supervision of the social enterprise Fine Cell Work. Members of the Embroiderers' Guild contributed the images as did students from the Royal School of Needlework and the London embroidery company Hand & Lock. Six students from La Retraite Roman Catholic Girls' School, London were the youngest contributors to the work.Parker invited royalty to contribute to the work, but they declined. She said that right-wing people were more likely to decline; both Gordon Brown and Alex Salmond also declined to contribute. List of contributorsJulian Assange – "freedom" Mary Beard Shami Chakrabarti – "Charter of Liberties" Kenneth Clarke Jarvis Cocker – "common people" for the song of the same name Brian Eno – "in perpetuity" Anthea Godfrey (Embroiderers' Guild) – image of Pope Innocent III Antony Gormley Germaine Greer Igor Judge, Baron Judge and Lady Judith Judge – "Habeas Corpus" Christopher Le Brun – "folio" Doreen Lawrence, Baroness Lawrence of Clarendon – "justice", "denial" and "delay" Caroline Lucas Eliza Manningham-Buller – "freedom" James McNeill QC – "Abbots - witnesses" Caitlin Moran Cornelia Parker – "prerogative" Janet Payne (Embroiderers' Guild) – image of John of England signing Magna Carta Philip Pullman – "Oxford" Alan Rusbridger – "contemporary political relevance" Edward Snowden – "liberty" Clive Stafford Smith – stitched his contribution while visiting a client at the Guantanamo Bay detention camp Peter Tatchell – "democracy" (shared with Parker) Jimmy Wales – "user's manual" Sayeeda Warsi, Baroness Warsi – "freedom" Baroness Shirley Williams Students from La Retraite Roman Catholic Girls' School – "Salisbury Cathedral", "Durham Cathedral", "South Africa" and "Australia"

18842_NT

Magna Carta (An Embroidery)

Explore the Embroiderers of this artwork.

Parker invited some 200 people to hand-stitch portions of the work including prison inmates, civil rights campaigners, MPs, lawyers, barons and artists. Much of the work was done by 36 prisoners from 13 different prisons in England, under the supervision of the social enterprise Fine Cell Work. Members of the Embroiderers' Guild contributed the images as did students from the Royal School of Needlework and the London embroidery company Hand & Lock. Six students from La Retraite Roman Catholic Girls' School, London were the youngest contributors to the work.Parker invited royalty to contribute to the work, but they declined. She said that right-wing people were more likely to decline; both Gordon Brown and Alex Salmond also declined to contribute. List of contributorsJulian Assange – "freedom" Mary Beard Shami Chakrabarti – "Charter of Liberties" Kenneth Clarke Jarvis Cocker – "common people" for the song of the same name Brian Eno – "in perpetuity" Anthea Godfrey (Embroiderers' Guild) – image of Pope Innocent III Antony Gormley Germaine Greer Igor Judge, Baron Judge and Lady Judith Judge – "Habeas Corpus" Christopher Le Brun – "folio" Doreen Lawrence, Baroness Lawrence of Clarendon – "justice", "denial" and "delay" Caroline Lucas Eliza Manningham-Buller – "freedom" James McNeill QC – "Abbots - witnesses" Caitlin Moran Cornelia Parker – "prerogative" Janet Payne (Embroiderers' Guild) – image of John of England signing Magna Carta Philip Pullman – "Oxford" Alan Rusbridger – "contemporary political relevance" Edward Snowden – "liberty" Clive Stafford Smith – stitched his contribution while visiting a client at the Guantanamo Bay detention camp Peter Tatchell – "democracy" (shared with Parker) Jimmy Wales – "user's manual" Sayeeda Warsi, Baroness Warsi – "freedom" Baroness Shirley Williams Students from La Retraite Roman Catholic Girls' School – "Salisbury Cathedral", "Durham Cathedral", "South Africa" and "Australia"

18843_T

Magna Carta (An Embroidery)

Focus on Magna Carta (An Embroidery) and discuss the Display.

Magna Carta (An Embroidery) formed part of an exhibition celebrating the 800th anniversary of Magna Carta. It was displayed in the Entrance Hall of the British Library from 15 May to 24 July 2015, at the Whitworth Art Gallery, Manchester, August – November 2016, and in the Blackwell Hall of the Bodleian Library, Oxford, 11 November 2015 – 3 January 2016, touring other United Kingdom locations in the rest of 2016 and 2017. In 2022 it was exhibited at Tate Britain as part of an exhibition of Cornelia Parker's work. From 15 May to 17 September 2023, it is displayed as part of the exhibition To Be Free: Art and Liberty at Salisbury Cathedral.

18843_NT

Magna Carta (An Embroidery)

Focus on this artwork and discuss the Display.

Magna Carta (An Embroidery) formed part of an exhibition celebrating the 800th anniversary of Magna Carta. It was displayed in the Entrance Hall of the British Library from 15 May to 24 July 2015, at the Whitworth Art Gallery, Manchester, August – November 2016, and in the Blackwell Hall of the Bodleian Library, Oxford, 11 November 2015 – 3 January 2016, touring other United Kingdom locations in the rest of 2016 and 2017. In 2022 it was exhibited at Tate Britain as part of an exhibition of Cornelia Parker's work. From 15 May to 17 September 2023, it is displayed as part of the exhibition To Be Free: Art and Liberty at Salisbury Cathedral.

18844_T

Banquet of the Amsterdam Civic Guard in Celebration of the Peace of Münster

How does Banquet of the Amsterdam Civic Guard in Celebration of the Peace of Münster elucidate its abstract?

Banquet of the Amsterdam Civic Guard in Celebration of the Peace of Münster (1648) is a group portrait oil painting by the Dutch painter Bartholomeus van der Helst. It is an example of Dutch Golden Age painting and is considered one of the highlights of the Amsterdam Museum, though it is generally on show in the Rijksmuseum. The painting is one of the largest civic guard group portraits for which most of the sitters are known and most of the portrayed objects have survived. The painting is about retiring from active duty, because the Peace of Münster had finally been signed after years of negotiations. The main figures are seen with the attributes of the civic guard guilds. On the right Cornelis Jan Witsen heads up the table, holding the silver drinking horn of the Voetboogdoelen, Amsterdam. The art historian J.J. de Gelder mentioned the painting is dated 1648 but was probably finished at least a year later, similar to the way other group portraits by Van der Helst bear the date of the commission and not of completion. The drum explains the occasion by way of the poem attached to it by Jan Vos. The names mentioned in the poem are the handshakers, but in 1680 a name board was added that included 24 names: The art historian Judith van Gent remarked that the first name on this list was Hendrik Caliber who was buried a month after the festivities took place, and agrees with De Gelder that the painting took quite a while to create and assumes the commission probably was granted well before the summer of 1648. In her catalog entry for this painting she lists short biographies of the traceable names.

18844_NT

Banquet of the Amsterdam Civic Guard in Celebration of the Peace of Münster

How does this artwork elucidate its abstract?

Banquet of the Amsterdam Civic Guard in Celebration of the Peace of Münster (1648) is a group portrait oil painting by the Dutch painter Bartholomeus van der Helst. It is an example of Dutch Golden Age painting and is considered one of the highlights of the Amsterdam Museum, though it is generally on show in the Rijksmuseum. The painting is one of the largest civic guard group portraits for which most of the sitters are known and most of the portrayed objects have survived. The painting is about retiring from active duty, because the Peace of Münster had finally been signed after years of negotiations. The main figures are seen with the attributes of the civic guard guilds. On the right Cornelis Jan Witsen heads up the table, holding the silver drinking horn of the Voetboogdoelen, Amsterdam. The art historian J.J. de Gelder mentioned the painting is dated 1648 but was probably finished at least a year later, similar to the way other group portraits by Van der Helst bear the date of the commission and not of completion. The drum explains the occasion by way of the poem attached to it by Jan Vos. The names mentioned in the poem are the handshakers, but in 1680 a name board was added that included 24 names: The art historian Judith van Gent remarked that the first name on this list was Hendrik Caliber who was buried a month after the festivities took place, and agrees with De Gelder that the painting took quite a while to create and assumes the commission probably was granted well before the summer of 1648. In her catalog entry for this painting she lists short biographies of the traceable names.

18845_T

Near Here

Focus on Near Here and analyze the abstract.

Near Here is a public art work by American artist Paul Druecke, originally located on the facade of the Peck School of the Arts Kenilworth Building, part of University of Wisconsin–Milwaukee on the east side of Milwaukee, Wisconsin. The artwork is a bronze plaque with a poetic text created by Donna Stonecipher. It was located at 2155 North Prospect Avenue. The temporary installation has been relocated to The Green Gallery at 1500 N Farwell Ave, Milwaukee.

18845_NT

Near Here

Focus on this artwork and analyze the abstract.

Near Here is a public art work by American artist Paul Druecke, originally located on the facade of the Peck School of the Arts Kenilworth Building, part of University of Wisconsin–Milwaukee on the east side of Milwaukee, Wisconsin. The artwork is a bronze plaque with a poetic text created by Donna Stonecipher. It was located at 2155 North Prospect Avenue. The temporary installation has been relocated to The Green Gallery at 1500 N Farwell Ave, Milwaukee.

18846_T

The Chess Players (sculpture)

In The Chess Players (sculpture), how is the abstract discussed?

The Chess Players is an outdoor 1983 sculpture by Lloyd Lillie, installed in John Marshall Park in Washington, D.C., United States.

18846_NT

The Chess Players (sculpture)

In this artwork, how is the abstract discussed?

The Chess Players is an outdoor 1983 sculpture by Lloyd Lillie, installed in John Marshall Park in Washington, D.C., United States.

18847_T

Portrait of a Lady in White

Focus on Portrait of a Lady in White and explore the abstract.

Portrait of a Lady in White is a painting by Titian, made about 1561, of an unknown gentlewoman dressed in white; it is now in the Gemäldegalerie Alte Meister in Dresden.

18847_NT

Portrait of a Lady in White

Focus on this artwork and explore the abstract.

Portrait of a Lady in White is a painting by Titian, made about 1561, of an unknown gentlewoman dressed in white; it is now in the Gemäldegalerie Alte Meister in Dresden.

18848_T

Portrait of a Lady in White

Focus on Portrait of a Lady in White and explain the Identity of the sitter.

Speculation about the sitter has ranged from a young bride to a prostitute or some family member of the artist. Detailed analysis of her jewelry, dress and hairstyle may give more clues, as does the fan she is carrying. It has long been assumed that Titian had depicted his daughter Lavinia in her bridal gown. However, she married six years before this painting was created, and his fourth child and other daughter, Emilia, didn't marry for another seven years. Titian probably created an ideal image of feminine beauty and used a model that he also used in other paintings. The painting was copied by Peter Paul Rubens, and a similar painting is also in the collection at Dresden.

18848_NT

Portrait of a Lady in White

Focus on this artwork and explain the Identity of the sitter.

Speculation about the sitter has ranged from a young bride to a prostitute or some family member of the artist. Detailed analysis of her jewelry, dress and hairstyle may give more clues, as does the fan she is carrying. It has long been assumed that Titian had depicted his daughter Lavinia in her bridal gown. However, she married six years before this painting was created, and his fourth child and other daughter, Emilia, didn't marry for another seven years. Titian probably created an ideal image of feminine beauty and used a model that he also used in other paintings. The painting was copied by Peter Paul Rubens, and a similar painting is also in the collection at Dresden.

18849_T

Portrait of a Lady in White

Explore the Exhibitions of this artwork, Portrait of a Lady in White.

The painting was lent to the Columbus Museum of Art in 2018, and to the Norton Simon Museum in 2019.

18849_NT

Portrait of a Lady in White

Explore the Exhibitions of this artwork.

The painting was lent to the Columbus Museum of Art in 2018, and to the Norton Simon Museum in 2019.

18850_T

Grand Master Philippe Villiers de l'Isle Adam Taking Possession of Mdina

Focus on Grand Master Philippe Villiers de l'Isle Adam Taking Possession of Mdina and analyze the abstract.

Grand Master Philippe Villiers de l'Isle Adam Taking Possession of Mdina is a painting by the French artist Antoine de Favray from c. 1750. It depicts Philippe Villiers de L'Isle-Adam, a Grand Master of the Knights Hospitaller, entering the city of Mdina and taking possession of it in a ceremony known as the possesso. The real-life event which is the subject of the painting took place on 13 November 1530, shortly after the establishment of Hospitaller rule in Malta. The painting is an iconic representation of Hospitaller Malta, and it is located within the Grandmaster's Palace in Valletta, Malta.

18850_NT

Grand Master Philippe Villiers de l'Isle Adam Taking Possession of Mdina

Focus on this artwork and analyze the abstract.

Grand Master Philippe Villiers de l'Isle Adam Taking Possession of Mdina is a painting by the French artist Antoine de Favray from c. 1750. It depicts Philippe Villiers de L'Isle-Adam, a Grand Master of the Knights Hospitaller, entering the city of Mdina and taking possession of it in a ceremony known as the possesso. The real-life event which is the subject of the painting took place on 13 November 1530, shortly after the establishment of Hospitaller rule in Malta. The painting is an iconic representation of Hospitaller Malta, and it is located within the Grandmaster's Palace in Valletta, Malta.