ID
stringlengths 6
8
| title
stringlengths 3
136
| question
stringlengths 33
235
| answer
stringlengths 51
15.3k
| image_url
stringlengths 57
817
| entities
list |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
13551_T
|
Statue of Massasoit (Salt Lake City)
|
In Statue of Massasoit (Salt Lake City), how is the abstract discussed?
|
A statue of Massasoit by Cyrus E. Dallin is installed outside the Utah State Capitol in Salt Lake City, Utah, United States.
|
[
"Cyrus E. Dallin",
"Salt Lake City",
"Utah",
"Massasoit",
"Utah State Capitol"
] |
|
13551_NT
|
Statue of Massasoit (Salt Lake City)
|
In this artwork, how is the abstract discussed?
|
A statue of Massasoit by Cyrus E. Dallin is installed outside the Utah State Capitol in Salt Lake City, Utah, United States.
|
[
"Cyrus E. Dallin",
"Salt Lake City",
"Utah",
"Massasoit",
"Utah State Capitol"
] |
|
13552_T
|
The Third of May 1808
|
Focus on The Third of May 1808 and explore the abstract.
|
The Third of May 1808 (also known as El tres de mayo de 1808 en Madrid or Los fusilamientos de la montaña del Príncipe Pío, or Los fusilamientos del tres de mayo) is a painting completed in 1814 by the Spanish painter Francisco Goya, now in the Museo del Prado, Madrid. In the work, Goya sought to commemorate Spanish resistance to Napoleon's armies during the occupation of 1808 in the Peninsular War. Along with its companion piece of the same size, The Second of May 1808 (or The Charge of the Mamelukes), it was commissioned by the provisional government of Spain at Goya's own suggestion shortly after the ousting of the French occupation and the restoration of King Ferdinand VII.
The painting's content, presentation, and emotional force secure its status as a ground-breaking, archetypal image of the horrors of war. Although it draws on many sources from both high and popular art, The Third of May 1808 marks a clear break from convention. Diverging from the traditions of Christian art and traditional depictions of war, it has no distinct precedent, and is acknowledged as one of the first paintings of the modern era. According to the art historian Kenneth Clark, The Third of May 1808 is "the first great picture which can be called revolutionary in every sense of the word, in style, in subject, and in intention".The Third of May 1808 inspired Gerald Holtom's peace sign and a number of later major paintings, including a series by Édouard Manet, and Pablo Picasso's Massacre in Korea and Guernica.
|
[
"Napoleon",
"French occupation",
"Museo del Prado",
"Ferdinand VII",
"The Second of May 1808",
"Mamelukes",
"Peninsular War",
"Pablo Picasso",
"Madrid",
"Francisco Goya",
"Gerald Holtom",
"Guernica",
"es",
"Édouard Manet",
"Kenneth Clark",
"Príncipe Pío",
"Massacre in Korea"
] |
|
13552_NT
|
The Third of May 1808
|
Focus on this artwork and explore the abstract.
|
The Third of May 1808 (also known as El tres de mayo de 1808 en Madrid or Los fusilamientos de la montaña del Príncipe Pío, or Los fusilamientos del tres de mayo) is a painting completed in 1814 by the Spanish painter Francisco Goya, now in the Museo del Prado, Madrid. In the work, Goya sought to commemorate Spanish resistance to Napoleon's armies during the occupation of 1808 in the Peninsular War. Along with its companion piece of the same size, The Second of May 1808 (or The Charge of the Mamelukes), it was commissioned by the provisional government of Spain at Goya's own suggestion shortly after the ousting of the French occupation and the restoration of King Ferdinand VII.
The painting's content, presentation, and emotional force secure its status as a ground-breaking, archetypal image of the horrors of war. Although it draws on many sources from both high and popular art, The Third of May 1808 marks a clear break from convention. Diverging from the traditions of Christian art and traditional depictions of war, it has no distinct precedent, and is acknowledged as one of the first paintings of the modern era. According to the art historian Kenneth Clark, The Third of May 1808 is "the first great picture which can be called revolutionary in every sense of the word, in style, in subject, and in intention".The Third of May 1808 inspired Gerald Holtom's peace sign and a number of later major paintings, including a series by Édouard Manet, and Pablo Picasso's Massacre in Korea and Guernica.
|
[
"Napoleon",
"French occupation",
"Museo del Prado",
"Ferdinand VII",
"The Second of May 1808",
"Mamelukes",
"Peninsular War",
"Pablo Picasso",
"Madrid",
"Francisco Goya",
"Gerald Holtom",
"Guernica",
"es",
"Édouard Manet",
"Kenneth Clark",
"Príncipe Pío",
"Massacre in Korea"
] |
|
13553_T
|
The Third of May 1808
|
Explore the Description about the The painting of this artwork, The Third of May 1808.
|
The Third of May 1808 is set in the early hours of the morning following the uprising and centers on two masses of men: one a rigidly poised firing squad, the other a disorganized group of captives held at gunpoint. Executioners and victims face each other abruptly across a narrow space; according to Kenneth Clark, "by a stroke of genius [Goya] has contrasted the fierce repetition of the soldiers' attitudes and the steely line of their rifles, with the crumbling irregularity of their target." A square lantern situated on the ground between the two groups throws a dramatic light on the scene. The brightest illumination falls on the huddled victims to the left, whose numbers include a monk or friar in prayer. To the immediate right and at the center of the canvas, other condemned figures stand next in line to be shot. The central figure is the brilliantly lit man kneeling amid the bloodied corpses of those already executed, his arms flung wide in either appeal or defiance. His yellow and white clothing repeats the colors of the lantern. His plain white shirt and sun-burnt face show he is a simple laborer.On the right side stands the firing squad, engulfed in shadow and painted as a monolithic unit. Seen nearly from behind, their bayonets and their shako headgear form a relentless and immutable column. Most of the faces of the figures cannot be seen, but the face of the man to the right of the main victim, peeping fearfully towards the soldiers, acts as a repoussoir at the back of the central group. Without distracting from the intensity of the foreground drama, a townscape with a steeple looms in the nocturnal distance, probably including the barracks used by the French. In the background between the hillside and the shakos is a crowd with torches: perhaps onlookers, perhaps more soldiers or victims.
The Second and Third of May 1808 are thought to have been intended as parts of a larger series. Written commentary and circumstantial evidence suggest that Goya painted four large canvases memorializing the rebellion of May 1808. In his memoirs of the Royal Academy in 1867, José Caveda wrote of four paintings by Goya of the second of May, and Cristóbal Ferriz—an artist and a collector of Goya—mentioned two other paintings on the theme: a revolt at the royal palace and a defense of artillery barracks. Contemporary prints stand as precedents for such a series. The disappearance of two paintings may indicate official displeasure with the depiction of popular insurrection.
|
[
"bayonets",
"firing squad",
"es",
"repoussoir",
"Royal Academy",
"left",
"Kenneth Clark",
"shako"
] |
|
13553_NT
|
The Third of May 1808
|
Explore the Description about the The painting of this artwork.
|
The Third of May 1808 is set in the early hours of the morning following the uprising and centers on two masses of men: one a rigidly poised firing squad, the other a disorganized group of captives held at gunpoint. Executioners and victims face each other abruptly across a narrow space; according to Kenneth Clark, "by a stroke of genius [Goya] has contrasted the fierce repetition of the soldiers' attitudes and the steely line of their rifles, with the crumbling irregularity of their target." A square lantern situated on the ground between the two groups throws a dramatic light on the scene. The brightest illumination falls on the huddled victims to the left, whose numbers include a monk or friar in prayer. To the immediate right and at the center of the canvas, other condemned figures stand next in line to be shot. The central figure is the brilliantly lit man kneeling amid the bloodied corpses of those already executed, his arms flung wide in either appeal or defiance. His yellow and white clothing repeats the colors of the lantern. His plain white shirt and sun-burnt face show he is a simple laborer.On the right side stands the firing squad, engulfed in shadow and painted as a monolithic unit. Seen nearly from behind, their bayonets and their shako headgear form a relentless and immutable column. Most of the faces of the figures cannot be seen, but the face of the man to the right of the main victim, peeping fearfully towards the soldiers, acts as a repoussoir at the back of the central group. Without distracting from the intensity of the foreground drama, a townscape with a steeple looms in the nocturnal distance, probably including the barracks used by the French. In the background between the hillside and the shakos is a crowd with torches: perhaps onlookers, perhaps more soldiers or victims.
The Second and Third of May 1808 are thought to have been intended as parts of a larger series. Written commentary and circumstantial evidence suggest that Goya painted four large canvases memorializing the rebellion of May 1808. In his memoirs of the Royal Academy in 1867, José Caveda wrote of four paintings by Goya of the second of May, and Cristóbal Ferriz—an artist and a collector of Goya—mentioned two other paintings on the theme: a revolt at the royal palace and a defense of artillery barracks. Contemporary prints stand as precedents for such a series. The disappearance of two paintings may indicate official displeasure with the depiction of popular insurrection.
|
[
"bayonets",
"firing squad",
"es",
"repoussoir",
"Royal Academy",
"left",
"Kenneth Clark",
"shako"
] |
|
13554_T
|
The Third of May 1808
|
In the context of The Third of May 1808, discuss the The Disasters of War of the The painting.
|
Goya's series of aquatint etchings The Disasters of War (Los desastres de la guerra) was not completed until 1820, although most of the prints were made in the period 1810–1814. The album of proofs given by Goya to a friend, however, now in the British Museum, provides many indications of the order in which both the preliminary drawings and the prints themselves were composed. The groups identified as the earliest clearly seem to predate the commission for the two paintings, and include two prints with obviously related compositions (illustrated), as well as I saw this, which is presumably a scene witnessed during Goya's trip to Saragossa. No se puede mirar (One cannot look at this) is clearly related compositionally and thematically; the female central figure has her arms outstretched, but pointing down, while another figure has his hands clasped in prayer, and several others shield or hide their faces. This time the soldiers are not visible even from behind; only the bayonets of their guns are seen.Y no hay remedio (And it cannot be helped) is another of the early prints, from a slightly later group apparently produced at the height of the war when materials were unobtainable, so that Goya had to destroy the plate of an earlier landscape print to make this and another piece in the Disasters series. It shows a shako-wearing firing squad in the background, this time seen receding in a frontal rather than a rear view.
|
[
"etching",
"British Museum",
"bayonets",
"firing squad",
"es",
"The Disasters of War",
"aquatint",
"shako"
] |
|
13554_NT
|
The Third of May 1808
|
In the context of this artwork, discuss the The Disasters of War of the The painting.
|
Goya's series of aquatint etchings The Disasters of War (Los desastres de la guerra) was not completed until 1820, although most of the prints were made in the period 1810–1814. The album of proofs given by Goya to a friend, however, now in the British Museum, provides many indications of the order in which both the preliminary drawings and the prints themselves were composed. The groups identified as the earliest clearly seem to predate the commission for the two paintings, and include two prints with obviously related compositions (illustrated), as well as I saw this, which is presumably a scene witnessed during Goya's trip to Saragossa. No se puede mirar (One cannot look at this) is clearly related compositionally and thematically; the female central figure has her arms outstretched, but pointing down, while another figure has his hands clasped in prayer, and several others shield or hide their faces. This time the soldiers are not visible even from behind; only the bayonets of their guns are seen.Y no hay remedio (And it cannot be helped) is another of the early prints, from a slightly later group apparently produced at the height of the war when materials were unobtainable, so that Goya had to destroy the plate of an earlier landscape print to make this and another piece in the Disasters series. It shows a shako-wearing firing squad in the background, this time seen receding in a frontal rather than a rear view.
|
[
"etching",
"British Museum",
"bayonets",
"firing squad",
"es",
"The Disasters of War",
"aquatint",
"shako"
] |
|
13555_T
|
The Third of May 1808
|
In The Third of May 1808, how is the Iconography and invention of the The painting elucidated?
|
At first the painting met with mixed reactions from art critics and historians. Artists had previously tended to depict war in the high style of history painting, and Goya's unheroic description was unusual for the time. According to some early critical opinion the painting was flawed technically: the perspective is flat, or the victims and executioners are standing too close together to be realistic. Although these observations may be strictly correct, the writer Richard Schickel argues that Goya was not striving for academic propriety but rather to strengthen the overall impact of the piece.The Third of May references a number of earlier works of art, but its power comes from its bluntness rather than its adherence to traditional compositional formulas. Pictorial artifice gives way to the epic portrayal of unvarnished brutality. Even the contemporary Romantic painters—who were also intrigued with subjects of injustice, war, and death—composed their paintings with greater attention to the conventions of beauty, as is evident in Théodore Géricault's Raft of the Medusa (1818–1819) and Eugène Delacroix's 1830 painting Liberty Leading the People.
The painting is structurally and thematically tied to traditions of martyrdom in Christian art, as exemplified in the dramatic use of chiaroscuro, and the appeal to life juxtaposed with the inevitability of imminent execution. However, Goya's painting departs from this tradition. Works that depicted violence, such as those by Jusepe de Ribera, feature an artful technique and harmonious composition which anticipate the "crown of martyrdom" for the victim. The man with raised arms at the focal point of the composition has often been compared to a crucified Christ, and a similar pose is sometimes seen in depictions of Christ's nocturnal Agony in the Garden of Gethsemane. Goya's figure displays stigmata-like marks on his right hand, while the lantern at the center of the canvas references a traditional attribute of the Roman soldiers who arrested Christ in the garden. Not only is he posed as if in crucifixion, he wears yellow and white: the heraldic colors of the papacy.
The lantern as a source of illumination in art was widely used by Baroque artists, and perfected by Caravaggio. Traditionally a dramatic light source and the resultant chiaroscuro were used as metaphors for the presence of God. Illumination by torch or candlelight took on religious connotations; but in The Third of May the lantern manifests no such miracle. Rather, it affords light only so that the firing squad may complete its grim work, and provides a stark illumination so that the viewer may bear witness to wanton violence. The traditional role of light in art as a conduit for the spiritual has been subverted.The victim is as anonymous as his killers. His entreaty is addressed not to God in the manner of traditional painting, but to an unheeding and impersonal firing squad. He is not granted the heroism of individuality, but is merely part of a continuum of victims. Beneath him lies a bloody and disfigured corpse; behind and around him are others who will soon share the same fate. Here, for the first time, according to biographer Fred Licht, nobility in individual martyrdom is replaced by futility and irrelevance, the victimization of mass murder, and anonymity as a hallmark of the modern condition.The way the painting shows the progress of time is also without precedent in Western art. The death of a blameless victim had typically been presented as a conclusive episode, imbued with the virtue of heroism. The Third of May offers no such cathartic message. Instead, there is a continuous procession of the condemned in a mechanical formalization of murder. The inevitable outcome is seen in the corpse of a man, splayed on the ground in the lower left portion of the work. There is no room left for the sublime; his head and body have been disfigured to a degree that renders resurrection impossible. The victim is portrayed bereft of all aesthetic or spiritual grace. For the rest of the picture the viewer's eye level is mostly along the central horizontal axis; only here is the perspectival point of view changed, so that the viewer looks down on the mutilated body.Finally, there is no attempt by the artist to soften the subject's brutality through technical skill. Method and subject are indivisible. Goya's procedure is determined less by the mandates of traditional virtuosity than by his intrinsically morbid theme. The brushwork could not be described as pleasing, and the colors are restricted to earth tones and black, punctuated by bright flashes of white and the red blood of the victims. The quality of the pigment itself foreshadows Goya's later works: a granular solution producing a matte, sandy finish. Few would admire the work for painterly flourishes, such is its horrific force and its lack of theatricality.
|
[
"stigmata",
"crucified",
"Richard Schickel",
"Romantic painters",
"conduit",
"martyrdom",
"crucifixion",
"Liberty Leading the People",
"firing squad",
"Théodore Géricault",
"Jusepe de Ribera",
"history painting",
"Raft of the Medusa",
"Baroque",
"Caravaggio",
"chiaroscuro",
"es",
"papacy",
"Agony in the Garden",
"Delacroix",
"attribute",
"left",
"stigma",
"Eugène Delacroix"
] |
|
13555_NT
|
The Third of May 1808
|
In this artwork, how is the Iconography and invention of the The painting elucidated?
|
At first the painting met with mixed reactions from art critics and historians. Artists had previously tended to depict war in the high style of history painting, and Goya's unheroic description was unusual for the time. According to some early critical opinion the painting was flawed technically: the perspective is flat, or the victims and executioners are standing too close together to be realistic. Although these observations may be strictly correct, the writer Richard Schickel argues that Goya was not striving for academic propriety but rather to strengthen the overall impact of the piece.The Third of May references a number of earlier works of art, but its power comes from its bluntness rather than its adherence to traditional compositional formulas. Pictorial artifice gives way to the epic portrayal of unvarnished brutality. Even the contemporary Romantic painters—who were also intrigued with subjects of injustice, war, and death—composed their paintings with greater attention to the conventions of beauty, as is evident in Théodore Géricault's Raft of the Medusa (1818–1819) and Eugène Delacroix's 1830 painting Liberty Leading the People.
The painting is structurally and thematically tied to traditions of martyrdom in Christian art, as exemplified in the dramatic use of chiaroscuro, and the appeal to life juxtaposed with the inevitability of imminent execution. However, Goya's painting departs from this tradition. Works that depicted violence, such as those by Jusepe de Ribera, feature an artful technique and harmonious composition which anticipate the "crown of martyrdom" for the victim. The man with raised arms at the focal point of the composition has often been compared to a crucified Christ, and a similar pose is sometimes seen in depictions of Christ's nocturnal Agony in the Garden of Gethsemane. Goya's figure displays stigmata-like marks on his right hand, while the lantern at the center of the canvas references a traditional attribute of the Roman soldiers who arrested Christ in the garden. Not only is he posed as if in crucifixion, he wears yellow and white: the heraldic colors of the papacy.
The lantern as a source of illumination in art was widely used by Baroque artists, and perfected by Caravaggio. Traditionally a dramatic light source and the resultant chiaroscuro were used as metaphors for the presence of God. Illumination by torch or candlelight took on religious connotations; but in The Third of May the lantern manifests no such miracle. Rather, it affords light only so that the firing squad may complete its grim work, and provides a stark illumination so that the viewer may bear witness to wanton violence. The traditional role of light in art as a conduit for the spiritual has been subverted.The victim is as anonymous as his killers. His entreaty is addressed not to God in the manner of traditional painting, but to an unheeding and impersonal firing squad. He is not granted the heroism of individuality, but is merely part of a continuum of victims. Beneath him lies a bloody and disfigured corpse; behind and around him are others who will soon share the same fate. Here, for the first time, according to biographer Fred Licht, nobility in individual martyrdom is replaced by futility and irrelevance, the victimization of mass murder, and anonymity as a hallmark of the modern condition.The way the painting shows the progress of time is also without precedent in Western art. The death of a blameless victim had typically been presented as a conclusive episode, imbued with the virtue of heroism. The Third of May offers no such cathartic message. Instead, there is a continuous procession of the condemned in a mechanical formalization of murder. The inevitable outcome is seen in the corpse of a man, splayed on the ground in the lower left portion of the work. There is no room left for the sublime; his head and body have been disfigured to a degree that renders resurrection impossible. The victim is portrayed bereft of all aesthetic or spiritual grace. For the rest of the picture the viewer's eye level is mostly along the central horizontal axis; only here is the perspectival point of view changed, so that the viewer looks down on the mutilated body.Finally, there is no attempt by the artist to soften the subject's brutality through technical skill. Method and subject are indivisible. Goya's procedure is determined less by the mandates of traditional virtuosity than by his intrinsically morbid theme. The brushwork could not be described as pleasing, and the colors are restricted to earth tones and black, punctuated by bright flashes of white and the red blood of the victims. The quality of the pigment itself foreshadows Goya's later works: a granular solution producing a matte, sandy finish. Few would admire the work for painterly flourishes, such is its horrific force and its lack of theatricality.
|
[
"stigmata",
"crucified",
"Richard Schickel",
"Romantic painters",
"conduit",
"martyrdom",
"crucifixion",
"Liberty Leading the People",
"firing squad",
"Théodore Géricault",
"Jusepe de Ribera",
"history painting",
"Raft of the Medusa",
"Baroque",
"Caravaggio",
"chiaroscuro",
"es",
"papacy",
"Agony in the Garden",
"Delacroix",
"attribute",
"left",
"stigma",
"Eugène Delacroix"
] |
|
13556_T
|
The Third of May 1808
|
Focus on The Third of May 1808 and analyze the Provenance.
|
Despite the work's commemorative value, no details about its first exhibition are known, and it is not mentioned in any surviving contemporaneous accounts. This lack of commentary may be due to Fernando VII's preference for neoclassical art, and to the fact that popular revolts of any kind were not regarded as suitable subject matter by the restored Bourbons. A monument to the fallen in the uprising, also commissioned in 1814 by the provisional government, "was stopped by Ferdinand VII, in whose eyes the senators and heroes of the war of independence found small favour, on account of their reforming tendencies".According to some accounts, the painting lay in storage for thirty to forty years before being shown to the public. Its mention in an 1834 Prado inventory shows that the painting remained in the possession of the government or monarchy; much of the royal collection had been transferred to the museum upon its opening in 1819. Théophile Gautier mentioned seeing "a massacre" by Goya during a visit to the museum in 1845, and a visitor in 1858 noted it as well, though both accounts refer to the work as depicting the events of the second of May, perhaps because Dos de Mayo continues to be the Spanish name for the whole episode.In 1867, Goya's biographer Charles Emile Yriarte considered the painting important enough to warrant its own special exhibition, but it was not until 1872 that The Third of May was listed in the Prado's published catalog, under the title Scene of the Third of May 1808. Both the Third and Second of May suffered damage in a road accident while being transported by truck to Valencia for safety during the Spanish Civil War, apparently the only time they have left Madrid. Significant paint losses to the left side of the Second of May have been deliberately left unrepaired until the restoration work to both paintings done in 2008 in time for an exhibition marking the bicentennial of the uprising.In 2009, the Prado selected The Third of May 1808 as one of the museum's fourteen most important paintings, to be displayed in Google Earth at a resolution of 14,000 megapixels.
|
[
"Dos de Mayo",
"Valencia",
"Ferdinand VII",
"restoration work",
"Madrid",
"Théophile Gautier",
"es",
"Bourbons",
"left",
"Spanish Civil War",
"Google Earth"
] |
|
13556_NT
|
The Third of May 1808
|
Focus on this artwork and analyze the Provenance.
|
Despite the work's commemorative value, no details about its first exhibition are known, and it is not mentioned in any surviving contemporaneous accounts. This lack of commentary may be due to Fernando VII's preference for neoclassical art, and to the fact that popular revolts of any kind were not regarded as suitable subject matter by the restored Bourbons. A monument to the fallen in the uprising, also commissioned in 1814 by the provisional government, "was stopped by Ferdinand VII, in whose eyes the senators and heroes of the war of independence found small favour, on account of their reforming tendencies".According to some accounts, the painting lay in storage for thirty to forty years before being shown to the public. Its mention in an 1834 Prado inventory shows that the painting remained in the possession of the government or monarchy; much of the royal collection had been transferred to the museum upon its opening in 1819. Théophile Gautier mentioned seeing "a massacre" by Goya during a visit to the museum in 1845, and a visitor in 1858 noted it as well, though both accounts refer to the work as depicting the events of the second of May, perhaps because Dos de Mayo continues to be the Spanish name for the whole episode.In 1867, Goya's biographer Charles Emile Yriarte considered the painting important enough to warrant its own special exhibition, but it was not until 1872 that The Third of May was listed in the Prado's published catalog, under the title Scene of the Third of May 1808. Both the Third and Second of May suffered damage in a road accident while being transported by truck to Valencia for safety during the Spanish Civil War, apparently the only time they have left Madrid. Significant paint losses to the left side of the Second of May have been deliberately left unrepaired until the restoration work to both paintings done in 2008 in time for an exhibition marking the bicentennial of the uprising.In 2009, the Prado selected The Third of May 1808 as one of the museum's fourteen most important paintings, to be displayed in Google Earth at a resolution of 14,000 megapixels.
|
[
"Dos de Mayo",
"Valencia",
"Ferdinand VII",
"restoration work",
"Madrid",
"Théophile Gautier",
"es",
"Bourbons",
"left",
"Spanish Civil War",
"Google Earth"
] |
|
13557_T
|
The Third of May 1808
|
In The Third of May 1808, how is the Legacy discussed?
|
The first paraphrasing of The Third of May was Édouard Manet's Execution of Emperor Maximilian, painted in several versions between 1867 and 1869. In recording a current event to which neither he nor the emerging art of photography was witness, Manet was inspired by Goya's precedent and may have seen the work at the Prado in 1865 before beginning his own paintings, which were too sensitive to be exhibited in France in Manet's lifetime. He undoubtedly saw an 1867 print published by an acquaintance. Art critic Arthur Danto compares Goya's work and Manet's:The Third of May also depicts an execution, an early event in the so-called Peninsular War between France and Spain. Napoleon Bonaparte invaded Spain in 1808, capturing its royal family and replacing them with his brother, Joseph. The French were as unpopular in Spain as they later were in Mexico, and they encountered a fierce insurrection, which ultimately triumphed. The Third of May execution was an indiscriminate killing of civilians by French soldiers in reprisal for a guerrilla attack the previous day. Goya's painting of the massacre, which shows terrified civilians facing a firing squad, was intended to arouse anger and hatred on the part of Spanish viewers. Goya's is a highly romantic picture of a deeply emotional episode.
The Third of May is cited as an influence on Pablo Picasso's 1937 Guernica, which shows the aftermath of the Nazi German bombing of Guernica during the Spanish Civil War. An exhibition in 2006 at the Prado and the Reina Sofía showed The Third of May, Guernica, and the Execution of the Emperor Maximilian in the same room. Also in the room was Picasso's Massacre in Korea, painted in 1951 during the Korean War—an even more direct reference to the composition of The Third of May. The perpetrators in this painting were intended to be the United States Army or their United Nations allies.
Aldous Huxley wrote in 1957 that Goya lacked Rubens' ability to fill the canvas with an ordered composition; but he considered The Third of May a success because Goya "is speaking in his native language, and he is therefore able to express what he wants to say with maximum force and clarity". Kenneth Clark remarked on the painting's radical departure from history painting and its intensity: "With Goya we do not think of the studio or even of the artist at work. We think only of the event. Does this imply that The Third of May is a kind of superior journalism, the record of an incident in which depth of focus is sacrificed to an immediate effect? I am ashamed to say that I once thought so; but the longer I look at this ...the more clearly I recognise that I was mistaken."
|
[
"Napoleon",
"France",
"bombing of Guernica",
"Execution of Emperor Maximilian",
"United States Army",
"firing squad",
"Aldous Huxley",
"Peninsular War",
"Pablo Picasso",
"history painting",
"Guernica",
"es",
"Édouard Manet",
"Reina Sofía",
"Spanish Civil War",
"Arthur Danto",
"Kenneth Clark",
"Korean War",
"Massacre in Korea"
] |
|
13557_NT
|
The Third of May 1808
|
In this artwork, how is the Legacy discussed?
|
The first paraphrasing of The Third of May was Édouard Manet's Execution of Emperor Maximilian, painted in several versions between 1867 and 1869. In recording a current event to which neither he nor the emerging art of photography was witness, Manet was inspired by Goya's precedent and may have seen the work at the Prado in 1865 before beginning his own paintings, which were too sensitive to be exhibited in France in Manet's lifetime. He undoubtedly saw an 1867 print published by an acquaintance. Art critic Arthur Danto compares Goya's work and Manet's:The Third of May also depicts an execution, an early event in the so-called Peninsular War between France and Spain. Napoleon Bonaparte invaded Spain in 1808, capturing its royal family and replacing them with his brother, Joseph. The French were as unpopular in Spain as they later were in Mexico, and they encountered a fierce insurrection, which ultimately triumphed. The Third of May execution was an indiscriminate killing of civilians by French soldiers in reprisal for a guerrilla attack the previous day. Goya's painting of the massacre, which shows terrified civilians facing a firing squad, was intended to arouse anger and hatred on the part of Spanish viewers. Goya's is a highly romantic picture of a deeply emotional episode.
The Third of May is cited as an influence on Pablo Picasso's 1937 Guernica, which shows the aftermath of the Nazi German bombing of Guernica during the Spanish Civil War. An exhibition in 2006 at the Prado and the Reina Sofía showed The Third of May, Guernica, and the Execution of the Emperor Maximilian in the same room. Also in the room was Picasso's Massacre in Korea, painted in 1951 during the Korean War—an even more direct reference to the composition of The Third of May. The perpetrators in this painting were intended to be the United States Army or their United Nations allies.
Aldous Huxley wrote in 1957 that Goya lacked Rubens' ability to fill the canvas with an ordered composition; but he considered The Third of May a success because Goya "is speaking in his native language, and he is therefore able to express what he wants to say with maximum force and clarity". Kenneth Clark remarked on the painting's radical departure from history painting and its intensity: "With Goya we do not think of the studio or even of the artist at work. We think only of the event. Does this imply that The Third of May is a kind of superior journalism, the record of an incident in which depth of focus is sacrificed to an immediate effect? I am ashamed to say that I once thought so; but the longer I look at this ...the more clearly I recognise that I was mistaken."
|
[
"Napoleon",
"France",
"bombing of Guernica",
"Execution of Emperor Maximilian",
"United States Army",
"firing squad",
"Aldous Huxley",
"Peninsular War",
"Pablo Picasso",
"history painting",
"Guernica",
"es",
"Édouard Manet",
"Reina Sofía",
"Spanish Civil War",
"Arthur Danto",
"Kenneth Clark",
"Korean War",
"Massacre in Korea"
] |
|
13558_T
|
A Couple (Les Fiancés)
|
Focus on A Couple (Les Fiancés) and explore the abstract.
|
A Couple (Les Fiancés) also known as The Engaged Couple or Alfred Sisley and his Wife, is an oil-on-canvas painting by the French artist Pierre-Auguste Renoir (1841–1919), created around 1868 during his early Salon period at a time when he focused on thematic works about couples. It was acquired by the Wallraf–Richartz Museum in 1912.
|
[
"Alfred Sisley",
"Pierre-Auguste Renoir",
"Wallraf–Richartz Museum"
] |
|
13558_NT
|
A Couple (Les Fiancés)
|
Focus on this artwork and explore the abstract.
|
A Couple (Les Fiancés) also known as The Engaged Couple or Alfred Sisley and his Wife, is an oil-on-canvas painting by the French artist Pierre-Auguste Renoir (1841–1919), created around 1868 during his early Salon period at a time when he focused on thematic works about couples. It was acquired by the Wallraf–Richartz Museum in 1912.
|
[
"Alfred Sisley",
"Pierre-Auguste Renoir",
"Wallraf–Richartz Museum"
] |
|
13559_T
|
A Couple (Les Fiancés)
|
Focus on A Couple (Les Fiancés) and explain the Background.
|
Renoir and Alfred Sisley (1839–1899) both attended the studio of Charles Gleyre in the early 1860s. By 1865, they were good friends. Renoir painted Sisley's portrait several times, beginning with Mother Anthony's Tavern (1866). A letter from Renoir to artist Frédéric Bazille (1841–1870) in September 1869 identifies the woman at Sisley's side as Renoir's model Lise Tréhot (1848–1922). In the letter to Bazille, Renoir writes about his desperation for money: "I exhibited [the portraits of] Lise and Sisley at Carpentier's. I am going to try to stick him for about 100 francs, and I'm going to put my woman in white up for auction. I'll sell it for whatever price it goes for; it's all the same to me."
|
[
"Lise Tréhot",
"Frédéric Bazille",
"Mother Anthony's Tavern",
"Charles Gleyre",
"Alfred Sisley"
] |
|
13559_NT
|
A Couple (Les Fiancés)
|
Focus on this artwork and explain the Background.
|
Renoir and Alfred Sisley (1839–1899) both attended the studio of Charles Gleyre in the early 1860s. By 1865, they were good friends. Renoir painted Sisley's portrait several times, beginning with Mother Anthony's Tavern (1866). A letter from Renoir to artist Frédéric Bazille (1841–1870) in September 1869 identifies the woman at Sisley's side as Renoir's model Lise Tréhot (1848–1922). In the letter to Bazille, Renoir writes about his desperation for money: "I exhibited [the portraits of] Lise and Sisley at Carpentier's. I am going to try to stick him for about 100 francs, and I'm going to put my woman in white up for auction. I'll sell it for whatever price it goes for; it's all the same to me."
|
[
"Lise Tréhot",
"Frédéric Bazille",
"Mother Anthony's Tavern",
"Charles Gleyre",
"Alfred Sisley"
] |
|
13560_T
|
A Couple (Les Fiancés)
|
Explore the Description of this artwork, A Couple (Les Fiancés).
|
Although Lise was Renoir's lover at the time of the painting, he had her pose with Sisley, who was also involved with another woman, Eugénie Lescouézec. Art historian Michael F. Zimmermann writes that "the result was the modern image of an engaged couple, as well as a genre portrait enlarged to life size. The painter presents the gentleman's caressing affection and the lady's grateful intimacy from the perspective of a close friend, who recognizes these gestures as habitual but none the less touching."
|
[] |
|
13560_NT
|
A Couple (Les Fiancés)
|
Explore the Description of this artwork.
|
Although Lise was Renoir's lover at the time of the painting, he had her pose with Sisley, who was also involved with another woman, Eugénie Lescouézec. Art historian Michael F. Zimmermann writes that "the result was the modern image of an engaged couple, as well as a genre portrait enlarged to life size. The painter presents the gentleman's caressing affection and the lady's grateful intimacy from the perspective of a close friend, who recognizes these gestures as habitual but none the less touching."
|
[] |
|
13561_T
|
A Couple (Les Fiancés)
|
Focus on A Couple (Les Fiancés) and discuss the Analysis.
|
The painting shows the inspiration of Realism, particularly the influence of the work of Édouard Manet (1832-1883), although by this time Renoir was working towards his own unique, personal style. The museum performed an X-ray in 2021, which revealed that an altogether different painting lies beneath the current work.
|
[
"Realism",
"Édouard Manet"
] |
|
13561_NT
|
A Couple (Les Fiancés)
|
Focus on this artwork and discuss the Analysis.
|
The painting shows the inspiration of Realism, particularly the influence of the work of Édouard Manet (1832-1883), although by this time Renoir was working towards his own unique, personal style. The museum performed an X-ray in 2021, which revealed that an altogether different painting lies beneath the current work.
|
[
"Realism",
"Édouard Manet"
] |
|
13562_T
|
A Couple (Les Fiancés)
|
How does A Couple (Les Fiancés) elucidate its Influence?
|
Pablo Picasso (1881–1973) was a personal fan of Renoir, and at one time owned seven of his paintings. He was also a fierce defender of Renoir against his critics in the avant-garde. Inspired by A Couple (Les Fiancés), Picasso produced three pencil studies (Le Ménage Sisley) based on the work.
|
[
"Pablo Picasso"
] |
|
13562_NT
|
A Couple (Les Fiancés)
|
How does this artwork elucidate its Influence?
|
Pablo Picasso (1881–1973) was a personal fan of Renoir, and at one time owned seven of his paintings. He was also a fierce defender of Renoir against his critics in the avant-garde. Inspired by A Couple (Les Fiancés), Picasso produced three pencil studies (Le Ménage Sisley) based on the work.
|
[
"Pablo Picasso"
] |
|
13563_T
|
Portrait of a Man Rising from His Chair
|
Focus on Portrait of a Man Rising from His Chair and analyze the abstract.
|
Portrait of a Man Rising from His Chair is a painting by the Dutch painter Rembrandt, painted in 1633. It hangs in the Taft Museum of Art of Cincinnati, Ohio, United States. The oil-on-canvas portrait measures 124 by 99 centimetres (49 in × 39 in). It is signed and dated 1633, and there is no doubt of its authenticity.
|
[
"Ohio",
"Dutch",
"Taft Museum of Art",
"Cincinnati",
"United States",
"Man Rising from His Chair",
"Rembrandt"
] |
|
13563_NT
|
Portrait of a Man Rising from His Chair
|
Focus on this artwork and analyze the abstract.
|
Portrait of a Man Rising from His Chair is a painting by the Dutch painter Rembrandt, painted in 1633. It hangs in the Taft Museum of Art of Cincinnati, Ohio, United States. The oil-on-canvas portrait measures 124 by 99 centimetres (49 in × 39 in). It is signed and dated 1633, and there is no doubt of its authenticity.
|
[
"Ohio",
"Dutch",
"Taft Museum of Art",
"Cincinnati",
"United States",
"Man Rising from His Chair",
"Rembrandt"
] |
|
13564_T
|
Portrait of a Man Rising from His Chair
|
In Portrait of a Man Rising from His Chair, how is the Description discussed?
|
The pose of the wealthy subject is unusually animated, as he is rising, perhaps to greet a visitor or to introduce him to his wife depicted in a companion painting. The portrait and its pendant, Portrait of a Young Woman with a Fan, have been separated since 1793. Occasional exhibitions have reunited the pair. Wilhelm von Bode was the first one to notice the similarities in size and composition and presented the man and woman as pendants in his catalogue of Rembrandt paintings in 1897.
|
[
"Portrait of a Young Woman with a Fan",
"Wilhelm von Bode",
"Rembrandt"
] |
|
13564_NT
|
Portrait of a Man Rising from His Chair
|
In this artwork, how is the Description discussed?
|
The pose of the wealthy subject is unusually animated, as he is rising, perhaps to greet a visitor or to introduce him to his wife depicted in a companion painting. The portrait and its pendant, Portrait of a Young Woman with a Fan, have been separated since 1793. Occasional exhibitions have reunited the pair. Wilhelm von Bode was the first one to notice the similarities in size and composition and presented the man and woman as pendants in his catalogue of Rembrandt paintings in 1897.
|
[
"Portrait of a Young Woman with a Fan",
"Wilhelm von Bode",
"Rembrandt"
] |
|
13565_T
|
Portrait of a Man Rising from His Chair
|
Focus on Portrait of a Man Rising from His Chair and explore the Provenance.
|
The painting was purchased by Charles P. Taft from the Pourtales family of Paris, who had it in their private gallery for more than 100 years. Although the price paid for the picture was not made public, it was reported in the London Times at the time of the purchase (ca. 1909) that it cost $500,000.
|
[] |
|
13565_NT
|
Portrait of a Man Rising from His Chair
|
Focus on this artwork and explore the Provenance.
|
The painting was purchased by Charles P. Taft from the Pourtales family of Paris, who had it in their private gallery for more than 100 years. Although the price paid for the picture was not made public, it was reported in the London Times at the time of the purchase (ca. 1909) that it cost $500,000.
|
[] |
|
13566_T
|
Koa Kannon
|
Focus on Koa Kannon and explain the abstract.
|
The Koa Kannon (興亜観音, Kōa Kannon, literally the “Raising Asia Kannon”) refers to a statue of Kannon, the bodhisattva of compassion, located atop Mount Izu in Atami, Shizuoka Prefecture, as well as to the temple, formally a religious corporation called the Reihaizan Koa Kannon, which is dedicated to it. Koa Kannon is from the same lineage as the Hokke Shu Jin-Monryu, a breakaway sect of Nichiren Buddhism based in Sanjo in Niigata Prefecture, but it is not formally affiliated with them and is the only independent Buddhist temple in Japan with its own unique history and rites. The temple admits all worshipers regardless of their religion.
The temple is dedicated to all those who died in combat in the Second Sino-Japanese War but is especially known for interring the ashes of seven individuals executed as war criminals at a stone monument dedicated to the “seven warriors”.
The current head priest is Sister Myojo Itami who is the third daughter of the first head priest Master Ninrei Itami and is a registered nun of Hokke Shu Jin-Monryu. Yasuaki Itami, the adopted son of Ninrei’s eldest daughter, now hospitalized former head priest Myotoku Itami, assists Myojo and is in charge of the temple’s administrative affairs. He is a priest of the Soto school.
|
[
"seven individuals executed as war criminals",
"Nichiren Buddhism",
"Soto school",
"Sanjo",
"Atami",
"Shizuoka Prefecture",
"Niigata Prefecture",
"Second Sino-Japanese War",
"Kannon",
"religious corporation"
] |
|
13566_NT
|
Koa Kannon
|
Focus on this artwork and explain the abstract.
|
The Koa Kannon (興亜観音, Kōa Kannon, literally the “Raising Asia Kannon”) refers to a statue of Kannon, the bodhisattva of compassion, located atop Mount Izu in Atami, Shizuoka Prefecture, as well as to the temple, formally a religious corporation called the Reihaizan Koa Kannon, which is dedicated to it. Koa Kannon is from the same lineage as the Hokke Shu Jin-Monryu, a breakaway sect of Nichiren Buddhism based in Sanjo in Niigata Prefecture, but it is not formally affiliated with them and is the only independent Buddhist temple in Japan with its own unique history and rites. The temple admits all worshipers regardless of their religion.
The temple is dedicated to all those who died in combat in the Second Sino-Japanese War but is especially known for interring the ashes of seven individuals executed as war criminals at a stone monument dedicated to the “seven warriors”.
The current head priest is Sister Myojo Itami who is the third daughter of the first head priest Master Ninrei Itami and is a registered nun of Hokke Shu Jin-Monryu. Yasuaki Itami, the adopted son of Ninrei’s eldest daughter, now hospitalized former head priest Myotoku Itami, assists Myojo and is in charge of the temple’s administrative affairs. He is a priest of the Soto school.
|
[
"seven individuals executed as war criminals",
"Nichiren Buddhism",
"Soto school",
"Sanjo",
"Atami",
"Shizuoka Prefecture",
"Niigata Prefecture",
"Second Sino-Japanese War",
"Kannon",
"religious corporation"
] |
|
13567_T
|
Koa Kannon
|
In the context of Koa Kannon, discuss the Origin of the Koa Kannon statue of the History.
|
General Iwane Matsui who commanded the Shanghai Expeditionary Force at the outbreak of the Second Sino-Japanese War built the Koa Kannon statue after retiring from the service in 1940 to honor the officers and men of both China and Japan who fell in battle in the name of consecrating equally both friend and enemy. The statue was made using clay from battlefields, including from the vicinity of Nanjing where Matsui served. On 24 February 1940 the consecration ceremony was performed in the presence of Tessui Oshima, a high-ranking Jodo Buddhist monk from Zojo-ji, and other distinguished figures. Then Matsui moved into a retreat he built nearby and he used to ascend the mountain every morning to give the kannon sutra.
In 1944 another monument was erected called the “Bodhi for the Warriors Who Fell in Battle in the Great Pacific War” which honors all the war dead in the Pacific theater.
|
[
"Iwane Matsui",
"Pacific War",
"kannon sutra",
"Shanghai Expeditionary Force",
"Jodo",
"Zojo-ji",
"Nanjing",
"Second Sino-Japanese War",
"Kannon",
"Pacific theater"
] |
|
13567_NT
|
Koa Kannon
|
In the context of this artwork, discuss the Origin of the Koa Kannon statue of the History.
|
General Iwane Matsui who commanded the Shanghai Expeditionary Force at the outbreak of the Second Sino-Japanese War built the Koa Kannon statue after retiring from the service in 1940 to honor the officers and men of both China and Japan who fell in battle in the name of consecrating equally both friend and enemy. The statue was made using clay from battlefields, including from the vicinity of Nanjing where Matsui served. On 24 February 1940 the consecration ceremony was performed in the presence of Tessui Oshima, a high-ranking Jodo Buddhist monk from Zojo-ji, and other distinguished figures. Then Matsui moved into a retreat he built nearby and he used to ascend the mountain every morning to give the kannon sutra.
In 1944 another monument was erected called the “Bodhi for the Warriors Who Fell in Battle in the Great Pacific War” which honors all the war dead in the Pacific theater.
|
[
"Iwane Matsui",
"Pacific War",
"kannon sutra",
"Shanghai Expeditionary Force",
"Jodo",
"Zojo-ji",
"Nanjing",
"Second Sino-Japanese War",
"Kannon",
"Pacific theater"
] |
|
13568_T
|
Koa Kannon
|
In Koa Kannon, how is the Enshrinement of war criminals of the History elucidated?
|
On 23 December 1948, six men including Hideki Tojo were executed by the International Military Tribunal of the Far East as “Class A” war criminals alongside Iwane Matsui, and were cremated at Kuboyama Crematorium in Yokohama. The American army disposed of most of the ashes, but one urn was secretly collected up by a group including Miyoshi Tobita, the manager of Kuboyama Crematorium, and Shohei Sanmonji, defense counsel to Kuniaki Koiso, and on 3 May 1949 this urn was carried to the Koa Kannon temple due to its links with Matsui. Right away the head priest Master Ninrei Itami intuitively understood that these were the ashes of the seven war criminals and hid them until he thought the time was right. Finally on 19 April 1959 the stone monument of the seven warriors was erected, with the inscription written personally by former prime minister Shigeru Yoshida, and the ashes were buried underneath it. However, in 1960 one incense container of these ashes was taken to be buried separately at the “Tomb of the Seven Warriors Who Died for their Country” located on Mount Sangane at Nishio, then part of Hazu District, in Aichi Prefecture.
In addition to the stone monument of the seven warriors and the Bodhi monument put up in 1944, at the same site there is now also the “Memorial Stone of the 1,068 Executed Martyrs of the Great Pacific War”, which enshrines Class B and C war criminals who were executed or died in prison and has been likened to a “little Yasukuni Shrine”.
|
[
"Yasukuni Shrine",
"Iwane Matsui",
"Hazu District",
"Nishio",
"Pacific War",
"Shigeru Yoshida",
"Kuniaki Koiso",
"International Military Tribunal of the Far East",
"Aichi Prefecture",
"Hideki Tojo",
"Kannon"
] |
|
13568_NT
|
Koa Kannon
|
In this artwork, how is the Enshrinement of war criminals of the History elucidated?
|
On 23 December 1948, six men including Hideki Tojo were executed by the International Military Tribunal of the Far East as “Class A” war criminals alongside Iwane Matsui, and were cremated at Kuboyama Crematorium in Yokohama. The American army disposed of most of the ashes, but one urn was secretly collected up by a group including Miyoshi Tobita, the manager of Kuboyama Crematorium, and Shohei Sanmonji, defense counsel to Kuniaki Koiso, and on 3 May 1949 this urn was carried to the Koa Kannon temple due to its links with Matsui. Right away the head priest Master Ninrei Itami intuitively understood that these were the ashes of the seven war criminals and hid them until he thought the time was right. Finally on 19 April 1959 the stone monument of the seven warriors was erected, with the inscription written personally by former prime minister Shigeru Yoshida, and the ashes were buried underneath it. However, in 1960 one incense container of these ashes was taken to be buried separately at the “Tomb of the Seven Warriors Who Died for their Country” located on Mount Sangane at Nishio, then part of Hazu District, in Aichi Prefecture.
In addition to the stone monument of the seven warriors and the Bodhi monument put up in 1944, at the same site there is now also the “Memorial Stone of the 1,068 Executed Martyrs of the Great Pacific War”, which enshrines Class B and C war criminals who were executed or died in prison and has been likened to a “little Yasukuni Shrine”.
|
[
"Yasukuni Shrine",
"Iwane Matsui",
"Hazu District",
"Nishio",
"Pacific War",
"Shigeru Yoshida",
"Kuniaki Koiso",
"International Military Tribunal of the Far East",
"Aichi Prefecture",
"Hideki Tojo",
"Kannon"
] |
|
13569_T
|
Koa Kannon
|
In the context of Koa Kannon, analyze the 1971 bombing of the History.
|
On 12 December 1971 the East Asia Anti-Japan Armed Front, an extremist group, tried to blow up the statue of the Koa Kannon, the stone monument of the seven warriors, and the Memorial Stone of the 1,068 Executed Martyrs of the Great Pacific War, which they viewed as symbols of Japanese imperialism. The stone monument of the seven warriors was destroyed but because the fuse was short the other two escaped destruction. The monument which was destroyed was restored afterwards by volunteers.
|
[
"Pacific War",
"East Asia Anti-Japan Armed Front",
"Kannon"
] |
|
13569_NT
|
Koa Kannon
|
In the context of this artwork, analyze the 1971 bombing of the History.
|
On 12 December 1971 the East Asia Anti-Japan Armed Front, an extremist group, tried to blow up the statue of the Koa Kannon, the stone monument of the seven warriors, and the Memorial Stone of the 1,068 Executed Martyrs of the Great Pacific War, which they viewed as symbols of Japanese imperialism. The stone monument of the seven warriors was destroyed but because the fuse was short the other two escaped destruction. The monument which was destroyed was restored afterwards by volunteers.
|
[
"Pacific War",
"East Asia Anti-Japan Armed Front",
"Kannon"
] |
|
13570_T
|
Koa Kannon
|
In Koa Kannon, how is the Support discussed?
|
Unlike a typical temple, Koa Kannon has no graves and thus no patrons under the danka system except for the surviving family of the seven war criminals. Koa Kannon is always requesting general help since the only thing maintaining the temple is offering money from visitors, volunteers, and members of support groups. One such association is the Koa Kannon Support Group, which was founded in 1942 by its first president Iwane Matsui and is preserved primarily by local devotees in Atami.
There was in addition the Society to Protect the Koa Kannon which was established in 1994, but due to a scandal involving some of its board members it dissolved in March 2011.
|
[
"Iwane Matsui",
"danka system",
"Atami",
"Kannon"
] |
|
13570_NT
|
Koa Kannon
|
In this artwork, how is the Support discussed?
|
Unlike a typical temple, Koa Kannon has no graves and thus no patrons under the danka system except for the surviving family of the seven war criminals. Koa Kannon is always requesting general help since the only thing maintaining the temple is offering money from visitors, volunteers, and members of support groups. One such association is the Koa Kannon Support Group, which was founded in 1942 by its first president Iwane Matsui and is preserved primarily by local devotees in Atami.
There was in addition the Society to Protect the Koa Kannon which was established in 1994, but due to a scandal involving some of its board members it dissolved in March 2011.
|
[
"Iwane Matsui",
"danka system",
"Atami",
"Kannon"
] |
|
13571_T
|
Koa Kannon
|
Focus on Koa Kannon and explore the Directions.
|
At JR Atami Station take the Izu Tokai Bus bound for Yugawara Station, get off at the “Koa Kannon” stop, and walk to the temple. At JR Yugawara Station there is also a bus going in the direction of Atami and Mount Izu.
|
[
"Atami Station",
"Atami",
"Yugawara Station",
"Kannon"
] |
|
13571_NT
|
Koa Kannon
|
Focus on this artwork and explore the Directions.
|
At JR Atami Station take the Izu Tokai Bus bound for Yugawara Station, get off at the “Koa Kannon” stop, and walk to the temple. At JR Yugawara Station there is also a bus going in the direction of Atami and Mount Izu.
|
[
"Atami Station",
"Atami",
"Yugawara Station",
"Kannon"
] |
|
13572_T
|
Spirit of Communication
|
Focus on Spirit of Communication and explain the abstract.
|
Spirit of Communication is the formal name for the statue by Evelyn Beatrice Longman originally called Genius of Telegraphy. The statue has been the symbol of AT&T (and also the former Western Electric) since their commission was completed in 1916. It is also known informally as the Golden Boy statue and formerly as Genius of Electricity.
Commissioned for 195 Broadway in New York City, the sculpture has followed AT&T to other sites in New York and New Jersey over the years. In 2009, the statue was relocated to AT&T's current corporate headquarters in downtown Dallas, Texas, U.S. As of 2022, the statue is located outside in the AT&T Discovery District in Downtown Dallas.
|
[
"New Jersey",
"New York City",
"Downtown Dallas",
"195 Broadway",
"AT&T",
"Dallas",
"New York",
"Western Electric",
"Evelyn Beatrice Longman",
"Dallas, Texas"
] |
|
13572_NT
|
Spirit of Communication
|
Focus on this artwork and explain the abstract.
|
Spirit of Communication is the formal name for the statue by Evelyn Beatrice Longman originally called Genius of Telegraphy. The statue has been the symbol of AT&T (and also the former Western Electric) since their commission was completed in 1916. It is also known informally as the Golden Boy statue and formerly as Genius of Electricity.
Commissioned for 195 Broadway in New York City, the sculpture has followed AT&T to other sites in New York and New Jersey over the years. In 2009, the statue was relocated to AT&T's current corporate headquarters in downtown Dallas, Texas, U.S. As of 2022, the statue is located outside in the AT&T Discovery District in Downtown Dallas.
|
[
"New Jersey",
"New York City",
"Downtown Dallas",
"195 Broadway",
"AT&T",
"Dallas",
"New York",
"Western Electric",
"Evelyn Beatrice Longman",
"Dallas, Texas"
] |
|
13573_T
|
Spirit of Communication
|
Explore the History of this artwork, Spirit of Communication.
|
Commissioned in 1914, it was crafted by Evelyn Beatrice Longman. The work was completed in 1916 and hoisted to the roof of AT&T Corporate Headquarters at 195 Broadway in the Financial District of Lower Manhattan. The statue's design by Evelyn Beatrice Longman was selected as the winner of a competition, similar to the 1917 Bell Telephone Memorial. It became New York City's second-largest sculpture, after the Statue of Liberty. The statue's original name as commissioned under the aegis of AT&T's president Theodore N. Vail was Genius of Telegraphy. By that time, AT&T had spun off its telegraphy component, Western Union, and the work was renamed to Genius of Electricity. In the 1928,1938, and 1941 editions of the training course Principles of Electricity applied to Telephone and Telegraph Work, it was referred to as Spirit of Electricity.
The statue weighs more than 14.5 tonnes (16 short tons) and is 7.3 metres (24 ft) tall, with wings that extend 2.7 metres (9 ft) from its body. It is cast in bronze and covered with more than 12,500 pieces of gold leaf.Sometime in the mid-1930s, AT&T changed the name of the statue (and the image) to The Spirit of Communication. It continued to stand atop the 195 Broadway building until the early 1980s. In 1984, AT&T moved to a new postmodern headquarters building at 550 Madison Avenue in Midtown Manhattan, designed by Philip Johnson. On Johnson's suggestion, the statue was relocated to the foyer of the new location.
|
[
"Bell Telephone Memorial",
"New York City",
"Western Union",
"195 Broadway",
"AT&T",
"550 Madison Avenue",
"New York",
"Evelyn Beatrice Longman",
"Lower Manhattan",
"Theodore N. Vail",
"Financial District",
"Midtown Manhattan"
] |
|
13573_NT
|
Spirit of Communication
|
Explore the History of this artwork.
|
Commissioned in 1914, it was crafted by Evelyn Beatrice Longman. The work was completed in 1916 and hoisted to the roof of AT&T Corporate Headquarters at 195 Broadway in the Financial District of Lower Manhattan. The statue's design by Evelyn Beatrice Longman was selected as the winner of a competition, similar to the 1917 Bell Telephone Memorial. It became New York City's second-largest sculpture, after the Statue of Liberty. The statue's original name as commissioned under the aegis of AT&T's president Theodore N. Vail was Genius of Telegraphy. By that time, AT&T had spun off its telegraphy component, Western Union, and the work was renamed to Genius of Electricity. In the 1928,1938, and 1941 editions of the training course Principles of Electricity applied to Telephone and Telegraph Work, it was referred to as Spirit of Electricity.
The statue weighs more than 14.5 tonnes (16 short tons) and is 7.3 metres (24 ft) tall, with wings that extend 2.7 metres (9 ft) from its body. It is cast in bronze and covered with more than 12,500 pieces of gold leaf.Sometime in the mid-1930s, AT&T changed the name of the statue (and the image) to The Spirit of Communication. It continued to stand atop the 195 Broadway building until the early 1980s. In 1984, AT&T moved to a new postmodern headquarters building at 550 Madison Avenue in Midtown Manhattan, designed by Philip Johnson. On Johnson's suggestion, the statue was relocated to the foyer of the new location.
|
[
"Bell Telephone Memorial",
"New York City",
"Western Union",
"195 Broadway",
"AT&T",
"550 Madison Avenue",
"New York",
"Evelyn Beatrice Longman",
"Lower Manhattan",
"Theodore N. Vail",
"Financial District",
"Midtown Manhattan"
] |
|
13574_T
|
Spirit of Communication
|
Focus on Spirit of Communication and discuss the Relocation to New Jersey.
|
1984 marked the end of the Bell System. The New York City headquarters building was sold to Sony in 1992 and the company relocated its headquarters to 32 Avenue of the Americas
(which had no room for the statue) and many operating functions across the Hudson River and about forty miles west to a 140-acre (0.57 km2) wooded campus purchased nine years previously in Basking Ridge, New Jersey.
The statue was installed in front of the main entrance to the new building in 1992. In 2002, AT&T sold its Basking Ridge property and moved eight miles (13 km) down the road to Bedminster Township bringing the statue. Those facilities had previously been the headquarters of the AT&T Long Lines division and home to the company's national network operations center.
|
[
"Sony",
"New Jersey",
"New York City",
"AT&T",
"Bedminster Township",
"New York",
"Bell System",
"Basking Ridge, New Jersey",
"32 Avenue of the Americas",
"AT&T Long Lines"
] |
|
13574_NT
|
Spirit of Communication
|
Focus on this artwork and discuss the Relocation to New Jersey.
|
1984 marked the end of the Bell System. The New York City headquarters building was sold to Sony in 1992 and the company relocated its headquarters to 32 Avenue of the Americas
(which had no room for the statue) and many operating functions across the Hudson River and about forty miles west to a 140-acre (0.57 km2) wooded campus purchased nine years previously in Basking Ridge, New Jersey.
The statue was installed in front of the main entrance to the new building in 1992. In 2002, AT&T sold its Basking Ridge property and moved eight miles (13 km) down the road to Bedminster Township bringing the statue. Those facilities had previously been the headquarters of the AT&T Long Lines division and home to the company's national network operations center.
|
[
"Sony",
"New Jersey",
"New York City",
"AT&T",
"Bedminster Township",
"New York",
"Bell System",
"Basking Ridge, New Jersey",
"32 Avenue of the Americas",
"AT&T Long Lines"
] |
|
13575_T
|
Spirit of Communication
|
How does Spirit of Communication elucidate its Present owners?
|
In November 2005, SBC (once a wholly owned subsidiary of the AT&T Corporation—a Baby Bell) acquired AT&T. In a move designed to capitalize on the national and global name of its former parent, San Antonio, Texas-based SBC renamed itself AT&T Inc. In 2009, the new AT&T removed the statue from the Bedminster Township, New Jersey location and later installed it in the lobby of its new headquarters at the Whitacre Tower in Dallas, Texas. The statue was moved yet again in 2019 from the Whitacre Tower to AT&T's Discovery District in Downtown Dallas.
|
[
"New Jersey",
"San Antonio, Texas",
"Baby Bell",
"Whitacre Tower",
"AT&T Inc.",
"Downtown Dallas",
"AT&T Corporation",
"AT&T",
"Dallas",
"Bedminster Township, New Jersey",
"Bedminster Township",
"San Antonio",
"Dallas, Texas"
] |
|
13575_NT
|
Spirit of Communication
|
How does this artwork elucidate its Present owners?
|
In November 2005, SBC (once a wholly owned subsidiary of the AT&T Corporation—a Baby Bell) acquired AT&T. In a move designed to capitalize on the national and global name of its former parent, San Antonio, Texas-based SBC renamed itself AT&T Inc. In 2009, the new AT&T removed the statue from the Bedminster Township, New Jersey location and later installed it in the lobby of its new headquarters at the Whitacre Tower in Dallas, Texas. The statue was moved yet again in 2019 from the Whitacre Tower to AT&T's Discovery District in Downtown Dallas.
|
[
"New Jersey",
"San Antonio, Texas",
"Baby Bell",
"Whitacre Tower",
"AT&T Inc.",
"Downtown Dallas",
"AT&T Corporation",
"AT&T",
"Dallas",
"Bedminster Township, New Jersey",
"Bedminster Township",
"San Antonio",
"Dallas, Texas"
] |
|
13576_T
|
Hunters of Skagen
|
Focus on Hunters of Skagen and analyze the People.
|
The figures in the painting include Krøyer himself in the extreme right (lying) with the reddish beard alongside his dog Rap. Michael Ancher is seated left of, and above, Krøyer. Others left to right: Degn Brøndum, owner of Brøndum hotel, is at the extreme left, architect Ulrik Plesner (lying on his stomach), artist Einar Hein, Skagen's city treasurer Hans Brodersen, and C.F. Dahlerup.
|
[
"Degn Brøndum",
"Michael Ancher",
"Ulrik Plesner",
"Einar Hein",
"painting"
] |
|
13576_NT
|
Hunters of Skagen
|
Focus on this artwork and analyze the People.
|
The figures in the painting include Krøyer himself in the extreme right (lying) with the reddish beard alongside his dog Rap. Michael Ancher is seated left of, and above, Krøyer. Others left to right: Degn Brøndum, owner of Brøndum hotel, is at the extreme left, architect Ulrik Plesner (lying on his stomach), artist Einar Hein, Skagen's city treasurer Hans Brodersen, and C.F. Dahlerup.
|
[
"Degn Brøndum",
"Michael Ancher",
"Ulrik Plesner",
"Einar Hein",
"painting"
] |
|
13577_T
|
Hunters of Skagen
|
In Hunters of Skagen, how is the Preliminary studies discussed?
|
Krøyer did several preliminary studies for Hunters of Skagen. At Skagens Museum there are four oil studies;Skagensjægere, 1897, oil on wood, 32 x 43 cm
Krøyers Dog Rap, 1898, oil on wood, 43 x 31.5 cm
Overplantor CF Dahlerup with Hunting Dog, 1898, oil on wood, 43.2 x 31.6 cm
Architect Ulrik Plesner lying in the Dunes, 1898, 51.7 x 92.6 cmIn the Hirschsprung Collection the actual cardboard study is found, 1898, pastel on paper, 136.5 x 246.5 cm. Photographs from 1895 show a charcoal drawing of the motif over Krøyer's fireplace. A template measuring 32x43 cm and painted on wood was sold at auction at Ellekilde Auktioner A/S for DKK 1,550,000 on 2 December 2000.
|
[
"Ulrik Plesner",
"Ellekilde Auktioner A/S",
"Skagens Museum",
"Hirschsprung Collection"
] |
|
13577_NT
|
Hunters of Skagen
|
In this artwork, how is the Preliminary studies discussed?
|
Krøyer did several preliminary studies for Hunters of Skagen. At Skagens Museum there are four oil studies;Skagensjægere, 1897, oil on wood, 32 x 43 cm
Krøyers Dog Rap, 1898, oil on wood, 43 x 31.5 cm
Overplantor CF Dahlerup with Hunting Dog, 1898, oil on wood, 43.2 x 31.6 cm
Architect Ulrik Plesner lying in the Dunes, 1898, 51.7 x 92.6 cmIn the Hirschsprung Collection the actual cardboard study is found, 1898, pastel on paper, 136.5 x 246.5 cm. Photographs from 1895 show a charcoal drawing of the motif over Krøyer's fireplace. A template measuring 32x43 cm and painted on wood was sold at auction at Ellekilde Auktioner A/S for DKK 1,550,000 on 2 December 2000.
|
[
"Ulrik Plesner",
"Ellekilde Auktioner A/S",
"Skagens Museum",
"Hirschsprung Collection"
] |
|
13578_T
|
Washington Grays Monument
|
Focus on Washington Grays Monument and explore the abstract.
|
Washington Grays Monument, also known as the Pennsylvania Volunteer, is a bronze statue by John A. Wilson. The monument represents the Washington Grays who served in the 17th, 21st and 49th Pennsylvania Militia during the American Civil War. In 1925, almost 20 years after the sculpture was made, renowned sculptor and art historian Lorado Taft wrote, "No American sculpture has surpassed the compelling power which John A. Wilson put into his steady, motionless 'Pennsylvania Volunteer'." Joseph Wilson built the base of the monument which was unveiled on April 19, 1872. Over 35 years later John Wilson sculpted the bronze statue, which was dedicated on April 18, 1908 at Washington Square, and rededicated June 14, 1991 at its present location in front of the Union League of Philadelphia, 140 South Broad Street, in Center City, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. The sculpture is positioned adjacent to the sculpture 1st Regiment Infantry National Guard of Philadelphia.
|
[
"Philadelphia",
"Union League of Philadelphia",
"Washington Grays",
"American Civil War",
"1st Regiment Infantry National Guard of Philadelphia",
"John A. Wilson",
"John Wilson",
"Philadelphia, Pennsylvania",
"Lorado Taft",
"Washington Square"
] |
|
13578_NT
|
Washington Grays Monument
|
Focus on this artwork and explore the abstract.
|
Washington Grays Monument, also known as the Pennsylvania Volunteer, is a bronze statue by John A. Wilson. The monument represents the Washington Grays who served in the 17th, 21st and 49th Pennsylvania Militia during the American Civil War. In 1925, almost 20 years after the sculpture was made, renowned sculptor and art historian Lorado Taft wrote, "No American sculpture has surpassed the compelling power which John A. Wilson put into his steady, motionless 'Pennsylvania Volunteer'." Joseph Wilson built the base of the monument which was unveiled on April 19, 1872. Over 35 years later John Wilson sculpted the bronze statue, which was dedicated on April 18, 1908 at Washington Square, and rededicated June 14, 1991 at its present location in front of the Union League of Philadelphia, 140 South Broad Street, in Center City, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. The sculpture is positioned adjacent to the sculpture 1st Regiment Infantry National Guard of Philadelphia.
|
[
"Philadelphia",
"Union League of Philadelphia",
"Washington Grays",
"American Civil War",
"1st Regiment Infantry National Guard of Philadelphia",
"John A. Wilson",
"John Wilson",
"Philadelphia, Pennsylvania",
"Lorado Taft",
"Washington Square"
] |
|
13579_T
|
Washington Grays Monument
|
Focus on Washington Grays Monument and explain the History.
|
On October 21, 1871, a communication was received by the Trustees from Mr. Edwin N. Benson, an honorary member of the Corps, tendering "the sum of Two Thousand Dollars to defray the expenses of erecting a granite monument, in a proper place, to the memory of the gallant comrades who fell in the war for the Union," suggesting it be completed and dedicated on the occasion of the semi-centennial Anniversary of the Corps.The base of the monument was unveiled at the intersection of Broad Street and Girard Avenue, with impressive and appropriate ceremonies on Friday, April 19, 1872, at 3 o'clock P. M., and the day concluded with a banquet of which three hundred persons partook, at the Continental Hotel. The monument was subsequently removed from the place of its dedication to the centre of Washington Square.
At a meeting of the "Old Guard of the Artillery Corps, Washington Grays," held February 22, 1906, a committee consisting of the Trustees and Comrade Captain John O. Foering was appointed to procure and have erected upon the base of the monument in Washington Square a bronze figure of a "Washington Gray" in the old uniform. The Committee reported at the meeting of May 4, 1908, that they had attended to the duty assigned them, and defrayed the entire cost ($5000) out of the Treasury of the old Guard without assistance from any other source whatever, and that the figure had been made by John A. Wilson and had been uncovered without ceremony in the presence of the few surviving members of the old Guard at 7 o'clock on the morning of Saturday, April 18th, 1908.
John Oppell Foering described the monument:It is a figure of a gentleman become a soldier, one who has turned his back upon the charms and allurement of peaceful life, resolved to do, to dare, perchance to die for his country in obedience to the instinct of patriotism imbibed in the first moments of life, while he lay a helpless babe listening to the beating of his mother's heart. If the lesson it teaches be properly learned, love of country will be immortal, and untold generations will accept as truth, "greater love than this hath no man, that he giveth his life for his brother."In 1954 the monument was moved to Lemon Hill and remained unprotected for almost four decades. The unnamed Grays soldier suffered the neglect of an uninterested public. Bored kids probably assaulted the statue with stones, knocking off his bayonet and plume. The monument was moved to its present location in 1991.
|
[
"Washington Grays",
"John A. Wilson",
"Washington Square"
] |
|
13579_NT
|
Washington Grays Monument
|
Focus on this artwork and explain the History.
|
On October 21, 1871, a communication was received by the Trustees from Mr. Edwin N. Benson, an honorary member of the Corps, tendering "the sum of Two Thousand Dollars to defray the expenses of erecting a granite monument, in a proper place, to the memory of the gallant comrades who fell in the war for the Union," suggesting it be completed and dedicated on the occasion of the semi-centennial Anniversary of the Corps.The base of the monument was unveiled at the intersection of Broad Street and Girard Avenue, with impressive and appropriate ceremonies on Friday, April 19, 1872, at 3 o'clock P. M., and the day concluded with a banquet of which three hundred persons partook, at the Continental Hotel. The monument was subsequently removed from the place of its dedication to the centre of Washington Square.
At a meeting of the "Old Guard of the Artillery Corps, Washington Grays," held February 22, 1906, a committee consisting of the Trustees and Comrade Captain John O. Foering was appointed to procure and have erected upon the base of the monument in Washington Square a bronze figure of a "Washington Gray" in the old uniform. The Committee reported at the meeting of May 4, 1908, that they had attended to the duty assigned them, and defrayed the entire cost ($5000) out of the Treasury of the old Guard without assistance from any other source whatever, and that the figure had been made by John A. Wilson and had been uncovered without ceremony in the presence of the few surviving members of the old Guard at 7 o'clock on the morning of Saturday, April 18th, 1908.
John Oppell Foering described the monument:It is a figure of a gentleman become a soldier, one who has turned his back upon the charms and allurement of peaceful life, resolved to do, to dare, perchance to die for his country in obedience to the instinct of patriotism imbibed in the first moments of life, while he lay a helpless babe listening to the beating of his mother's heart. If the lesson it teaches be properly learned, love of country will be immortal, and untold generations will accept as truth, "greater love than this hath no man, that he giveth his life for his brother."In 1954 the monument was moved to Lemon Hill and remained unprotected for almost four decades. The unnamed Grays soldier suffered the neglect of an uninterested public. Bored kids probably assaulted the statue with stones, knocking off his bayonet and plume. The monument was moved to its present location in 1991.
|
[
"Washington Grays",
"John A. Wilson",
"Washington Square"
] |
|
13580_T
|
Washington Grays Monument
|
Explore the Inscription of this artwork, Washington Grays Monument.
|
The inscription reads:
J. Wilson
Bureau Bros.
This statue was dedicated at this site on June 14, 1991 By the Union League of Philadelphia. The First Regiment Infantry of Pennsylvania & Fairmount Park Commission through the efforts of a combined committee of those organizations.
The Union League of Philadelphia
Robert M. Flood Jr., President
Stanley W. Root Jr., Esq. Chairman
Leon Clemmer A.I.A., Architect
Raymond K. Denworth, Esquire
First Regiment Infantry of Pennsylvania
Colonel Jack C. Betson, Pres.
Major William M. Barnes, Sec'y
Fairmount Park Commission
F
Eugene Dixon, Jr., Chairman signed Founder's mark appears.
|
[
"Philadelphia",
"Union League of Philadelphia",
"Fairmount Park"
] |
|
13580_NT
|
Washington Grays Monument
|
Explore the Inscription of this artwork.
|
The inscription reads:
J. Wilson
Bureau Bros.
This statue was dedicated at this site on June 14, 1991 By the Union League of Philadelphia. The First Regiment Infantry of Pennsylvania & Fairmount Park Commission through the efforts of a combined committee of those organizations.
The Union League of Philadelphia
Robert M. Flood Jr., President
Stanley W. Root Jr., Esq. Chairman
Leon Clemmer A.I.A., Architect
Raymond K. Denworth, Esquire
First Regiment Infantry of Pennsylvania
Colonel Jack C. Betson, Pres.
Major William M. Barnes, Sec'y
Fairmount Park Commission
F
Eugene Dixon, Jr., Chairman signed Founder's mark appears.
|
[
"Philadelphia",
"Union League of Philadelphia",
"Fairmount Park"
] |
|
13581_T
|
Christ Enthroned (Moskos)
|
Focus on Christ Enthroned (Moskos) and discuss the abstract.
|
Christ Enthroned is a tempera painting by Elias Moskos, a representative of the Late Cretan School. The artist was also associated with the Heptanese School due to his migration to Zakinthos and the transition of his painting style. Moskos also taught painting. Most of his students became church committee members. Church committees were responsible for commissioning paintings. He was active from 1645 to 1687 on the islands of Crete, Zakynthos, and Kefalonia. Fifty-two of his works survived, over half of them were signed. Two other painters named Moskos were active during the same period Ioannis Moskos and Leos Moskos.Christ Enthroned was a popular theme among Italian and Greek Byzantine painters. The subject has been depicted since the inception of the new religion. The figure was usually painted in the apse of Byzantine churches. The Cretan School adopted the style. Angelos Akotantos painted one of the earliest signed works in the 1400s. His icon was the framework for later painters of the maniera greca. Moskos painted his own version and significantly refined it. Emmanuel Tzanes painted his own version around the same period. The Moskos version is located at the Icon Museum in Recklinghausen, Germany. It was formerly part of the Minken Collection in London.
|
[
"Heptanese School",
"Crete",
"Emmanuel Tzanes",
"Angelos Akotantos",
"Angelos",
"Tzanes",
"Cretan School",
"Elias Moskos",
"Christ Enthroned",
"Late Cretan School",
"Leos Moskos",
"Zakinthos",
"Ioannis Moskos",
"Kefalonia",
"Byzantine",
"Zakynthos"
] |
|
13581_NT
|
Christ Enthroned (Moskos)
|
Focus on this artwork and discuss the abstract.
|
Christ Enthroned is a tempera painting by Elias Moskos, a representative of the Late Cretan School. The artist was also associated with the Heptanese School due to his migration to Zakinthos and the transition of his painting style. Moskos also taught painting. Most of his students became church committee members. Church committees were responsible for commissioning paintings. He was active from 1645 to 1687 on the islands of Crete, Zakynthos, and Kefalonia. Fifty-two of his works survived, over half of them were signed. Two other painters named Moskos were active during the same period Ioannis Moskos and Leos Moskos.Christ Enthroned was a popular theme among Italian and Greek Byzantine painters. The subject has been depicted since the inception of the new religion. The figure was usually painted in the apse of Byzantine churches. The Cretan School adopted the style. Angelos Akotantos painted one of the earliest signed works in the 1400s. His icon was the framework for later painters of the maniera greca. Moskos painted his own version and significantly refined it. Emmanuel Tzanes painted his own version around the same period. The Moskos version is located at the Icon Museum in Recklinghausen, Germany. It was formerly part of the Minken Collection in London.
|
[
"Heptanese School",
"Crete",
"Emmanuel Tzanes",
"Angelos Akotantos",
"Angelos",
"Tzanes",
"Cretan School",
"Elias Moskos",
"Christ Enthroned",
"Late Cretan School",
"Leos Moskos",
"Zakinthos",
"Ioannis Moskos",
"Kefalonia",
"Byzantine",
"Zakynthos"
] |
|
13582_T
|
Christ Enthroned (Moskos)
|
How does Christ Enthroned (Moskos) elucidate its Description?
|
The painting is egg tempera and gold leaf on wood. The icon features a height of 119 cm (46.8 in) and a width of 85 cm (33.4 in). The work was completed in 1653. Christ is seated on his traditional throne. He is holding an open book. The book features the typical Greek text. The Christ figure is smaller than the Angelos. The icon is heavily decorative. Clear lines are visible throughout the image. The artist chose green and red. The painting heavily follows the maniera greca. The gilded gold background is mostly intact. The inscription is clearly visible. The painter creates a shallow stage for the heavenly figure of Christ. The flesh tones and hair are painted with intricate detail. The artist uses a shadowing technique. The folds of fabric feature striations. The throne illustrates depth it is painted symmetrically and the figure is clearly distinguishable. The throne is made up of three parts. The bottom, the middle, and the top. The bottom portion features, diagonal lines, straight lines, and a half-circle. The middle portion of the throne exactly where the figure is seated features clear diagonal lines. The top part features two symmetric three-dimensional pyramidal wood posts topped by a Cretan renaissance-style decorative ornament.
|
[
"Angelos"
] |
|
13582_NT
|
Christ Enthroned (Moskos)
|
How does this artwork elucidate its Description?
|
The painting is egg tempera and gold leaf on wood. The icon features a height of 119 cm (46.8 in) and a width of 85 cm (33.4 in). The work was completed in 1653. Christ is seated on his traditional throne. He is holding an open book. The book features the typical Greek text. The Christ figure is smaller than the Angelos. The icon is heavily decorative. Clear lines are visible throughout the image. The artist chose green and red. The painting heavily follows the maniera greca. The gilded gold background is mostly intact. The inscription is clearly visible. The painter creates a shallow stage for the heavenly figure of Christ. The flesh tones and hair are painted with intricate detail. The artist uses a shadowing technique. The folds of fabric feature striations. The throne illustrates depth it is painted symmetrically and the figure is clearly distinguishable. The throne is made up of three parts. The bottom, the middle, and the top. The bottom portion features, diagonal lines, straight lines, and a half-circle. The middle portion of the throne exactly where the figure is seated features clear diagonal lines. The top part features two symmetric three-dimensional pyramidal wood posts topped by a Cretan renaissance-style decorative ornament.
|
[
"Angelos"
] |
|
13583_T
|
Normandy Thatched Cottage, Old Trouville
|
Focus on Normandy Thatched Cottage, Old Trouville and analyze the abstract.
|
Normandy Thatched Cottage, Old Trouville (French: Chaumière normande, vieux Trouville) is an oil painting by French artist Paul Huet. It is currently on display at the Musée du Louvre in Paris.
|
[
"Musée du Louvre",
"Louvre",
"Paul Huet",
"Paris"
] |
|
13583_NT
|
Normandy Thatched Cottage, Old Trouville
|
Focus on this artwork and analyze the abstract.
|
Normandy Thatched Cottage, Old Trouville (French: Chaumière normande, vieux Trouville) is an oil painting by French artist Paul Huet. It is currently on display at the Musée du Louvre in Paris.
|
[
"Musée du Louvre",
"Louvre",
"Paul Huet",
"Paris"
] |
|
13584_T
|
Pes-Ke-Le-Cha-Co (Henry Inman)
|
In Pes-Ke-Le-Cha-Co (Henry Inman), how is the abstract discussed?
|
Pes-Ke-Le-Cha-Co is an oil painting by Henry Inman currently on display at the Metropolitan Museum of Art. It depicts Pawnee chief Pes-Ke-Le-Cha-Co as of 1832, painted as a copy of a now destroyed set of paintings by Charles Bird King. It was painted by Inman around 1832 to 1833.
Inman was an American artist who is well known for his portraits. He was asked by Thomas L. McKenney to copy over 100 oil paintings by King and translate them to his set of Native American chief biographies, History of the Indian Tribes of North America.
|
[
"Henry Inman",
"History of the Indian Tribes of North America",
"the Metropolitan Museum of Art",
"Pawnee",
"Thomas L. McKenney",
"Charles Bird King"
] |
|
13584_NT
|
Pes-Ke-Le-Cha-Co (Henry Inman)
|
In this artwork, how is the abstract discussed?
|
Pes-Ke-Le-Cha-Co is an oil painting by Henry Inman currently on display at the Metropolitan Museum of Art. It depicts Pawnee chief Pes-Ke-Le-Cha-Co as of 1832, painted as a copy of a now destroyed set of paintings by Charles Bird King. It was painted by Inman around 1832 to 1833.
Inman was an American artist who is well known for his portraits. He was asked by Thomas L. McKenney to copy over 100 oil paintings by King and translate them to his set of Native American chief biographies, History of the Indian Tribes of North America.
|
[
"Henry Inman",
"History of the Indian Tribes of North America",
"the Metropolitan Museum of Art",
"Pawnee",
"Thomas L. McKenney",
"Charles Bird King"
] |
|
13585_T
|
The Seine at Asnières
|
Focus on The Seine at Asnières and explore the abstract.
|
The Seine at Asnières is an 1873 oil on canvas painting by Claude Monet, now in the Hermitage Museum in St Petersburg. It was previously in the collection of Alice Meyer (née Sieveking; 1866–1949), widow of the extremely rich Hamburg businessman Eduard Lorenz Lorenz-Meyer (1856–1926) before being looted by the USSR after World War II and retained as war reparations. It has been on public display since an exhibition in 1995.Painted a few months after producing Impression, Sunrise, it shows a late afternoon scene with péniches moored at Asnières on the Seine to the north-west of Paris. The small town had recently been linked by rail to Paris via gare Saint-Lazare and was starting to industrialise, with a population of workers and lower-middle-class inhabitants building themselves houses in gritstone or brick, some of which are shown with tree gardens on the opposite bank in the painting. Living at Argenteuil, another town on the Seine slightly to the north, Monet came to paint the subject with his friends.
|
[
"Seine",
"Hermitage Museum",
"gare Saint-Lazare",
"Impression, Sunrise",
"gritstone",
"Argenteuil",
"Asnières",
"Claude Monet",
"World War II",
"péniches"
] |
|
13585_NT
|
The Seine at Asnières
|
Focus on this artwork and explore the abstract.
|
The Seine at Asnières is an 1873 oil on canvas painting by Claude Monet, now in the Hermitage Museum in St Petersburg. It was previously in the collection of Alice Meyer (née Sieveking; 1866–1949), widow of the extremely rich Hamburg businessman Eduard Lorenz Lorenz-Meyer (1856–1926) before being looted by the USSR after World War II and retained as war reparations. It has been on public display since an exhibition in 1995.Painted a few months after producing Impression, Sunrise, it shows a late afternoon scene with péniches moored at Asnières on the Seine to the north-west of Paris. The small town had recently been linked by rail to Paris via gare Saint-Lazare and was starting to industrialise, with a population of workers and lower-middle-class inhabitants building themselves houses in gritstone or brick, some of which are shown with tree gardens on the opposite bank in the painting. Living at Argenteuil, another town on the Seine slightly to the north, Monet came to paint the subject with his friends.
|
[
"Seine",
"Hermitage Museum",
"gare Saint-Lazare",
"Impression, Sunrise",
"gritstone",
"Argenteuil",
"Asnières",
"Claude Monet",
"World War II",
"péniches"
] |
|
13586_T
|
Frederick Douglass Memorial
|
Focus on Frederick Douglass Memorial and explain the abstract.
|
The Frederick Douglass Memorial is a memorial commemorating Frederick Douglass, installed at the northwest corner of New York City's Central Park, in the U.S. state of New York. The memorial includes an 8-foot bronze sculpture depicting Douglass by Gabriel Koren and a large circle and fountain designed by Algernon Miller. Additionally, Quennell Rothschild & Partners is credited as the memorial's architecture, and Polich-Tallix served as the foundry. The memorial was dedicated on September 20, 2011, and was funded by the Percent for Art program and the, New York City Department of Cultural Affairs.
|
[
"New York City",
"Percent for Art",
"Gabriel Koren",
"Frederick Douglass",
"New York",
"U.S. state",
"New York City Department of Cultural Affairs",
"Central Park",
"Douglass"
] |
|
13586_NT
|
Frederick Douglass Memorial
|
Focus on this artwork and explain the abstract.
|
The Frederick Douglass Memorial is a memorial commemorating Frederick Douglass, installed at the northwest corner of New York City's Central Park, in the U.S. state of New York. The memorial includes an 8-foot bronze sculpture depicting Douglass by Gabriel Koren and a large circle and fountain designed by Algernon Miller. Additionally, Quennell Rothschild & Partners is credited as the memorial's architecture, and Polich-Tallix served as the foundry. The memorial was dedicated on September 20, 2011, and was funded by the Percent for Art program and the, New York City Department of Cultural Affairs.
|
[
"New York City",
"Percent for Art",
"Gabriel Koren",
"Frederick Douglass",
"New York",
"U.S. state",
"New York City Department of Cultural Affairs",
"Central Park",
"Douglass"
] |
|
13587_T
|
Love and the Maiden
|
Explore the History of this artwork, Love and the Maiden.
|
Known as one of the "second-generation" of Pre-Raphaelites, Stanhope was among Dante Gabriel Rossetti's mural-painting party at the Oxford Union in 1857, together with Arthur Hughes, John Hungerford Pollen, Valentine Prinsep, Edward Burne-Jones and William Morris. He was a founder member of the Hogarth Club, a direct descendant of the Pre-Raphaelite Brotherhood.This painting is considered one of Stanhope's best, and represents two radically different artistic phases of his life. Although he began as fervently Pre-Raphaelite in outlook, Stanhope was deeply attracted by the Aesthetic movement during the 1860s. Love and the Maiden is a succinct mingling of these two equally formative phases in his career. Its presence in the 1877 exhibition at the Grosvenor Gallery — Aestheticism's most famous exposé — demonstrates his adherence to the latter movement, whereas the painting's similarity to the work of Edward Burne-Jones and Dante Gabriel Rossetti - the group of dancing women in the background are similar to those portrayed by Rossetti in The Bower Meadow (1871–72) - betray Stanhope's Pre-Raphaelite background.
During his time in Oxford in 1857, Stanhope wrote that he spent most days painting with Burne-Jones; possibly as a result of this, a great deal of Burne-Jones' influence can be seen in his work - although it could be argued that Burne-Jones also drew ideas from Stanhope's work. The androgynous physiques, Grecian-style draperies and facial expressions depicted in Love and the Maiden are classic Burne-Jones hallmarks, even though the facial similarities probably also arose from use of the same models.
|
[
"Hogarth Club",
"Dante Gabriel Rossetti",
"Oxford",
"Valentine Prinsep",
"Pre-Raphaelites",
"John Hungerford Pollen",
"mural-painting party",
"Pre-Raphaelite Brotherhood",
"Grosvenor Gallery",
"Aestheticism",
"William Morris",
"Burne-Jones",
"Oxford Union",
"androgynous",
"Aesthetic movement",
"Edward Burne-Jones",
"Pre-Raphaelite",
"Arthur Hughes"
] |
|
13587_NT
|
Love and the Maiden
|
Explore the History of this artwork.
|
Known as one of the "second-generation" of Pre-Raphaelites, Stanhope was among Dante Gabriel Rossetti's mural-painting party at the Oxford Union in 1857, together with Arthur Hughes, John Hungerford Pollen, Valentine Prinsep, Edward Burne-Jones and William Morris. He was a founder member of the Hogarth Club, a direct descendant of the Pre-Raphaelite Brotherhood.This painting is considered one of Stanhope's best, and represents two radically different artistic phases of his life. Although he began as fervently Pre-Raphaelite in outlook, Stanhope was deeply attracted by the Aesthetic movement during the 1860s. Love and the Maiden is a succinct mingling of these two equally formative phases in his career. Its presence in the 1877 exhibition at the Grosvenor Gallery — Aestheticism's most famous exposé — demonstrates his adherence to the latter movement, whereas the painting's similarity to the work of Edward Burne-Jones and Dante Gabriel Rossetti - the group of dancing women in the background are similar to those portrayed by Rossetti in The Bower Meadow (1871–72) - betray Stanhope's Pre-Raphaelite background.
During his time in Oxford in 1857, Stanhope wrote that he spent most days painting with Burne-Jones; possibly as a result of this, a great deal of Burne-Jones' influence can be seen in his work - although it could be argued that Burne-Jones also drew ideas from Stanhope's work. The androgynous physiques, Grecian-style draperies and facial expressions depicted in Love and the Maiden are classic Burne-Jones hallmarks, even though the facial similarities probably also arose from use of the same models.
|
[
"Hogarth Club",
"Dante Gabriel Rossetti",
"Oxford",
"Valentine Prinsep",
"Pre-Raphaelites",
"John Hungerford Pollen",
"mural-painting party",
"Pre-Raphaelite Brotherhood",
"Grosvenor Gallery",
"Aestheticism",
"William Morris",
"Burne-Jones",
"Oxford Union",
"androgynous",
"Aesthetic movement",
"Edward Burne-Jones",
"Pre-Raphaelite",
"Arthur Hughes"
] |
|
13588_T
|
Hutten's Grave
|
Focus on Hutten's Grave and discuss the abstract.
|
Hutten's Grave (1823) is an oil on canvas painting by Caspar David Friedrich, showing a man in Lützow Free Corps uniform standing by the grave of the Renaissance humanist and German nationalist Ulrich von Hutten. Influenced heavily by the political climate of the time and Friedrich's own political beliefs, the painting is one of Friedrich's most political works and affirms his allegiance to the German nationalist movement. The painting was made to commemorate the 300th anniversary of Hutten's death and the 10th anniversary of Napoleon's invasion of Germany.It is now in the Klassik Stiftung Weimar's collection and on show in the Schlossmuseum at the Stadtschloss Weimar.
|
[
"Napoleon",
"Stadtschloss Weimar",
"Lützow Free Corps",
"Klassik Stiftung Weimar",
"Ulrich von Hutten",
"Caspar David Friedrich",
"Napoleon's invasion of Germany",
"German nationalist",
"oil on canvas"
] |
|
13588_NT
|
Hutten's Grave
|
Focus on this artwork and discuss the abstract.
|
Hutten's Grave (1823) is an oil on canvas painting by Caspar David Friedrich, showing a man in Lützow Free Corps uniform standing by the grave of the Renaissance humanist and German nationalist Ulrich von Hutten. Influenced heavily by the political climate of the time and Friedrich's own political beliefs, the painting is one of Friedrich's most political works and affirms his allegiance to the German nationalist movement. The painting was made to commemorate the 300th anniversary of Hutten's death and the 10th anniversary of Napoleon's invasion of Germany.It is now in the Klassik Stiftung Weimar's collection and on show in the Schlossmuseum at the Stadtschloss Weimar.
|
[
"Napoleon",
"Stadtschloss Weimar",
"Lützow Free Corps",
"Klassik Stiftung Weimar",
"Ulrich von Hutten",
"Caspar David Friedrich",
"Napoleon's invasion of Germany",
"German nationalist",
"oil on canvas"
] |
|
13589_T
|
Hutten's Grave
|
How does Hutten's Grave elucidate its Background?
|
Following the defeat of Napoleon at the Battle of Leipzig in 1813, the ideas of German unification and nationalism gained momentum. The center of new liberal ideas was the universities. However, these ideas troubled the ruling elite and the new order established by the Congress of Vienna (1814-1815). As a result, the members of the German Confederation instituted the Carlsbad Decrees in 1819, which severely limited free speech and banned the teaching of liberal ideas in universities. Friedrich saw these developments as a betrayal of the spirit of those who had fought against Napoleon. He wanted to create a work that would honor liberal ideas and serve as a monument to those who had died in pursuit of them.
|
[
"Napoleon",
"Congress of Vienna",
"Carlsbad Decrees",
"German Confederation",
"Battle of Leipzig"
] |
|
13589_NT
|
Hutten's Grave
|
How does this artwork elucidate its Background?
|
Following the defeat of Napoleon at the Battle of Leipzig in 1813, the ideas of German unification and nationalism gained momentum. The center of new liberal ideas was the universities. However, these ideas troubled the ruling elite and the new order established by the Congress of Vienna (1814-1815). As a result, the members of the German Confederation instituted the Carlsbad Decrees in 1819, which severely limited free speech and banned the teaching of liberal ideas in universities. Friedrich saw these developments as a betrayal of the spirit of those who had fought against Napoleon. He wanted to create a work that would honor liberal ideas and serve as a monument to those who had died in pursuit of them.
|
[
"Napoleon",
"Congress of Vienna",
"Carlsbad Decrees",
"German Confederation",
"Battle of Leipzig"
] |
|
13590_T
|
Hutten's Grave
|
Focus on Hutten's Grave and analyze the Composition and symbolism.
|
In this work, Friedrich combines the political and religious in an overt manner that is unlike many of his previous works. The gothic ruin that serves as the setting for the image is based on a monastery in the German city of Oybin. The man in the image is wearing altdeutsch (old German) attire which grew popular during Napoleon's campaign as a symbol of anti-French sentiment. The style was also adopted by the Lützow Free Corps. Those who viewed the image at the time would have recognized this style and its political meaning. Friedrich's decision to depict the grave of Ulrich von Hutten was also political. Hutten was a German nationalist and a contemporary of Martin Luther. These values were very important to Friedrich, who wanted German unity and was a devout Lutheran himself. Several names and years are inscribed on the tomb: "Jahn 1813," "Arndt 1813," "Stein 1813," "Görres 1821," and "Scharnhorst.": 98 All of these men were contemporaries of Friedrich and all were German nationalist thinkers. Scharnhorst died in the Battle of Leipzig and the rest faced persecution and even exile for spreading liberal ideas. By combining the tomb of Hutten with the names of contemporary nationalist thinkers Friedrich linked together the past and present of German nationalist thinking. He also called attention to the repression of liberal ideas and what he saw as the failure of the regional elite to embrace reforms.Friedrich incorporates religious symbols with the political message. The most apparent is the headless statue of Faith in the background. Scholar have interpreted the figure as a symbol of mourning and as reference to the falling importance of religion. Other symbols that further emphasize the sense of death are the tomb and the dead tree in the foreground. The lancet windows have been interpreted to represent the outlines of Saints watching over both the tomb and man. Some scholars have pointed to the separation between the inside and outside of the ruin as representing the difference between Catholicism and Lutheranism respectively. The inside shows the old Catholic order as broken, while the expanse of the outside world, representing Lutheranism, gives a sense of freedom and hope.Strictly speaking, the figure in the image is not an example of a Rückenfigur; instead of being fully turned, he is half turned so that we are able to see his face. But the man functions in much the same way as a fully turned Rückenfigur, inviting subjective identification. The man here represents what Joseph Koerner has described as a "missed encounter with history" in which the future of German reunification can only be imagined through an unresolved relationship with the past.: 244
|
[
"Napoleon",
"Lützow Free Corps",
"Lutheranism",
"Ulrich von Hutten",
"Rückenfigur",
"altdeutsch",
"monastery",
"Lutheran",
"lancet windows",
"Arndt",
"German nationalist",
"Görres",
"Saint",
"Battle of Leipzig",
"gothic",
"Oybin",
"Martin Luther",
"Jahn",
"Stein",
"Napoleon's campaign",
"Saints",
"Joseph Koerner",
"Catholicism",
"Scharnhorst"
] |
|
13590_NT
|
Hutten's Grave
|
Focus on this artwork and analyze the Composition and symbolism.
|
In this work, Friedrich combines the political and religious in an overt manner that is unlike many of his previous works. The gothic ruin that serves as the setting for the image is based on a monastery in the German city of Oybin. The man in the image is wearing altdeutsch (old German) attire which grew popular during Napoleon's campaign as a symbol of anti-French sentiment. The style was also adopted by the Lützow Free Corps. Those who viewed the image at the time would have recognized this style and its political meaning. Friedrich's decision to depict the grave of Ulrich von Hutten was also political. Hutten was a German nationalist and a contemporary of Martin Luther. These values were very important to Friedrich, who wanted German unity and was a devout Lutheran himself. Several names and years are inscribed on the tomb: "Jahn 1813," "Arndt 1813," "Stein 1813," "Görres 1821," and "Scharnhorst.": 98 All of these men were contemporaries of Friedrich and all were German nationalist thinkers. Scharnhorst died in the Battle of Leipzig and the rest faced persecution and even exile for spreading liberal ideas. By combining the tomb of Hutten with the names of contemporary nationalist thinkers Friedrich linked together the past and present of German nationalist thinking. He also called attention to the repression of liberal ideas and what he saw as the failure of the regional elite to embrace reforms.Friedrich incorporates religious symbols with the political message. The most apparent is the headless statue of Faith in the background. Scholar have interpreted the figure as a symbol of mourning and as reference to the falling importance of religion. Other symbols that further emphasize the sense of death are the tomb and the dead tree in the foreground. The lancet windows have been interpreted to represent the outlines of Saints watching over both the tomb and man. Some scholars have pointed to the separation between the inside and outside of the ruin as representing the difference between Catholicism and Lutheranism respectively. The inside shows the old Catholic order as broken, while the expanse of the outside world, representing Lutheranism, gives a sense of freedom and hope.Strictly speaking, the figure in the image is not an example of a Rückenfigur; instead of being fully turned, he is half turned so that we are able to see his face. But the man functions in much the same way as a fully turned Rückenfigur, inviting subjective identification. The man here represents what Joseph Koerner has described as a "missed encounter with history" in which the future of German reunification can only be imagined through an unresolved relationship with the past.: 244
|
[
"Napoleon",
"Lützow Free Corps",
"Lutheranism",
"Ulrich von Hutten",
"Rückenfigur",
"altdeutsch",
"monastery",
"Lutheran",
"lancet windows",
"Arndt",
"German nationalist",
"Görres",
"Saint",
"Battle of Leipzig",
"gothic",
"Oybin",
"Martin Luther",
"Jahn",
"Stein",
"Napoleon's campaign",
"Saints",
"Joseph Koerner",
"Catholicism",
"Scharnhorst"
] |
|
13591_T
|
Hutten's Grave
|
In Hutten's Grave, how is the Related Works discussed?
|
Wanderer Above the Sea of Fog (1818)
In this image, the main figure is also wearing altdeutsch attire, which is also meant to allude to his military experience and German heritage.
Two Men Contemplating the Moon (1819-1820)
Here two figures also in altdeutsch attire stand looking at the moon. This image is also widely seen as being a political critique of the repressive government following the Congress of Vienna.
Ruins at Oybin (1812)
Friedrich reused the setting in this image for the setting in Hutten's Grave.
|
[
"Congress of Vienna",
"altdeutsch",
"Wanderer Above the Sea of Fog",
"Two Men Contemplating the Moon",
"Oybin"
] |
|
13591_NT
|
Hutten's Grave
|
In this artwork, how is the Related Works discussed?
|
Wanderer Above the Sea of Fog (1818)
In this image, the main figure is also wearing altdeutsch attire, which is also meant to allude to his military experience and German heritage.
Two Men Contemplating the Moon (1819-1820)
Here two figures also in altdeutsch attire stand looking at the moon. This image is also widely seen as being a political critique of the repressive government following the Congress of Vienna.
Ruins at Oybin (1812)
Friedrich reused the setting in this image for the setting in Hutten's Grave.
|
[
"Congress of Vienna",
"altdeutsch",
"Wanderer Above the Sea of Fog",
"Two Men Contemplating the Moon",
"Oybin"
] |
|
13592_T
|
Hutten's Grave
|
Focus on Hutten's Grave and explore the Legacy.
|
Hutten's Grave and Friedrich's other works related to German nationalism and heritage were later coopted by the Nazis to promote their ideology. The Nazis highlighted the elements of nationalism, German unification, and sacrifice. This association tainted Friedrich's reputation and required decades of scholarship to resurrect his reputation.
|
[
"German nationalism",
"Nazis"
] |
|
13592_NT
|
Hutten's Grave
|
Focus on this artwork and explore the Legacy.
|
Hutten's Grave and Friedrich's other works related to German nationalism and heritage were later coopted by the Nazis to promote their ideology. The Nazis highlighted the elements of nationalism, German unification, and sacrifice. This association tainted Friedrich's reputation and required decades of scholarship to resurrect his reputation.
|
[
"German nationalism",
"Nazis"
] |
|
13593_T
|
Torso Fragment
|
Focus on Torso Fragment and explain the abstract.
|
Torso Fragment, a public sculpture by the American artist Casey Eskridge, is located on the Indiana University–Purdue University Indianapolis (IUPUI) campus, near downtown Indianapolis, Indiana. The piece was donated to IUPUI and is located outside of the west entrance to Eskenazi Hall on the IUPUI campus. Eskenazi Hall houses Indiana University’s Herron School of Art and Design and is located at 735 W. New York Street in Indianapolis. The sculpture was created in 2005.
Torso Fragment is 20" long by 17" wide by 37" high. The metal work of public art stands atop a concrete base, with a label identifying the artist, title and year of creation on the proper front (south side) of the base.
|
[
"Eskenazi Hall",
"Torso",
"Indianapolis",
"Indiana University",
"sculpture",
"concrete",
"Indianapolis, Indiana",
"Indiana University–Purdue University Indianapolis",
"Indiana",
"Herron School of Art and Design",
"public art",
"Casey Eskridge"
] |
|
13593_NT
|
Torso Fragment
|
Focus on this artwork and explain the abstract.
|
Torso Fragment, a public sculpture by the American artist Casey Eskridge, is located on the Indiana University–Purdue University Indianapolis (IUPUI) campus, near downtown Indianapolis, Indiana. The piece was donated to IUPUI and is located outside of the west entrance to Eskenazi Hall on the IUPUI campus. Eskenazi Hall houses Indiana University’s Herron School of Art and Design and is located at 735 W. New York Street in Indianapolis. The sculpture was created in 2005.
Torso Fragment is 20" long by 17" wide by 37" high. The metal work of public art stands atop a concrete base, with a label identifying the artist, title and year of creation on the proper front (south side) of the base.
|
[
"Eskenazi Hall",
"Torso",
"Indianapolis",
"Indiana University",
"sculpture",
"concrete",
"Indianapolis, Indiana",
"Indiana University–Purdue University Indianapolis",
"Indiana",
"Herron School of Art and Design",
"public art",
"Casey Eskridge"
] |
|
13594_T
|
Torso Fragment
|
Explore the Description of this artwork, Torso Fragment.
|
"The torso piece, commissioned by his alma mater, the Herron School of Art and Design in Indianapolis, resembles a piece from classical antiquity, except that instead of being carved in stone, it's formed from aluminum." Eskridge's creation of Torso Fragment was clearly influenced by the classical sculpture developed during the 5th century BC in Ancient Greece and the exaggerated contrapposto form.
This silver sculpture of a male torso twists in a classical S Curve form, with the proper right thigh extending forward and its counterpart — the proper left thigh — in a flexed, straight position. The S Curve continues with a slight twist in the torso and finishes with the proper right shoulder raised while proper left shoulder slacked and extended downward. The sculpture has been described as "a truncated male figure that shows a muscular torso slightly turned - might have been lifted from an archaeological ruin." Departing from this reference to classical sculpture, Torso Fragment is hollow and aluminum, reminding a viewer of its modern origins.
|
[
"Torso",
"right",
"Indianapolis",
"sculpture",
"contrapposto",
"Indiana",
"S Curve",
"Herron School of Art and Design",
"Ancient Greece",
"torso",
"classical sculpture"
] |
|
13594_NT
|
Torso Fragment
|
Explore the Description of this artwork.
|
"The torso piece, commissioned by his alma mater, the Herron School of Art and Design in Indianapolis, resembles a piece from classical antiquity, except that instead of being carved in stone, it's formed from aluminum." Eskridge's creation of Torso Fragment was clearly influenced by the classical sculpture developed during the 5th century BC in Ancient Greece and the exaggerated contrapposto form.
This silver sculpture of a male torso twists in a classical S Curve form, with the proper right thigh extending forward and its counterpart — the proper left thigh — in a flexed, straight position. The S Curve continues with a slight twist in the torso and finishes with the proper right shoulder raised while proper left shoulder slacked and extended downward. The sculpture has been described as "a truncated male figure that shows a muscular torso slightly turned - might have been lifted from an archaeological ruin." Departing from this reference to classical sculpture, Torso Fragment is hollow and aluminum, reminding a viewer of its modern origins.
|
[
"Torso",
"right",
"Indianapolis",
"sculpture",
"contrapposto",
"Indiana",
"S Curve",
"Herron School of Art and Design",
"Ancient Greece",
"torso",
"classical sculpture"
] |
|
13595_T
|
Torso Fragment
|
Focus on Torso Fragment and discuss the Artist.
|
Casey Eskridge grew up in rural Indiana, the son of a farmer. He spent his time “playing sports and being outdoors”. Eskridge is best known for a “naturalistic approach to the figure, recognizing human imperfections and the character within the figure". Eskridge, who earned his bachelor's degree from the Herron School of Art and Design in 1997 received his Master of Fine Arts degree in 2002 from the Pennsylvania Academy of Fine Arts in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. He works from his home, a "converted church built in 1873 in the southern Chester County", in Avondale, Pennsylvania, as a professional sculptor.
|
[
"Pennsylvania Academy of Fine Arts",
"Philadelphia",
"Avondale, Pennsylvania",
"Indiana",
"Herron School of Art and Design",
"Philadelphia, Pennsylvania",
"Master of Fine Arts",
"Casey Eskridge"
] |
|
13595_NT
|
Torso Fragment
|
Focus on this artwork and discuss the Artist.
|
Casey Eskridge grew up in rural Indiana, the son of a farmer. He spent his time “playing sports and being outdoors”. Eskridge is best known for a “naturalistic approach to the figure, recognizing human imperfections and the character within the figure". Eskridge, who earned his bachelor's degree from the Herron School of Art and Design in 1997 received his Master of Fine Arts degree in 2002 from the Pennsylvania Academy of Fine Arts in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. He works from his home, a "converted church built in 1873 in the southern Chester County", in Avondale, Pennsylvania, as a professional sculptor.
|
[
"Pennsylvania Academy of Fine Arts",
"Philadelphia",
"Avondale, Pennsylvania",
"Indiana",
"Herron School of Art and Design",
"Philadelphia, Pennsylvania",
"Master of Fine Arts",
"Casey Eskridge"
] |
|
13596_T
|
Ovid among the Scythians
|
How does Ovid among the Scythians elucidate its abstract?
|
Ovid among the Scythians (1859 and 1862) is the title of two oil paintings by French artist Eugène Delacroix. The less famous second version was painted to integrate the figures and landscape and rectified the problems of scale of the first version, which had an unusual composition and strange scale of the characters, provoking negative criticism, even among Delacroix's admirers such as Baudelaire and Gautier, although artists like Edgar Degas were deeply impressed.Delacroix painted this subject first in 1844 as part of the decorations for the ceiling of the Library of the Palais Bourbon in Paris, in a painting there titled Ovid Chez Les Barbares. They depict the life of the Ancient Roman poet Ovid when exiled by the Emperor Augustus to the Black Sea port of Tomis, in what was then part of Scythia and is now south east Romania, where he spent his last eight years and wrote poems such as Tristia and Epistulae ex Ponto. The Scythians were an ancient Iranian peoples whose way of life was described by Herodotus in his Histories as "nomadic" and Ovid himself called them a "wild tribe".However, with its cultured man standing before barbarous people, the 1859 picture show the Scythians treating the poet with sympathy and curiosity, and is a fine treatment of the theme of civilisation confronted with barbarity. Henri Loyrette wrote:Low but sometimes steep mountains covered with scrubby vegetation surround a still, shallow lake, boggy at its edges; scattered huts built precariously of wood and thatch suggest a pastoral and nomadic culture. In the foreground a man milks a large mare; behind him, various figures are casually placed, squatting, walking or standing still – a child, an old man, a nursling in its mother's arms, soldiers, resting shepherds. And, dolefully stretched out on a gentle incline, swathed in drapery, lies the figure identified by the painting's title as Ovid. He appears like a fallen meteorite on whom converge the friendly but startled inhabitants of this savage country. Delacroix has given him the pose of a Madonna in a Nativity [...].
The first version was exhibited in the Paris Salon of 1859, the last in which Delacroix participated. The composition reinterprets ideas that Delacroix had previously used in decorative compositions such as The Massacre at Chios, Death of Sardanapalus and Entry of the Crusaders in Constantinople. At the time of its exhibition, the landscape with its mountains was "universally" praised, while the mare in the foreground was thought strange by some. Théophile Gautier, for example, admired the painting, but ironically called the mare la femelle du cheval de Troie ("the female of the trojan horse"). Maxime Du Camp was the author of the harshest criticism, calling the painting "a spectacle of irremissible decadence" and advising the painter "to return to the literary works that he loves and to the music for which he was certainly born". Baudelaire, in his last Salon criticism, called the painting "one of these amazing works" and saying "Delacroix knows the design and painting", and also wrote a long essay on the life of an exiled poet and also quoting Chateaubriand's epic Les Martyrs to evoke "the landscape, its solitude, its calm charm". Zacharie Astruc, in his first Salon criticism, praised all the details in the picture: Ovid ("what noble elegance!"); the mare ("what color and air around it!"); the dog, which made him think about classical sculpture; the water ("a strange beauty"); and, above all, the landscape. In the catalog, by Delacroix himself, was written: "Some examine him [Ovid] with interest, others go home and offer wild fruit and mare's milk, etc., etc."The wildness and the misunderstood genius were key concepts in Romanticism and are very well portrayed in these two paintings by Delacroix. The second version, contrary to what one might think, is not an oil sketch but a completed version which develops many elements of the London work. Delacroix painted it with more vivid colors, replaced the barbarian with a shield on the back by a woman bringing food, and also closely integrated the figures and landscape in a manner that is more in keeping with a historical landscape. It was painted a year before his death, in 1862, most probably for a private collector. It was given to Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, in honour of Philippe de Montebello, in 2008. According to the art historian Gary Tinterow: "This is his late, final statement on a theme that interested him his whole life."
|
[
"Madonna",
"mare",
"Death of Sardanapalus",
"Henri Loyrette",
"Palais Bourbon",
"Paris Salon",
"ceiling",
"squatting",
"Histories",
"Scythia",
"shield",
"barbarous",
"Romanticism",
"Les Martyrs",
"landscape",
"Tris",
"Ep",
"French",
"Baudelaire",
"Chateaubriand",
"exhibited",
"Romania",
"exiled",
"Zacharie Astruc",
"nomad",
"Ovid",
"Edgar Degas",
"Gary Tinterow",
"Théophile Gautier",
"Gautier",
"wildness",
"London",
"Paris",
"civilisation",
"Tristia",
"Ancient Roman",
"criticism",
"Tomis",
"oil sketch",
"Black Sea",
"Entry of the Crusaders in Constantinople",
"Iranian peoples",
"Nativity",
"The Massacre at Chios",
"Herodotus",
"Eugène Delacroix",
"trojan horse",
"Augustus",
"Maxime Du Camp",
"Scythians",
"tribe",
"Epistulae ex Ponto",
"misunderstood genius",
"Metropolitan Museum of Art"
] |
|
13596_NT
|
Ovid among the Scythians
|
How does this artwork elucidate its abstract?
|
Ovid among the Scythians (1859 and 1862) is the title of two oil paintings by French artist Eugène Delacroix. The less famous second version was painted to integrate the figures and landscape and rectified the problems of scale of the first version, which had an unusual composition and strange scale of the characters, provoking negative criticism, even among Delacroix's admirers such as Baudelaire and Gautier, although artists like Edgar Degas were deeply impressed.Delacroix painted this subject first in 1844 as part of the decorations for the ceiling of the Library of the Palais Bourbon in Paris, in a painting there titled Ovid Chez Les Barbares. They depict the life of the Ancient Roman poet Ovid when exiled by the Emperor Augustus to the Black Sea port of Tomis, in what was then part of Scythia and is now south east Romania, where he spent his last eight years and wrote poems such as Tristia and Epistulae ex Ponto. The Scythians were an ancient Iranian peoples whose way of life was described by Herodotus in his Histories as "nomadic" and Ovid himself called them a "wild tribe".However, with its cultured man standing before barbarous people, the 1859 picture show the Scythians treating the poet with sympathy and curiosity, and is a fine treatment of the theme of civilisation confronted with barbarity. Henri Loyrette wrote:Low but sometimes steep mountains covered with scrubby vegetation surround a still, shallow lake, boggy at its edges; scattered huts built precariously of wood and thatch suggest a pastoral and nomadic culture. In the foreground a man milks a large mare; behind him, various figures are casually placed, squatting, walking or standing still – a child, an old man, a nursling in its mother's arms, soldiers, resting shepherds. And, dolefully stretched out on a gentle incline, swathed in drapery, lies the figure identified by the painting's title as Ovid. He appears like a fallen meteorite on whom converge the friendly but startled inhabitants of this savage country. Delacroix has given him the pose of a Madonna in a Nativity [...].
The first version was exhibited in the Paris Salon of 1859, the last in which Delacroix participated. The composition reinterprets ideas that Delacroix had previously used in decorative compositions such as The Massacre at Chios, Death of Sardanapalus and Entry of the Crusaders in Constantinople. At the time of its exhibition, the landscape with its mountains was "universally" praised, while the mare in the foreground was thought strange by some. Théophile Gautier, for example, admired the painting, but ironically called the mare la femelle du cheval de Troie ("the female of the trojan horse"). Maxime Du Camp was the author of the harshest criticism, calling the painting "a spectacle of irremissible decadence" and advising the painter "to return to the literary works that he loves and to the music for which he was certainly born". Baudelaire, in his last Salon criticism, called the painting "one of these amazing works" and saying "Delacroix knows the design and painting", and also wrote a long essay on the life of an exiled poet and also quoting Chateaubriand's epic Les Martyrs to evoke "the landscape, its solitude, its calm charm". Zacharie Astruc, in his first Salon criticism, praised all the details in the picture: Ovid ("what noble elegance!"); the mare ("what color and air around it!"); the dog, which made him think about classical sculpture; the water ("a strange beauty"); and, above all, the landscape. In the catalog, by Delacroix himself, was written: "Some examine him [Ovid] with interest, others go home and offer wild fruit and mare's milk, etc., etc."The wildness and the misunderstood genius were key concepts in Romanticism and are very well portrayed in these two paintings by Delacroix. The second version, contrary to what one might think, is not an oil sketch but a completed version which develops many elements of the London work. Delacroix painted it with more vivid colors, replaced the barbarian with a shield on the back by a woman bringing food, and also closely integrated the figures and landscape in a manner that is more in keeping with a historical landscape. It was painted a year before his death, in 1862, most probably for a private collector. It was given to Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, in honour of Philippe de Montebello, in 2008. According to the art historian Gary Tinterow: "This is his late, final statement on a theme that interested him his whole life."
|
[
"Madonna",
"mare",
"Death of Sardanapalus",
"Henri Loyrette",
"Palais Bourbon",
"Paris Salon",
"ceiling",
"squatting",
"Histories",
"Scythia",
"shield",
"barbarous",
"Romanticism",
"Les Martyrs",
"landscape",
"Tris",
"Ep",
"French",
"Baudelaire",
"Chateaubriand",
"exhibited",
"Romania",
"exiled",
"Zacharie Astruc",
"nomad",
"Ovid",
"Edgar Degas",
"Gary Tinterow",
"Théophile Gautier",
"Gautier",
"wildness",
"London",
"Paris",
"civilisation",
"Tristia",
"Ancient Roman",
"criticism",
"Tomis",
"oil sketch",
"Black Sea",
"Entry of the Crusaders in Constantinople",
"Iranian peoples",
"Nativity",
"The Massacre at Chios",
"Herodotus",
"Eugène Delacroix",
"trojan horse",
"Augustus",
"Maxime Du Camp",
"Scythians",
"tribe",
"Epistulae ex Ponto",
"misunderstood genius",
"Metropolitan Museum of Art"
] |
|
13597_T
|
Afternoon Tea
|
Focus on Afternoon Tea and analyze the abstract.
|
Afternoon Tea is a 1910 oil painting by American artist Richard E. Miller, located in the Indianapolis Museum of Art. Like many of Miller's paintings, it depicts women in a sunny scene, filled with flowers, depicted in his Impressionist style with a distinct flavor of Japonism.
|
[
"Japonism",
"Indianapolis",
"Richard E. Miller",
"Indianapolis Museum of Art",
"Impressionist",
"oil painting"
] |
|
13597_NT
|
Afternoon Tea
|
Focus on this artwork and analyze the abstract.
|
Afternoon Tea is a 1910 oil painting by American artist Richard E. Miller, located in the Indianapolis Museum of Art. Like many of Miller's paintings, it depicts women in a sunny scene, filled with flowers, depicted in his Impressionist style with a distinct flavor of Japonism.
|
[
"Japonism",
"Indianapolis",
"Richard E. Miller",
"Indianapolis Museum of Art",
"Impressionist",
"oil painting"
] |
|
13598_T
|
Afternoon Tea
|
In Afternoon Tea, how is the Description discussed?
|
Afternoon Tea has been lauded as one of Miller's best paintings, "a confident, mature work and an absolute knockout in coloristic power." He applied vibrant colors like bright reds, greens, and purples with artistic license, driven by decorative concerns rather than objective truth. By framing the two women with a Japanese parasol, Miller created a focal point that unified the disparate colors, patterns, and textures he juxtaposed so boldly, a hallmark of his particular style of Impressionism. The parasol was a device Miller would use over and over again, enamored of its "circular shape, ribbed structure, [and] colorful surface designs." The prominent brushstrokes are also a key feature of Miller's mature works.
|
[
"Impressionism",
"Japan",
"parasol"
] |
|
13598_NT
|
Afternoon Tea
|
In this artwork, how is the Description discussed?
|
Afternoon Tea has been lauded as one of Miller's best paintings, "a confident, mature work and an absolute knockout in coloristic power." He applied vibrant colors like bright reds, greens, and purples with artistic license, driven by decorative concerns rather than objective truth. By framing the two women with a Japanese parasol, Miller created a focal point that unified the disparate colors, patterns, and textures he juxtaposed so boldly, a hallmark of his particular style of Impressionism. The parasol was a device Miller would use over and over again, enamored of its "circular shape, ribbed structure, [and] colorful surface designs." The prominent brushstrokes are also a key feature of Miller's mature works.
|
[
"Impressionism",
"Japan",
"parasol"
] |
|
13599_T
|
Afternoon Tea
|
Focus on Afternoon Tea and explore the Historical information.
|
This painting was produced when Miller was at an important artistic crossroads, shifting from academic portraits to more animated images of contemporary women. The real subject, though, was paint itself, and the joy he derived from its manipulation.Miller was a member of the Giverny Group, a group of American Impressionists who settled in Northern France to be near Claude Monet. They preferred to produce paintings of women in sun-drenched landscapes, emphasizing bold contrasts and patterns. They, Miller included, embraced whole-heartedly the mania for Japanese aesthetics that swept France at the turn of the twentieth century. He filled his studio with fans, kimonos, ceramics, and other souvenirs. World War I dislodged them from the region; Miller returned to America in 1914.
|
[
"World War I",
"Giverny",
"American Impressionists",
"Japan",
"Giverny Group",
"Impressionist",
"Claude Monet"
] |
|
13599_NT
|
Afternoon Tea
|
Focus on this artwork and explore the Historical information.
|
This painting was produced when Miller was at an important artistic crossroads, shifting from academic portraits to more animated images of contemporary women. The real subject, though, was paint itself, and the joy he derived from its manipulation.Miller was a member of the Giverny Group, a group of American Impressionists who settled in Northern France to be near Claude Monet. They preferred to produce paintings of women in sun-drenched landscapes, emphasizing bold contrasts and patterns. They, Miller included, embraced whole-heartedly the mania for Japanese aesthetics that swept France at the turn of the twentieth century. He filled his studio with fans, kimonos, ceramics, and other souvenirs. World War I dislodged them from the region; Miller returned to America in 1914.
|
[
"World War I",
"Giverny",
"American Impressionists",
"Japan",
"Giverny Group",
"Impressionist",
"Claude Monet"
] |
|
13600_T
|
Afternoon Tea
|
In the context of Afternoon Tea, explain the Acquisition of the Historical information.
|
Afternoon Tea was vigorously pursued by IMA curator Ellen Lee to flesh out the museum's American Impressionism collection. Her research confirmed that it was a long-lost Miller masterpiece mentioned in the artist's scrapbook but not seen for years. Thus, she convinced IMA benefactors Jane and Andrew Paine to bid on it on December 4, 1997, at Christie's New York auction house, in the middle of an exciting week that also saw the museum acquire an important (and costly) Belgian Neo-Impressionist painting and an early Netherlandish triptych. The final price was $1,047,500, considerably higher than the initial estimate of $500,000–$700,000. It is currently on view as a promised gift in the American gallery with the accession number 1997.139.
|
[
"Impressionism",
"American Impressionism",
"Christie's",
"Impressionist",
"Netherlandish",
"Neo-Impressionist",
"triptych"
] |
|
13600_NT
|
Afternoon Tea
|
In the context of this artwork, explain the Acquisition of the Historical information.
|
Afternoon Tea was vigorously pursued by IMA curator Ellen Lee to flesh out the museum's American Impressionism collection. Her research confirmed that it was a long-lost Miller masterpiece mentioned in the artist's scrapbook but not seen for years. Thus, she convinced IMA benefactors Jane and Andrew Paine to bid on it on December 4, 1997, at Christie's New York auction house, in the middle of an exciting week that also saw the museum acquire an important (and costly) Belgian Neo-Impressionist painting and an early Netherlandish triptych. The final price was $1,047,500, considerably higher than the initial estimate of $500,000–$700,000. It is currently on view as a promised gift in the American gallery with the accession number 1997.139.
|
[
"Impressionism",
"American Impressionism",
"Christie's",
"Impressionist",
"Netherlandish",
"Neo-Impressionist",
"triptych"
] |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.