ID
stringlengths 6
8
| title
stringlengths 3
136
| question
stringlengths 33
235
| answer
stringlengths 51
15.3k
| image_url
stringlengths 57
817
| entities
sequence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
18501_T | Midvinterblot | In the context of Midvinterblot, explore the First version of the Evolution of the work. | The earliest known sketch (No. 236) is made in graphite and is located in the Carl Larsson museum in Sundborn. It was dated by Karl Axel Arvidsson to a time shortly after the visit to Copenhagen in 1910. In July, Larsson started to paint a large version, which was finished in January 1911, but it is only preserved in a photograph. It is based on the early sketch but it presents a richer set of figures in the foreground. The early version was put on display in Nationalmuseum without receiving any official comments. There was no formal order and no official contest had been declared, and the initiative was only Larsson's.An anonymous writer calling himself "Archaeologist" voiced harsh criticism in Dagens Nyheter on February 20, 1911. The writer stated that there were several anachronisms in the painting which had been combined freely. The anonymous writer called the temple a "summer restaurant" decorated with motives from the Biological museum in Stockholm and he considered the dresses in the painting to be as preposterous as a Swedish farm with camels walking around the dunghill. | [
"Carl Larsson",
"Stockholm",
"Nationalmuseum",
"Copenhagen",
"Biological museum",
"Dagens Nyheter",
"No."
] |
|
18501_NT | Midvinterblot | In the context of this artwork, explore the First version of the Evolution of the work. | The earliest known sketch (No. 236) is made in graphite and is located in the Carl Larsson museum in Sundborn. It was dated by Karl Axel Arvidsson to a time shortly after the visit to Copenhagen in 1910. In July, Larsson started to paint a large version, which was finished in January 1911, but it is only preserved in a photograph. It is based on the early sketch but it presents a richer set of figures in the foreground. The early version was put on display in Nationalmuseum without receiving any official comments. There was no formal order and no official contest had been declared, and the initiative was only Larsson's.An anonymous writer calling himself "Archaeologist" voiced harsh criticism in Dagens Nyheter on February 20, 1911. The writer stated that there were several anachronisms in the painting which had been combined freely. The anonymous writer called the temple a "summer restaurant" decorated with motives from the Biological museum in Stockholm and he considered the dresses in the painting to be as preposterous as a Swedish farm with camels walking around the dunghill. | [
"Carl Larsson",
"Stockholm",
"Nationalmuseum",
"Copenhagen",
"Biological museum",
"Dagens Nyheter",
"No."
] |
|
18502_T | Midvinterblot | In the context of Midvinterblot, explain the Second version of the Evolution of the work. | The criticism of the artistic freedom of giving a personal interpretation of a distant historic event could have been directed at many other historic paintings of the 19th century. The criticism of Midvinterblot would be in the same vein during the following years. Larsson retorted that he would happily delegate the task to a younger talent—but he made a second version in oil (No. 237) in which he made the temple wider and where he added an executioner in the centre. The sets of characters were more closely assembled and the frieze-like quality was enhanced. | [
"No."
] |
|
18502_NT | Midvinterblot | In the context of this artwork, explain the Second version of the Evolution of the work. | The criticism of the artistic freedom of giving a personal interpretation of a distant historic event could have been directed at many other historic paintings of the 19th century. The criticism of Midvinterblot would be in the same vein during the following years. Larsson retorted that he would happily delegate the task to a younger talent—but he made a second version in oil (No. 237) in which he made the temple wider and where he added an executioner in the centre. The sets of characters were more closely assembled and the frieze-like quality was enhanced. | [
"No."
] |
|
18503_T | Midvinterblot | Explore the Third version about the Evolution of the work of this artwork, Midvinterblot. | Some major changes were introduced in a third watercolour painting (No. 238) which he made during the autumn of 1913. This version was given the text "En drömsyn. En konung offras för folket" ("A dream vision, a king sacrificed for his people"), a text which was possibly added in the hope that it would not be considered to be an attempt at a historically faithful reconstruction.The most essential change consisted of a more monumental composition. The temple had been enlarged considerably and given a more stern shape, and the figures had been more closely assembled and they formed an unbroken relief-like row. The sketch was put on exhibition in the museum in November 1913 and in a letter to Ludvig Looström, the director of the museum, Larsson offered the painting for 35,000 Swedish kronor.This version was criticised even before the museum board had had time to present their own view. August Brunius, who had expressed his enthusiasm for the Gustav Vasa painting, reacted against the choice of subject, like most critics. The choice of subject was only aggravated by the way it was presented. Brunius felt the painting to be unreal, unbelievable and not very relevant for the modern Swedes of the early 20th century.On January 17, 1914, the museum's board presented their ambivalent view on the painting. The majority of the board seconded the motion that Larsson was to finish Midvinterblot for the museum wall, but they added the reservation that the main scene with the sacrifice of a king should be excluded or downplayed. The director of the museum, Looström, objected to the board's ruling, and he declared the painting illustrated a "ritual killing" and he would rather the wall remain empty. Carl Larsson received the ruling of the board as a confirmation that the museum accepted his painting, but he declared that he would not make the suggested changes, nor would he accept the suggestion that the painting should be installed in the Stockholm City Hall instead.Even Larsson's good friend and biographer Georg Nordensvan joined the critics, but he could not sway Larsson's determination either, although Larsson probably took his criticism hardest. The archaeologist Bror Schnittger, who was probably the anonymous writer who had initiated the criticism, launched additional criticism in Svenska Dagbladet against the lack of historical authenticity in the painting. The distance in dating among the objects in the painting was given as at least 2000 years and Schnittger thought that the painting was unacceptable in the museum building. Larsson stated that he intentionally included objects that would be from the distant past in relation to the setting of the painting, and that he did not see these as anachronisms, because he imagined the subjects would be antiquarians who kept ancient items as ritual objects.On March 1, 1914, Larsson, who was by then ostracized, wrote a letter to the minister of religious affairs and declared that he resigned from the task of illustrating the museum wall. | [
"watercolour painting",
"Carl Larsson",
"Stockholm",
"Stockholm City Hall",
"No."
] |
|
18503_NT | Midvinterblot | Explore the Third version about the Evolution of the work of this artwork. | Some major changes were introduced in a third watercolour painting (No. 238) which he made during the autumn of 1913. This version was given the text "En drömsyn. En konung offras för folket" ("A dream vision, a king sacrificed for his people"), a text which was possibly added in the hope that it would not be considered to be an attempt at a historically faithful reconstruction.The most essential change consisted of a more monumental composition. The temple had been enlarged considerably and given a more stern shape, and the figures had been more closely assembled and they formed an unbroken relief-like row. The sketch was put on exhibition in the museum in November 1913 and in a letter to Ludvig Looström, the director of the museum, Larsson offered the painting for 35,000 Swedish kronor.This version was criticised even before the museum board had had time to present their own view. August Brunius, who had expressed his enthusiasm for the Gustav Vasa painting, reacted against the choice of subject, like most critics. The choice of subject was only aggravated by the way it was presented. Brunius felt the painting to be unreal, unbelievable and not very relevant for the modern Swedes of the early 20th century.On January 17, 1914, the museum's board presented their ambivalent view on the painting. The majority of the board seconded the motion that Larsson was to finish Midvinterblot for the museum wall, but they added the reservation that the main scene with the sacrifice of a king should be excluded or downplayed. The director of the museum, Looström, objected to the board's ruling, and he declared the painting illustrated a "ritual killing" and he would rather the wall remain empty. Carl Larsson received the ruling of the board as a confirmation that the museum accepted his painting, but he declared that he would not make the suggested changes, nor would he accept the suggestion that the painting should be installed in the Stockholm City Hall instead.Even Larsson's good friend and biographer Georg Nordensvan joined the critics, but he could not sway Larsson's determination either, although Larsson probably took his criticism hardest. The archaeologist Bror Schnittger, who was probably the anonymous writer who had initiated the criticism, launched additional criticism in Svenska Dagbladet against the lack of historical authenticity in the painting. The distance in dating among the objects in the painting was given as at least 2000 years and Schnittger thought that the painting was unacceptable in the museum building. Larsson stated that he intentionally included objects that would be from the distant past in relation to the setting of the painting, and that he did not see these as anachronisms, because he imagined the subjects would be antiquarians who kept ancient items as ritual objects.On March 1, 1914, Larsson, who was by then ostracized, wrote a letter to the minister of religious affairs and declared that he resigned from the task of illustrating the museum wall. | [
"watercolour painting",
"Carl Larsson",
"Stockholm",
"Stockholm City Hall",
"No."
] |
|
18504_T | Midvinterblot | In the context of Midvinterblot, discuss the The final versions and rejection of the Evolution of the work. | In May 1914, Carl Larsson resumed the work on the painting on his own initiative. During 1915, he presented a painted sketch (No. 239), which was largely consistent with the previous painting. The king had been remade based on an oil painting (No. 240) that Larsson had made with a male model named Rydberg in 1914. The king's position was more pathetically composed and expressive and it agreed more with the change of emphasis that had taken place during the evolution of the work after Larsson's decision that the sacrifice was voluntary.A new figure, a wizard, had been added to the left of the sleighs and the lion guardians at the entry of the temple, which received a noticeably Chinese character. The colours are forceful and there are considerable amounts of gold, something that Larsson intended as a disclaimer of the common notion that pre-history was gray.Before the final decision, both the board and Carl Larsson knew that the Minister of Education (at the time called Minister of Religious Affairs) was favourable towards the new painting. However, a majority of the board, including the former director Looström and his successor Richard Bergh, was against it, and only two were in favour. Instead, the board asked Larsson to make a different painting. Larsson did not answer initially, but he declared in the press that he still considered Midvinterblot to be among the greatest and most beautiful works he had ever made.The minister asked for expert advice and the debate continued in the newspapers. There were suspicions that there was a political side to the animosity between Bergh and Larsson, but these suspicions were convincingly dispelled much later by Prince Eugén, Duke of Närke in a personal letter.A book on Carl Larsson, published by Nationalmuseum in 1992, claims that the most immediate and natural explanation for the ultimate rejection of the painting was the fact that time had rendered the painting unfashionable. Because of the long debate, the painting became a survivor from a time past and it could not meet the modernist ideals of the new century.The final version was exhibited where it was intended to be in June 1915. In the following year, it was shown at the art gallery Liljevalchs konsthall as its first exhibit was dedicated to Carl Larsson, Bruno Liljefors and Anders Zorn. It was tentatively shown again in Nationalmuseum during the period 1925–1933. In 1942, the painting was stored at the Archive for Public Decorative Art (now renamed the Museum of Sketches) in Lund, where it was prominently on show for forty years.
According to the book by Nationalmuseum, the controversy concerned Carl Larsson's personal prestige and the ideals that he stood for, but his contemporaries would turn more and more indifferent to these ideals. The events embittered his last years and he declared in his autobiography that the controversy broke him down and that he admitted it with anger. It is clear that he began to identify himself with the work and it is possible that he also identified himself with the sacrificed king, as he primarily saw conspiracies and bad intentions behind the opposition. This identification was made apparent in his self-portrait, in 1916, where he presented himself as king Domalde, and which he donated to Sundborn parish where he lived. | [
"Domalde",
"Carl Larsson",
"Anders Zorn",
"Prince Eugén, Duke of Närke",
"Bruno Liljefors",
"wizard",
"Richard Bergh",
"Nationalmuseum",
"Lund",
"a time past",
"Domald",
"Liljevalchs konsthall",
"modernist ideals",
"No."
] |
|
18504_NT | Midvinterblot | In the context of this artwork, discuss the The final versions and rejection of the Evolution of the work. | In May 1914, Carl Larsson resumed the work on the painting on his own initiative. During 1915, he presented a painted sketch (No. 239), which was largely consistent with the previous painting. The king had been remade based on an oil painting (No. 240) that Larsson had made with a male model named Rydberg in 1914. The king's position was more pathetically composed and expressive and it agreed more with the change of emphasis that had taken place during the evolution of the work after Larsson's decision that the sacrifice was voluntary.A new figure, a wizard, had been added to the left of the sleighs and the lion guardians at the entry of the temple, which received a noticeably Chinese character. The colours are forceful and there are considerable amounts of gold, something that Larsson intended as a disclaimer of the common notion that pre-history was gray.Before the final decision, both the board and Carl Larsson knew that the Minister of Education (at the time called Minister of Religious Affairs) was favourable towards the new painting. However, a majority of the board, including the former director Looström and his successor Richard Bergh, was against it, and only two were in favour. Instead, the board asked Larsson to make a different painting. Larsson did not answer initially, but he declared in the press that he still considered Midvinterblot to be among the greatest and most beautiful works he had ever made.The minister asked for expert advice and the debate continued in the newspapers. There were suspicions that there was a political side to the animosity between Bergh and Larsson, but these suspicions were convincingly dispelled much later by Prince Eugén, Duke of Närke in a personal letter.A book on Carl Larsson, published by Nationalmuseum in 1992, claims that the most immediate and natural explanation for the ultimate rejection of the painting was the fact that time had rendered the painting unfashionable. Because of the long debate, the painting became a survivor from a time past and it could not meet the modernist ideals of the new century.The final version was exhibited where it was intended to be in June 1915. In the following year, it was shown at the art gallery Liljevalchs konsthall as its first exhibit was dedicated to Carl Larsson, Bruno Liljefors and Anders Zorn. It was tentatively shown again in Nationalmuseum during the period 1925–1933. In 1942, the painting was stored at the Archive for Public Decorative Art (now renamed the Museum of Sketches) in Lund, where it was prominently on show for forty years.
According to the book by Nationalmuseum, the controversy concerned Carl Larsson's personal prestige and the ideals that he stood for, but his contemporaries would turn more and more indifferent to these ideals. The events embittered his last years and he declared in his autobiography that the controversy broke him down and that he admitted it with anger. It is clear that he began to identify himself with the work and it is possible that he also identified himself with the sacrificed king, as he primarily saw conspiracies and bad intentions behind the opposition. This identification was made apparent in his self-portrait, in 1916, where he presented himself as king Domalde, and which he donated to Sundborn parish where he lived. | [
"Domalde",
"Carl Larsson",
"Anders Zorn",
"Prince Eugén, Duke of Närke",
"Bruno Liljefors",
"wizard",
"Richard Bergh",
"Nationalmuseum",
"Lund",
"a time past",
"Domald",
"Liljevalchs konsthall",
"modernist ideals",
"No."
] |
|
18505_T | Midvinterblot | How does Midvinterblot elucidate its The later controversy and eventual acceptance? | During 1983–1984, the painting was exhibited at the Swedish History Museum in Stockholm, and after this exhibit an art dealer offered to donate or sell the painting to Nationalmuseum. The board rejected the offer with the statement that the Old Norse motif was more appropriate for the Swedish History Museum, which at the time still shared the same building as Nationalmuseum. When the Swedish History Museum had been moved to a building of its own, the painting should be moved there too.After this rejection, the painting was sold to art collector Carl-Eric Björkegren, who offered to sell it to the Swedish History Museum for 12 million Swedish kronor. This offer caused a controversy in which people debated if the painting belonged to Nationalmuseum or the Swedish History Museum. In this debate where there were exaggerations in both directions, people claimed that the painting was both an unsurpassed masterpiece of Swedish art and a work of suspect morality. In 1987, it was sold by Sotheby's in London to a Japanese art collector.In 1992, Nationalmuseum celebrated its bicentennial anniversary and dedicated the exhibit to Carl Larsson. The Japanese owner lent the painting to the museum, and when the 300,000 visitors of the late 20th century were able to see the work for the first time in the hall where it was intended to be, the general opinion changed.In 1997, Nationalmuseum bought the painting from the collector, ordered a frame for stretching the canvas from Per Målare, a carpenter in Gagnef, Dalarna, and installed it permanently where Carl Larsson had intended it to be. | [
"Carl Larsson",
"Stockholm",
"Nationalmuseum",
"Gagnef",
"Dalarna",
"Sotheby's",
"London",
"Carl-Eric Björkegren",
"Swedish History Museum"
] |
|
18505_NT | Midvinterblot | How does this artwork elucidate its The later controversy and eventual acceptance? | During 1983–1984, the painting was exhibited at the Swedish History Museum in Stockholm, and after this exhibit an art dealer offered to donate or sell the painting to Nationalmuseum. The board rejected the offer with the statement that the Old Norse motif was more appropriate for the Swedish History Museum, which at the time still shared the same building as Nationalmuseum. When the Swedish History Museum had been moved to a building of its own, the painting should be moved there too.After this rejection, the painting was sold to art collector Carl-Eric Björkegren, who offered to sell it to the Swedish History Museum for 12 million Swedish kronor. This offer caused a controversy in which people debated if the painting belonged to Nationalmuseum or the Swedish History Museum. In this debate where there were exaggerations in both directions, people claimed that the painting was both an unsurpassed masterpiece of Swedish art and a work of suspect morality. In 1987, it was sold by Sotheby's in London to a Japanese art collector.In 1992, Nationalmuseum celebrated its bicentennial anniversary and dedicated the exhibit to Carl Larsson. The Japanese owner lent the painting to the museum, and when the 300,000 visitors of the late 20th century were able to see the work for the first time in the hall where it was intended to be, the general opinion changed.In 1997, Nationalmuseum bought the painting from the collector, ordered a frame for stretching the canvas from Per Målare, a carpenter in Gagnef, Dalarna, and installed it permanently where Carl Larsson had intended it to be. | [
"Carl Larsson",
"Stockholm",
"Nationalmuseum",
"Gagnef",
"Dalarna",
"Sotheby's",
"London",
"Carl-Eric Björkegren",
"Swedish History Museum"
] |
|
18506_T | View of Genoa | Focus on View of Genoa and analyze the abstract. | The View of Genoa is a 16th century painting of the harbor of Genoa. The painting was done in tempera on canvas in 1597 by Genoese painter Cristoforo de Grassi. | [
"tempera",
"Cristoforo de Grassi",
"Genoa",
"16th century"
] |
|
18506_NT | View of Genoa | Focus on this artwork and analyze the abstract. | The View of Genoa is a 16th century painting of the harbor of Genoa. The painting was done in tempera on canvas in 1597 by Genoese painter Cristoforo de Grassi. | [
"tempera",
"Cristoforo de Grassi",
"Genoa",
"16th century"
] |
|
18507_T | View of Genoa | In View of Genoa, how is the Description discussed? | View of Genoa depicts the harbor of the Italian city state of Genoa as it was in the late 15th century. The painting was started by an unknown artist in 1481, but was left incomplete. Cristoforo de Grassi, a painter who was often commissioned to portray naval scenes, was commissioned to finish the painting, which he did in 1597.The painting depicts the city state of Genoa as it was in 1481. Heavy emphasis is placed upon Genoa's prominence as a trading and naval power, as can be seen with the abundance of ships. Several war galleys of the Genoese navy occupy the center of the harbor, and city's arsenal and famous lighthouse (the Laterna) can be seen. Two crests of Saint George (the patron saint of Genoa) are placed above the hills surrounding the city. The scene references the return of a Genoese fleet from an expedition against the Ottoman Turks.The View of Genoa is currently on display at the Galata Museo del Mare in Genoa. | [
"Ottoman Turks",
"Genoese navy",
"Cristoforo de Grassi",
"Galata Museo del Mare",
"patron saint",
"Genoa",
"Saint George"
] |
|
18507_NT | View of Genoa | In this artwork, how is the Description discussed? | View of Genoa depicts the harbor of the Italian city state of Genoa as it was in the late 15th century. The painting was started by an unknown artist in 1481, but was left incomplete. Cristoforo de Grassi, a painter who was often commissioned to portray naval scenes, was commissioned to finish the painting, which he did in 1597.The painting depicts the city state of Genoa as it was in 1481. Heavy emphasis is placed upon Genoa's prominence as a trading and naval power, as can be seen with the abundance of ships. Several war galleys of the Genoese navy occupy the center of the harbor, and city's arsenal and famous lighthouse (the Laterna) can be seen. Two crests of Saint George (the patron saint of Genoa) are placed above the hills surrounding the city. The scene references the return of a Genoese fleet from an expedition against the Ottoman Turks.The View of Genoa is currently on display at the Galata Museo del Mare in Genoa. | [
"Ottoman Turks",
"Genoese navy",
"Cristoforo de Grassi",
"Galata Museo del Mare",
"patron saint",
"Genoa",
"Saint George"
] |
|
18508_T | Virgin Nikopoios | Focus on Virgin Nikopoios and explore the abstract. | The Virgin Nikopoios also known as Panagia Nikopoios is a tempera painting by Thomas Bathas. Bathas was active in Heraklion, Venice, and Corfu during the second half of the 16th century. The painting follows the traditional Byzantine style characteristic of the traditional maniera greca. The painting also featured the Venetian style. The position of the Virgin and Child is the Nikopoios (the bringer of victory). The word Nicopeia is indicative of Constantinople. There are actually many different types.The name "bringer of the victory" has been associated with this position and style after 7th century Byzantine Emperor Heraclius choose the image of the Theotokos and Child and made them his protectors when he sailed from Carthage to Constantinople in 610 AD. Byzantine Emperor Heraclius left the image in Constantinople after the victory. According to legend, the siege of the Avaren and Slaves was averted in 626, after praying to the image. Another legend states that Empress Eudokia gave the icon to her sister in sister-in-law Empress Pulcheria in the 400s.The original was part of Venetian loot when Constantinople was sacked in 1204 during the fourth Crusade.
The Madonna Nicopeia became part of the collection of St Mark's Basilica. Ironically, Thomas Bathas maintained some of the paintings at the Basilica. The Virgin Nicopeia was definitely inspired by the Madonna Nicopeia at St Mark's Basilica. | [
"Corfu",
"Panagia",
"tempera",
"Thomas Bathas",
"Heraklion",
"Venetian style",
"Theotokos",
"St Mark's Basilica",
"Venice",
"Heraclius",
"maniera greca"
] |
|
18508_NT | Virgin Nikopoios | Focus on this artwork and explore the abstract. | The Virgin Nikopoios also known as Panagia Nikopoios is a tempera painting by Thomas Bathas. Bathas was active in Heraklion, Venice, and Corfu during the second half of the 16th century. The painting follows the traditional Byzantine style characteristic of the traditional maniera greca. The painting also featured the Venetian style. The position of the Virgin and Child is the Nikopoios (the bringer of victory). The word Nicopeia is indicative of Constantinople. There are actually many different types.The name "bringer of the victory" has been associated with this position and style after 7th century Byzantine Emperor Heraclius choose the image of the Theotokos and Child and made them his protectors when he sailed from Carthage to Constantinople in 610 AD. Byzantine Emperor Heraclius left the image in Constantinople after the victory. According to legend, the siege of the Avaren and Slaves was averted in 626, after praying to the image. Another legend states that Empress Eudokia gave the icon to her sister in sister-in-law Empress Pulcheria in the 400s.The original was part of Venetian loot when Constantinople was sacked in 1204 during the fourth Crusade.
The Madonna Nicopeia became part of the collection of St Mark's Basilica. Ironically, Thomas Bathas maintained some of the paintings at the Basilica. The Virgin Nicopeia was definitely inspired by the Madonna Nicopeia at St Mark's Basilica. | [
"Corfu",
"Panagia",
"tempera",
"Thomas Bathas",
"Heraklion",
"Venetian style",
"Theotokos",
"St Mark's Basilica",
"Venice",
"Heraclius",
"maniera greca"
] |
|
18509_T | Virgin Nikopoios | Focus on Virgin Nikopoios and explain the Description. | The painting is egg tempera and gold leaf on wood. The dimensions are 53 cm x 41.2 cm or 20.9 in x 16.2 in, it was completed in 1594 in Venice. The icon features the Virgin holding the infant Jesus. The Virgin Mary is depicted as half-body and frontal, holding Christ with both hands in front of her chest, and on the axis of her body.
The halo is decorated with precious stones. Her cloak is dark in contrast to the shining garments of Christ. The infant’s halo features three precious stones denoting the father, son, and holy spirit. Two of the stones are the same. There is a scroll in the infant's left hand. The scroll in his hand has many interpretations. Some call it the scroll of wisdom, it symbolizes the word of god or indicates that Jesus is the living word of God. It can also denote the new testament. The Virgin holds his baby blanket.The position of the Madonna and Child is the traditional Our Lady of the Sign also known as Platitera and in Italian Nostra Signora del Segno. The position is also referred to as the Nikopoios. This is very different from the Madonna and Child Hodegetria (Our Lady of the Way) in Italian La Madonna Odigitria. Another term commonly used is the Glykophilousa (Virgin of the Sweet Kiss), Eleusa Virgin (Virgin of Compassion), and Pelagonitissa (Playing child) are interchanged. Although the subject is similar among the artists of the style each specific painting has its own character and identity. | [
"Our Lady of the Sign",
"tempera",
"Hodegetria",
"Venice",
"Eleusa",
"Pelagonitissa"
] |
|
18509_NT | Virgin Nikopoios | Focus on this artwork and explain the Description. | The painting is egg tempera and gold leaf on wood. The dimensions are 53 cm x 41.2 cm or 20.9 in x 16.2 in, it was completed in 1594 in Venice. The icon features the Virgin holding the infant Jesus. The Virgin Mary is depicted as half-body and frontal, holding Christ with both hands in front of her chest, and on the axis of her body.
The halo is decorated with precious stones. Her cloak is dark in contrast to the shining garments of Christ. The infant’s halo features three precious stones denoting the father, son, and holy spirit. Two of the stones are the same. There is a scroll in the infant's left hand. The scroll in his hand has many interpretations. Some call it the scroll of wisdom, it symbolizes the word of god or indicates that Jesus is the living word of God. It can also denote the new testament. The Virgin holds his baby blanket.The position of the Madonna and Child is the traditional Our Lady of the Sign also known as Platitera and in Italian Nostra Signora del Segno. The position is also referred to as the Nikopoios. This is very different from the Madonna and Child Hodegetria (Our Lady of the Way) in Italian La Madonna Odigitria. Another term commonly used is the Glykophilousa (Virgin of the Sweet Kiss), Eleusa Virgin (Virgin of Compassion), and Pelagonitissa (Playing child) are interchanged. Although the subject is similar among the artists of the style each specific painting has its own character and identity. | [
"Our Lady of the Sign",
"tempera",
"Hodegetria",
"Venice",
"Eleusa",
"Pelagonitissa"
] |
|
18510_T | Statue of Alexander von Humboldt (Stanford University) | Explore the abstract of this artwork, Statue of Alexander von Humboldt (Stanford University). | A statue of Alexander von Humboldt is installed on the exterior of Building 420 (formerly known as Jordan Hall), in Stanford University's Main Quad, in the U.S. state of California. | [
"Alexander von Humboldt",
"Stanford University",
"U.S. state",
"Jordan Hall",
"California",
"Main Quad"
] |
|
18510_NT | Statue of Alexander von Humboldt (Stanford University) | Explore the abstract of this artwork. | A statue of Alexander von Humboldt is installed on the exterior of Building 420 (formerly known as Jordan Hall), in Stanford University's Main Quad, in the U.S. state of California. | [
"Alexander von Humboldt",
"Stanford University",
"U.S. state",
"Jordan Hall",
"California",
"Main Quad"
] |
|
18511_T | Farewell to Orpheus | Focus on Farewell to Orpheus and discuss the abstract. | Farewell to Orpheus is an outdoor 1968–1973 bronze sculpture and fountain by Frederic Littman, installed at the Portland State University campus in Portland, Oregon, United States. | [
"Portland, Oregon",
"bronze sculpture",
"Frederic Littman",
"Portland State University"
] |
|
18511_NT | Farewell to Orpheus | Focus on this artwork and discuss the abstract. | Farewell to Orpheus is an outdoor 1968–1973 bronze sculpture and fountain by Frederic Littman, installed at the Portland State University campus in Portland, Oregon, United States. | [
"Portland, Oregon",
"bronze sculpture",
"Frederic Littman",
"Portland State University"
] |
|
18512_T | Farewell to Orpheus | How does Farewell to Orpheus elucidate its Description and history? | Farewell to Orpheus, created by former Portland State University (PSU) art professor Frederic Littman in 1968, is located at Southwest Montgomery Street in the South Park Blocks. It depicts Eurydice and was installed in 1972–1973 as part of the South Park Blocks Urban Renewal Development Project. The fountain is one of four maintained by PSU, along with Walk of Heroines at Hoffman Hall, another in front of the Student Health and Counseling Building, and one at Urban Plaza.The sculpture has always been surrounded by water but the fountain, which continually recycles 227 gallons of water, was not added until the 1990s. In 2009, PSU partnered with the City of Portland and the sculpture's owners to repair the fountain, which had not worked for nearly a decade. Repairs cost $6,000 and were funded in part by rentals on the South Park Blocks. Work included installation of new fountain heads, lights, and wiring, and re-sealing underwater surfaces. The repairs were completed by three PSU employees. Farewell to Orpheus has been described as a "seating refuge" for students and included in published walking tours of the city. | [
"Urban Plaza",
"Frederic Littman",
"South Park Blocks",
"Portland State University",
"Eurydice"
] |
|
18512_NT | Farewell to Orpheus | How does this artwork elucidate its Description and history? | Farewell to Orpheus, created by former Portland State University (PSU) art professor Frederic Littman in 1968, is located at Southwest Montgomery Street in the South Park Blocks. It depicts Eurydice and was installed in 1972–1973 as part of the South Park Blocks Urban Renewal Development Project. The fountain is one of four maintained by PSU, along with Walk of Heroines at Hoffman Hall, another in front of the Student Health and Counseling Building, and one at Urban Plaza.The sculpture has always been surrounded by water but the fountain, which continually recycles 227 gallons of water, was not added until the 1990s. In 2009, PSU partnered with the City of Portland and the sculpture's owners to repair the fountain, which had not worked for nearly a decade. Repairs cost $6,000 and were funded in part by rentals on the South Park Blocks. Work included installation of new fountain heads, lights, and wiring, and re-sealing underwater surfaces. The repairs were completed by three PSU employees. Farewell to Orpheus has been described as a "seating refuge" for students and included in published walking tours of the city. | [
"Urban Plaza",
"Frederic Littman",
"South Park Blocks",
"Portland State University",
"Eurydice"
] |
|
18513_T | Taddei Tondo | Focus on Taddei Tondo and analyze the Physical history. | The tondo dates to Michelangelo's time in Florence before his move to Rome in 1505. According to the art historian, Vasari, while working on his David, Michelangelo "also at this time... blocked out but did not finish two marble tondi, one for Taddeo Taddei, today in his house, and for Bartolomeo Pitti he began another... which works were considered outstanding and marvellous".To the lower right of the back of the relief is a ligature combining the letters L and A, probably the mark of another carver or dealer, considered most likely to be the initials of Lapo d'Antonio di Lapo, active at the Opera del Duomo and for a short period in 1506-1507, one of Michelangelo's assistants. A chisel blow on the reverse seemingly from this earlier phase resulted in a hairline crack in the face of the Virgin that may only have become apparent as carving progressed. In consideration of his motivation to continue working on the damaged marble after that was obvious, speculation exists about whether Michelangelo, known for his concern for his materials, was constrained by a shortage of ready alternatives, or, considering his success with the damaged block for David, was more accepting of flaws because he was confident in his ability to work around them. The missing segment to the bottom right may be a result of an excess of his celebrated "direct attack". At some point, however, work on the tondo ceased. Five holes in the outer rim of the tondo were intended for fixings and are variously dated.Although unfinished, the tondo appeared in the Palazzo Taddei and is documented as still there in 1568, but by 1678, the family had moved to a new residence near San Remigio. At an unknown date the tondo was taken to Rome, where it was acquired from Jean-Baptiste Wicar by Sir George Beaumont in 1822. Initially hung at Beaumont's house in Grosvenor Square, it was bequeathed to the academy in 1830 and installed at Somerset House, before moving with the academy to the east wing of the new National Gallery building in 1836, where it remained until the academy relocated to Burlington House in 1868. Except for an exhibition at the Victoria and Albert Museum in 1960, the tondo has been housed and displayed in various academy locations ever since.
The discovery of the hairline crack running through the upper half of the marble contributed to the decision in 1989 to provide a permanent home for the tondo. Subsequently the tondo was cleaned with dichloromethane swabs and clay poultices to remove residues of nineteenth-century plaster casts and their oil-based release agents, packing materials, traces of beeswax and pine resin adhesives, and other surface accretions. The tondo was left unwaxed and no other coating was applied, as the work is not "finished" and originally had not been polished (as was the David when finished). Since the opening of the Sackler Wing of Galleries in 1991, the tondo has been on free public display in an area designed for it on the top floor that was positioned for reasons of preventive conservation behind protective glass, to combat the effects of air pollution and the possibility of vandalism. | [
"Grosvenor Square",
"new National Gallery building",
"Sir George Beaumont",
"cleaned",
"Burlington House",
"Rome",
"dichloromethane",
"National Gallery",
"air pollution",
"San Remigio",
"Florence",
"poultice",
"marble",
"his move",
"preventive conservation",
"pine resin",
"another",
"Jean-Baptiste Wicar",
"Pitti",
"Somerset House",
"Michelangelo's time",
"relief",
"tondo",
"David",
"Opera del Duomo",
"ligature",
"vandalism",
"Michelangelo",
"plaster casts",
"release agent",
"beeswax",
"Victoria and Albert Museum",
"Vasari"
] |
|
18513_NT | Taddei Tondo | Focus on this artwork and analyze the Physical history. | The tondo dates to Michelangelo's time in Florence before his move to Rome in 1505. According to the art historian, Vasari, while working on his David, Michelangelo "also at this time... blocked out but did not finish two marble tondi, one for Taddeo Taddei, today in his house, and for Bartolomeo Pitti he began another... which works were considered outstanding and marvellous".To the lower right of the back of the relief is a ligature combining the letters L and A, probably the mark of another carver or dealer, considered most likely to be the initials of Lapo d'Antonio di Lapo, active at the Opera del Duomo and for a short period in 1506-1507, one of Michelangelo's assistants. A chisel blow on the reverse seemingly from this earlier phase resulted in a hairline crack in the face of the Virgin that may only have become apparent as carving progressed. In consideration of his motivation to continue working on the damaged marble after that was obvious, speculation exists about whether Michelangelo, known for his concern for his materials, was constrained by a shortage of ready alternatives, or, considering his success with the damaged block for David, was more accepting of flaws because he was confident in his ability to work around them. The missing segment to the bottom right may be a result of an excess of his celebrated "direct attack". At some point, however, work on the tondo ceased. Five holes in the outer rim of the tondo were intended for fixings and are variously dated.Although unfinished, the tondo appeared in the Palazzo Taddei and is documented as still there in 1568, but by 1678, the family had moved to a new residence near San Remigio. At an unknown date the tondo was taken to Rome, where it was acquired from Jean-Baptiste Wicar by Sir George Beaumont in 1822. Initially hung at Beaumont's house in Grosvenor Square, it was bequeathed to the academy in 1830 and installed at Somerset House, before moving with the academy to the east wing of the new National Gallery building in 1836, where it remained until the academy relocated to Burlington House in 1868. Except for an exhibition at the Victoria and Albert Museum in 1960, the tondo has been housed and displayed in various academy locations ever since.
The discovery of the hairline crack running through the upper half of the marble contributed to the decision in 1989 to provide a permanent home for the tondo. Subsequently the tondo was cleaned with dichloromethane swabs and clay poultices to remove residues of nineteenth-century plaster casts and their oil-based release agents, packing materials, traces of beeswax and pine resin adhesives, and other surface accretions. The tondo was left unwaxed and no other coating was applied, as the work is not "finished" and originally had not been polished (as was the David when finished). Since the opening of the Sackler Wing of Galleries in 1991, the tondo has been on free public display in an area designed for it on the top floor that was positioned for reasons of preventive conservation behind protective glass, to combat the effects of air pollution and the possibility of vandalism. | [
"Grosvenor Square",
"new National Gallery building",
"Sir George Beaumont",
"cleaned",
"Burlington House",
"Rome",
"dichloromethane",
"National Gallery",
"air pollution",
"San Remigio",
"Florence",
"poultice",
"marble",
"his move",
"preventive conservation",
"pine resin",
"another",
"Jean-Baptiste Wicar",
"Pitti",
"Somerset House",
"Michelangelo's time",
"relief",
"tondo",
"David",
"Opera del Duomo",
"ligature",
"vandalism",
"Michelangelo",
"plaster casts",
"release agent",
"beeswax",
"Victoria and Albert Museum",
"Vasari"
] |
|
18514_T | Taddei Tondo | In Taddei Tondo, how is the Description discussed? | The tondo as a format for painting and relief sculpture was a quintessential product of the Florentine Renaissance. During the century after 1430, all the leading artists created tondi, including Filippo Lippi, Botticelli, Luca Signorelli, Piero di Cosimo, Fra Bartolomeo, Andrea del Sarto, Leonardo da Vinci (in a lost work), and Raphael. For a few years Michelangelo also experimented with the form. He executed the Doni tondo, his only panel painting documented in contemporary sources, and he also began two unfinished tondo sculptures, the Pitti and Taddei tondi, but after that he never returned to the tondo form in either medium.This tondo depicts a seated Virgin Mary with the baby Jesus dynamically sprawled across her lap, turning and looking back over his right shoulder toward the infant Saint John the Baptist, who stands before him looking down and holding a fluttering bird. When viewing the composition, the eye of the viewer is drawn diagonally along Christ's body, back up that of his mother, follows her gaze across to John, and from his face back to Christ. John, patron saint of Florence, with his attribute of a baptismal bowl, crosses his arms, perhaps in allusion to the cross. Most likely the bird he holds is a goldfinch not a dove - Christian symbolism sees in this bird a representation of the Passion. The unfinished portion of the marble below the bird might have been intended to become a crown of thorns.Michelangelo's execution with only a point and claw chisel, often driven hard and with great energy, is a combination of techniques that helps create a sense of "surface unity" unbroken by the use of the drill. The Christ child, almost completely in full relief is the only figure that is highly finished (except for the feet), St. John is much less finished, Mary is the least finished, and the background is only roughly executed. One critic declares a belief that these marked variations in texture help establish the relative status of the three figures while creating a sense of compositional depth all the greater for not being more conventionally "finished".Many of Michelangelo's works are unfinished. Circumstances around each being unfinished vary. Critical opinions address some of his unfinished works as if completed, however. The nineteenth-century French sculptor and critic Eugène Guillaume declared that, what he labeled as Michelangelo's "non finito", was "one of the master's expressive devices in his quest for infinite suggestiveness". | [
"Raphael",
"Leonardo da Vinci",
"Passion",
"crown of thorns",
"Virgin Mary",
"goldfinch",
"Florence",
"John the Baptist",
"patron saint",
"marble",
"Piero di Cosimo",
"composition",
"baby Jesus",
"Filippo Lippi",
"baptismal",
"Fra Bartolomeo",
"Pitti",
"relief",
"tondo",
"Botticelli",
"Andrea del Sarto",
"Luca Signorelli",
"Doni tondo",
"dove",
"Michelangelo",
"sculpture",
"Saint John the Baptist",
"attribute",
"cross",
"Christian symbolism",
"point and claw chisel",
"Eugène Guillaume"
] |
|
18514_NT | Taddei Tondo | In this artwork, how is the Description discussed? | The tondo as a format for painting and relief sculpture was a quintessential product of the Florentine Renaissance. During the century after 1430, all the leading artists created tondi, including Filippo Lippi, Botticelli, Luca Signorelli, Piero di Cosimo, Fra Bartolomeo, Andrea del Sarto, Leonardo da Vinci (in a lost work), and Raphael. For a few years Michelangelo also experimented with the form. He executed the Doni tondo, his only panel painting documented in contemporary sources, and he also began two unfinished tondo sculptures, the Pitti and Taddei tondi, but after that he never returned to the tondo form in either medium.This tondo depicts a seated Virgin Mary with the baby Jesus dynamically sprawled across her lap, turning and looking back over his right shoulder toward the infant Saint John the Baptist, who stands before him looking down and holding a fluttering bird. When viewing the composition, the eye of the viewer is drawn diagonally along Christ's body, back up that of his mother, follows her gaze across to John, and from his face back to Christ. John, patron saint of Florence, with his attribute of a baptismal bowl, crosses his arms, perhaps in allusion to the cross. Most likely the bird he holds is a goldfinch not a dove - Christian symbolism sees in this bird a representation of the Passion. The unfinished portion of the marble below the bird might have been intended to become a crown of thorns.Michelangelo's execution with only a point and claw chisel, often driven hard and with great energy, is a combination of techniques that helps create a sense of "surface unity" unbroken by the use of the drill. The Christ child, almost completely in full relief is the only figure that is highly finished (except for the feet), St. John is much less finished, Mary is the least finished, and the background is only roughly executed. One critic declares a belief that these marked variations in texture help establish the relative status of the three figures while creating a sense of compositional depth all the greater for not being more conventionally "finished".Many of Michelangelo's works are unfinished. Circumstances around each being unfinished vary. Critical opinions address some of his unfinished works as if completed, however. The nineteenth-century French sculptor and critic Eugène Guillaume declared that, what he labeled as Michelangelo's "non finito", was "one of the master's expressive devices in his quest for infinite suggestiveness". | [
"Raphael",
"Leonardo da Vinci",
"Passion",
"crown of thorns",
"Virgin Mary",
"goldfinch",
"Florence",
"John the Baptist",
"patron saint",
"marble",
"Piero di Cosimo",
"composition",
"baby Jesus",
"Filippo Lippi",
"baptismal",
"Fra Bartolomeo",
"Pitti",
"relief",
"tondo",
"Botticelli",
"Andrea del Sarto",
"Luca Signorelli",
"Doni tondo",
"dove",
"Michelangelo",
"sculpture",
"Saint John the Baptist",
"attribute",
"cross",
"Christian symbolism",
"point and claw chisel",
"Eugène Guillaume"
] |
|
18515_T | Taddei Tondo | Focus on Taddei Tondo and explore the Influence and reception. | The tondo was commissioned by Taddeo Taddei. He was a patron and friend of Raphael, a young contemporary to Michelangelo also working in Florence. Raphael studied and reworked the tondo in two drawings, the versi of The Storming of Perugia now at the Louvre as well as compositional studies for the Madonna del Prato now at Chatsworth House. Raphael also applied the concept of Michelangelo's twisting body of the Christ child stretching across his mother's lap in Bridgewater Madonna.Shortly after its arrival in England, Michelangelo's tondo was sketched by Wilkie, who wrote to Beaumont "your important acquisition of the basso-relievo of Michael Angelo is still the chief talk of all our artists. It is indeed a great addition to our stock of art, and is the only work that has appeared in this northern latitude to justify the great reputation of its author". Cockerell noted in his diary how "the subject seems growing from the marble & emerging into life. It assumes by degrees its shape, features from an unformed mass, as it were you trace & watch its birth from the sculptor's mind".Following its arrival at the Royal Academy, the tondo was sketched by Constable, who published a letter in the Athenaeum of 3 July 1830 praising the way it was lit, "showing the more finished parts to advantage, and causing those less perfect to become masses of shadow, having at a distance all the effect of a rich picture in chiaroscuro". With its differing degrees of finish the tondo is an outstanding technical study piece; plaster casts may be found at the Victoria and Albert Museum and Fitzwilliam Museum. | [
"Raphael",
"Chatsworth House",
"Cockerell",
"Florence",
"marble",
"Constable",
"Madonna del Prato",
"composition",
"Louvre",
"versi",
"Athenaeum",
"tondo",
"Fitzwilliam Museum",
"chiaroscuro",
"Wilkie",
"Michelangelo",
"Royal Academy",
"plaster casts",
"cross",
"Victoria and Albert Museum",
"Bridgewater Madonna"
] |
|
18515_NT | Taddei Tondo | Focus on this artwork and explore the Influence and reception. | The tondo was commissioned by Taddeo Taddei. He was a patron and friend of Raphael, a young contemporary to Michelangelo also working in Florence. Raphael studied and reworked the tondo in two drawings, the versi of The Storming of Perugia now at the Louvre as well as compositional studies for the Madonna del Prato now at Chatsworth House. Raphael also applied the concept of Michelangelo's twisting body of the Christ child stretching across his mother's lap in Bridgewater Madonna.Shortly after its arrival in England, Michelangelo's tondo was sketched by Wilkie, who wrote to Beaumont "your important acquisition of the basso-relievo of Michael Angelo is still the chief talk of all our artists. It is indeed a great addition to our stock of art, and is the only work that has appeared in this northern latitude to justify the great reputation of its author". Cockerell noted in his diary how "the subject seems growing from the marble & emerging into life. It assumes by degrees its shape, features from an unformed mass, as it were you trace & watch its birth from the sculptor's mind".Following its arrival at the Royal Academy, the tondo was sketched by Constable, who published a letter in the Athenaeum of 3 July 1830 praising the way it was lit, "showing the more finished parts to advantage, and causing those less perfect to become masses of shadow, having at a distance all the effect of a rich picture in chiaroscuro". With its differing degrees of finish the tondo is an outstanding technical study piece; plaster casts may be found at the Victoria and Albert Museum and Fitzwilliam Museum. | [
"Raphael",
"Chatsworth House",
"Cockerell",
"Florence",
"marble",
"Constable",
"Madonna del Prato",
"composition",
"Louvre",
"versi",
"Athenaeum",
"tondo",
"Fitzwilliam Museum",
"chiaroscuro",
"Wilkie",
"Michelangelo",
"Royal Academy",
"plaster casts",
"cross",
"Victoria and Albert Museum",
"Bridgewater Madonna"
] |
|
18516_T | Camille (Monet) | Focus on Camille (Monet) and explain the abstract. | Camille, also known as The Woman in the Green Dress, is an 1866 oil-on-canvas painting by French artist Claude Monet. The portrait shows Monet's future wife, Camille Doncieux, wearing a green dress and jacket. Monet submitted the work to the Paris Salon of 1866, where it was well received by critics. The painting is held in the collection of the Kunsthalle Bremen. | [
"Kunsthalle Bremen",
"Claude Monet",
"Camille Doncieux"
] |
|
18516_NT | Camille (Monet) | Focus on this artwork and explain the abstract. | Camille, also known as The Woman in the Green Dress, is an 1866 oil-on-canvas painting by French artist Claude Monet. The portrait shows Monet's future wife, Camille Doncieux, wearing a green dress and jacket. Monet submitted the work to the Paris Salon of 1866, where it was well received by critics. The painting is held in the collection of the Kunsthalle Bremen. | [
"Kunsthalle Bremen",
"Claude Monet",
"Camille Doncieux"
] |
|
18517_T | Annunziata Polyptych | Explore the abstract of this artwork, Annunziata Polyptych. | The Annunziata Polyptych is a painting cycle started by Filippino Lippi and finished by Pietro Perugino, whose central panel is now divided between the Galleria dell'Accademia (Deposition from the Cross) and the Basilica dell'Annunziata, both in Florence, Italy. The polyptych had other six panels, which are housed in the Lindenau-Museum of Altenburg, the Metropolitan Museum of New York City, the Galleria Nazionale d'Arte Antica in Rome and in a private collection in South Africa. | [
"Basilica dell'Annunziata",
"Altenburg",
"New York City",
"Florence",
"Filippino Lippi",
"Lindenau-Museum",
"Metropolitan Museum",
"Galleria dell'Accademia",
"Pietro Perugino",
"Galleria Nazionale d'Arte Antica"
] |
|
18517_NT | Annunziata Polyptych | Explore the abstract of this artwork. | The Annunziata Polyptych is a painting cycle started by Filippino Lippi and finished by Pietro Perugino, whose central panel is now divided between the Galleria dell'Accademia (Deposition from the Cross) and the Basilica dell'Annunziata, both in Florence, Italy. The polyptych had other six panels, which are housed in the Lindenau-Museum of Altenburg, the Metropolitan Museum of New York City, the Galleria Nazionale d'Arte Antica in Rome and in a private collection in South Africa. | [
"Basilica dell'Annunziata",
"Altenburg",
"New York City",
"Florence",
"Filippino Lippi",
"Lindenau-Museum",
"Metropolitan Museum",
"Galleria dell'Accademia",
"Pietro Perugino",
"Galleria Nazionale d'Arte Antica"
] |
|
18518_T | Annunziata Polyptych | Focus on Annunziata Polyptych and discuss the History. | The work was originally commissioned to Filippino Lippi for the high altar of the Annunziata Basilica in Florence. Lippi had already ceded the same commission to Leonardo da Vinci, who had executed a cartoon with St. Anne, the Virgin and the Child, before abandoning the work when he followed Cesare Borgia (1502). The work was thus reassigned to Lippi, who changed completely the theme. At his death in 1504 the painting, already completed in the central part, was assigned to Pietro Perugino, who completed it, including the secondary panels, in 1507.
Once finished, the painting was sharply criticized by the Florentines, due to the alleged lack of originality of the composition. At the time, Perugino was often re-using the same cartoons, due to big number of commissions. The Annunciation altarpiece was thus Perugino's last work in Florence. | [
"Florence",
"Filippino Lippi",
"Pietro Perugino",
"Leonardo da Vinci",
"altarpiece",
"Cesare Borgia"
] |
|
18518_NT | Annunziata Polyptych | Focus on this artwork and discuss the History. | The work was originally commissioned to Filippino Lippi for the high altar of the Annunziata Basilica in Florence. Lippi had already ceded the same commission to Leonardo da Vinci, who had executed a cartoon with St. Anne, the Virgin and the Child, before abandoning the work when he followed Cesare Borgia (1502). The work was thus reassigned to Lippi, who changed completely the theme. At his death in 1504 the painting, already completed in the central part, was assigned to Pietro Perugino, who completed it, including the secondary panels, in 1507.
Once finished, the painting was sharply criticized by the Florentines, due to the alleged lack of originality of the composition. At the time, Perugino was often re-using the same cartoons, due to big number of commissions. The Annunciation altarpiece was thus Perugino's last work in Florence. | [
"Florence",
"Filippino Lippi",
"Pietro Perugino",
"Leonardo da Vinci",
"altarpiece",
"Cesare Borgia"
] |
|
18519_T | Annunziata Polyptych | How does Annunziata Polyptych elucidate its Description? | The work was originally painted on two sides: the Assumption of the Virgin facing the faithful, and the Deposition from the Cross facing the choir. After the panel was split in two, the latter was moved in the Grand Duke's collections, and then to the Gallerie dell'Accademia; the Assumption remained in the church, and was later moved to the Rabatta Chapel. The polyptych had a frame designed by Baccio d'Agnolo.
The Deposition shows the moment in which Jesus Christ is taken down from the cross after his death. Four men are carrying out the task by using ladders. On the ground, at the left, is the Virgin, fainting in the Swoon of the Virgin, and supported by the other Pious Women. The person praying at the foot of the cross is Mary Magdalene, regarding reverently the feet that she had so recently washed and anointed. On the right, caught in a surprised posture, is St. John the Apostle; in front of him, on the ground, are the nails of the crucifixion. It could also be that he is advising the men to be careful with their task, to handle the body of the Lord with ultimate care.
According to Giorgio Vasari, Lippi executed the upper part of the painting. Jesus, left unfinished, was completed by Perugino concerning the face. The latter also painted the lower part of the work, characterized by his typical serene faces and the distant landscape. Perugino's assistants painted a great number of details, especially in the side panels.
The polyptych was completed by a predella, now divided between several American museums. It included:Nativity, 26.7x42.6 cm, Art Institute of Chicago [2]
Baptism of Christ, 26.7x42.6 cm, Art Institute of Chicago [3]
The Samaritan Girl at the Pit, 26,7x42.6 cm, Art Institute of Chicago [4]
Noli me tangere, 26.7x42.6 cm, Art Institute of Chicago [5]
Resurrection of Christ, 27x45.7 cm, New York, Metropolitan Museum [6] | [
"Mary Magdalene",
"Giorgio Vasari",
"Art Institute of Chicago",
"Grand Duke",
"Metropolitan Museum",
"left",
"Baccio d'Agnolo",
"Swoon of the Virgin"
] |
|
18519_NT | Annunziata Polyptych | How does this artwork elucidate its Description? | The work was originally painted on two sides: the Assumption of the Virgin facing the faithful, and the Deposition from the Cross facing the choir. After the panel was split in two, the latter was moved in the Grand Duke's collections, and then to the Gallerie dell'Accademia; the Assumption remained in the church, and was later moved to the Rabatta Chapel. The polyptych had a frame designed by Baccio d'Agnolo.
The Deposition shows the moment in which Jesus Christ is taken down from the cross after his death. Four men are carrying out the task by using ladders. On the ground, at the left, is the Virgin, fainting in the Swoon of the Virgin, and supported by the other Pious Women. The person praying at the foot of the cross is Mary Magdalene, regarding reverently the feet that she had so recently washed and anointed. On the right, caught in a surprised posture, is St. John the Apostle; in front of him, on the ground, are the nails of the crucifixion. It could also be that he is advising the men to be careful with their task, to handle the body of the Lord with ultimate care.
According to Giorgio Vasari, Lippi executed the upper part of the painting. Jesus, left unfinished, was completed by Perugino concerning the face. The latter also painted the lower part of the work, characterized by his typical serene faces and the distant landscape. Perugino's assistants painted a great number of details, especially in the side panels.
The polyptych was completed by a predella, now divided between several American museums. It included:Nativity, 26.7x42.6 cm, Art Institute of Chicago [2]
Baptism of Christ, 26.7x42.6 cm, Art Institute of Chicago [3]
The Samaritan Girl at the Pit, 26,7x42.6 cm, Art Institute of Chicago [4]
Noli me tangere, 26.7x42.6 cm, Art Institute of Chicago [5]
Resurrection of Christ, 27x45.7 cm, New York, Metropolitan Museum [6] | [
"Mary Magdalene",
"Giorgio Vasari",
"Art Institute of Chicago",
"Grand Duke",
"Metropolitan Museum",
"left",
"Baccio d'Agnolo",
"Swoon of the Virgin"
] |
|
18520_T | Ezekiel's Vision (Raphael) | Focus on Ezekiel's Vision (Raphael) and analyze the abstract. | Ezekiel's Vision is a c. 1518 painting by Raphael showing the prophet Ezekiel's vision of God in majesty. It is housed in the Palatine Gallery of Palazzo Pitti, Florence, central Italy. | [
"Florence",
"Raphael",
"vision of God in majesty",
"Palazzo Pitti",
"Ezekiel"
] |
|
18520_NT | Ezekiel's Vision (Raphael) | Focus on this artwork and analyze the abstract. | Ezekiel's Vision is a c. 1518 painting by Raphael showing the prophet Ezekiel's vision of God in majesty. It is housed in the Palatine Gallery of Palazzo Pitti, Florence, central Italy. | [
"Florence",
"Raphael",
"vision of God in majesty",
"Palazzo Pitti",
"Ezekiel"
] |
|
18521_T | Ezekiel's Vision (Raphael) | In Ezekiel's Vision (Raphael), how is the History discussed? | The work is remembered by Renaissance art biographer Giorgio Vasari as property of a Bolognese nobleman, Vincenzo Ercolani. There is trace of payment by him to Raphael for 8 ducats in 1510, but this is generally considered just a down payment, since stylistically the work (inspired for example by Michelangelo's Sistine Chapel ceiling) cannot be dated before 1518.
In Florence since as early as 1589, it was ceded to Francesco I de' Medici and was placed at the Uffizi. The painting is known to be at Palazzo Pitti in 1697. In 1799 it was robbed by the French, who kept it in Paris until returning it back in 1816.
The work was once considered to be by the hand of Giulio Romano, with Raphael providing only the drawing. However, it has been subsequently assigned to Raphael. | [
"Giorgio Vasari",
"Florence",
"Raphael",
"Uffizi",
"Bolognese",
"Michelangelo",
"Sistine Chapel ceiling",
"Francesco I de' Medici",
"Palazzo Pitti",
"Giulio Romano",
"ducats"
] |
|
18521_NT | Ezekiel's Vision (Raphael) | In this artwork, how is the History discussed? | The work is remembered by Renaissance art biographer Giorgio Vasari as property of a Bolognese nobleman, Vincenzo Ercolani. There is trace of payment by him to Raphael for 8 ducats in 1510, but this is generally considered just a down payment, since stylistically the work (inspired for example by Michelangelo's Sistine Chapel ceiling) cannot be dated before 1518.
In Florence since as early as 1589, it was ceded to Francesco I de' Medici and was placed at the Uffizi. The painting is known to be at Palazzo Pitti in 1697. In 1799 it was robbed by the French, who kept it in Paris until returning it back in 1816.
The work was once considered to be by the hand of Giulio Romano, with Raphael providing only the drawing. However, it has been subsequently assigned to Raphael. | [
"Giorgio Vasari",
"Florence",
"Raphael",
"Uffizi",
"Bolognese",
"Michelangelo",
"Sistine Chapel ceiling",
"Francesco I de' Medici",
"Palazzo Pitti",
"Giulio Romano",
"ducats"
] |
|
18522_T | Ezekiel's Vision (Raphael) | Focus on Ezekiel's Vision (Raphael) and explore the Description. | The painting measures 40 by 30 centimetres (16 in × 12 in). | [] |
|
18522_NT | Ezekiel's Vision (Raphael) | Focus on this artwork and explore the Description. | The painting measures 40 by 30 centimetres (16 in × 12 in). | [] |
|
18523_T | Three Creeks, One Will | Focus on Three Creeks, One Will and explain the abstract. | Three Creeks, One Will is an outdoor 2013 sculpture by Devin Laurence Field, installed in Beaverton, Oregon, United States. | [
"Beaverton, Oregon",
"Devin Laurence Field"
] |
|
18523_NT | Three Creeks, One Will | Focus on this artwork and explain the abstract. | Three Creeks, One Will is an outdoor 2013 sculpture by Devin Laurence Field, installed in Beaverton, Oregon, United States. | [
"Beaverton, Oregon",
"Devin Laurence Field"
] |
|
18524_T | Atlas (statue) | Explore the abstract of this artwork, Atlas (statue). | Atlas is a bronze statue in Rockefeller Center, within the International Building's courtyard, in Midtown Manhattan in New York City. It is across Fifth Avenue from St. Patrick's Cathedral. The sculpture depicts the ancient Greek Titan Atlas holding the heavens on his shoulders.Atlas was created by the sculptor Lee Lawrie with the help of Rene Paul Chambellan and was installed in 1937. Atlas was cast at the Roman Bronze Works, a subsidiary of the General Bronze Corporation in Corona, Queens. The Roman Bronze Works had long been a sub-contractor to Louis C. Tiffany's Tiffany Studios which was then bought out by the General Bronze Corporation in 1928. Under the ownership of General Bronze, the Roman Bronze Works produced some of its finest bronze artwork from sculptors like Paul Manship, Rene Chambellan, and Lee Lawrie.The sculpture is in the Art Deco style of Rockefeller Center. The figure of Atlas in the sculpture is 15 feet (4.6 m) tall, while the entire statue is 45 feet (14 m) tall. It weighs 14,000 pounds (6,400 kg), and is the largest sculpture at Rockefeller Center.Atlas is depicted carrying the celestial vault on his shoulders. The north-south axis of the armillary sphere on his shoulders points towards the North Star's position relative to New York City. The statue stands on one muscular leg atop a small stone pedestal, whose corner faces Fifth Avenue. | [
"statue",
"Corona, Queens",
"New York City",
"Lee Lawrie",
"bronze",
"Louis C. Tiffany's",
"Paul Manship",
"Rene Chambellan",
"armillary sphere",
"General Bronze Corporation",
"Roman Bronze Works",
"Art Deco",
"Rene Paul Chambellan",
"Rockefeller Center",
"Bronze",
"North Star",
"Fifth Avenue",
"Tiffany Studios",
"International Building",
"St. Patrick's Cathedral",
"Atlas",
"Midtown Manhattan"
] |
|
18524_NT | Atlas (statue) | Explore the abstract of this artwork. | Atlas is a bronze statue in Rockefeller Center, within the International Building's courtyard, in Midtown Manhattan in New York City. It is across Fifth Avenue from St. Patrick's Cathedral. The sculpture depicts the ancient Greek Titan Atlas holding the heavens on his shoulders.Atlas was created by the sculptor Lee Lawrie with the help of Rene Paul Chambellan and was installed in 1937. Atlas was cast at the Roman Bronze Works, a subsidiary of the General Bronze Corporation in Corona, Queens. The Roman Bronze Works had long been a sub-contractor to Louis C. Tiffany's Tiffany Studios which was then bought out by the General Bronze Corporation in 1928. Under the ownership of General Bronze, the Roman Bronze Works produced some of its finest bronze artwork from sculptors like Paul Manship, Rene Chambellan, and Lee Lawrie.The sculpture is in the Art Deco style of Rockefeller Center. The figure of Atlas in the sculpture is 15 feet (4.6 m) tall, while the entire statue is 45 feet (14 m) tall. It weighs 14,000 pounds (6,400 kg), and is the largest sculpture at Rockefeller Center.Atlas is depicted carrying the celestial vault on his shoulders. The north-south axis of the armillary sphere on his shoulders points towards the North Star's position relative to New York City. The statue stands on one muscular leg atop a small stone pedestal, whose corner faces Fifth Avenue. | [
"statue",
"Corona, Queens",
"New York City",
"Lee Lawrie",
"bronze",
"Louis C. Tiffany's",
"Paul Manship",
"Rene Chambellan",
"armillary sphere",
"General Bronze Corporation",
"Roman Bronze Works",
"Art Deco",
"Rene Paul Chambellan",
"Rockefeller Center",
"Bronze",
"North Star",
"Fifth Avenue",
"Tiffany Studios",
"International Building",
"St. Patrick's Cathedral",
"Atlas",
"Midtown Manhattan"
] |
|
18525_T | Atlas (statue) | Focus on Atlas (statue) and discuss the In popular culture. | The piece has since been appropriated as a symbol of the Objectivist movement and has been associated with Ayn Rand's novel Atlas Shrugged (1957).
It has been featured in almost every episode of the television series 30 Rock, appearing in numerous establishing shots depicting the 30 Rockefeller Plaza building, where the series is set. Most Rainforest Cafe locations have a statue resembling this one in a waterfall with a fountain, with the words "Rescue the Rainforest" in green neon letters across the equator of the globe.Ridley Scott has cited the sculpture as the aesthetic inspiration for the character "Mother," on HBO Max's Raised by Wolves. | [
"Objectivist",
"statue",
"Rainforest Cafe",
"establishing shot",
"30 Rockefeller Plaza",
"Raised by Wolves",
"HBO Max",
"30 Rock",
"Ayn Rand",
"Atlas Shrugged",
"Ridley Scott",
"Atlas"
] |
|
18525_NT | Atlas (statue) | Focus on this artwork and discuss the In popular culture. | The piece has since been appropriated as a symbol of the Objectivist movement and has been associated with Ayn Rand's novel Atlas Shrugged (1957).
It has been featured in almost every episode of the television series 30 Rock, appearing in numerous establishing shots depicting the 30 Rockefeller Plaza building, where the series is set. Most Rainforest Cafe locations have a statue resembling this one in a waterfall with a fountain, with the words "Rescue the Rainforest" in green neon letters across the equator of the globe.Ridley Scott has cited the sculpture as the aesthetic inspiration for the character "Mother," on HBO Max's Raised by Wolves. | [
"Objectivist",
"statue",
"Rainforest Cafe",
"establishing shot",
"30 Rockefeller Plaza",
"Raised by Wolves",
"HBO Max",
"30 Rock",
"Ayn Rand",
"Atlas Shrugged",
"Ridley Scott",
"Atlas"
] |
|
18526_T | Awakening Slave | How does Awakening Slave elucidate its abstract? | The Awakening Slave is a 2.67m high marble statue by Michelangelo, dated to 1525-1530. It is one of the 'Prisoners', the series of unfinished sculptures for the tomb of Pope Julius II. It is now held in the Galleria dell'Accademia in Florence.
It seems that from the first project for the tomb of Julius II (1505) in the lower register of the mausoleum were planned a series of "Prisons", that is, a series of statues larger than the life of figures chained in various poses as prisoners, precisely, to be placed on the pillars that framed niches and topped with Hermes. Paired with each niche (in which a winged victory was planned) they were to initially be sixteen or twenty, being gradually reduced in the projects that followed, to twelve (second project, 1513), eight (third project, 1516) and finally perhaps only four (perhaps from the fourth or fifth project, 1526 and 1532), and then definitively eliminated in the final project of 1542.
The first of the series, of which traces can be found in Michelangelo's chart, are the two Prisons of Paris, called from the nineteenth century "Slaves": the Dying Slave and the Rebel Slave. They were carved in Rome around 1513.
The Florentine Prisons (Young Slave, Bearded Slave, Atlas, Slave who is reamed) may have been carved in the second half of the 1520s, while the master was engaged at San Lorenzo in Florence (but historians have proposed dating ranging from 1519 to 1534). It is known that they were in the artist's workshop in Via Mozza again in 1544, when Michelangelo's nephew, Leonardo Buonarroti, asked permission to sell them (Michelangelo did not set foot in Florence again after 1534). The permit was denied and only in 1564 they were donated, with the Genius of Victory, to Grand Duke Cosimo I who then placed them at the four corners of the Cave of Buontalenti, by 1591.
From there they were removed in 1908 to gather them at the michelangiolesco corpus that was forming in the Florentine Gallery.
As for the dating Justi (and others) they proposed 1519 on the basis of a letter of 13 February in which Jacopo Salviati promised Cardinal Aginesis, heir to Julius II, that the sculptor would perform four figures for the tomb by the summer of that year; Wilde the 1523, referring to a hint of Cardinal Giulio de' Medici (future Clement VII)who would see them before leaving for Rome on that date; finally de Tolnay gave them to 1530-1534, based on style, frequent references to unfinished sculptures for the tomb of Pope Julius in the paperwork of 1531-1532 and on the basis of the pottery mention that they were made while the artist prepared the cardboard of the Universal Judgment. | [
"Young Slave",
"Michelangelo",
"Dying Slave",
"Florence",
"Bearded Slave",
"marble",
"Galleria dell'Accademia",
"tomb of Pope Julius II"
] |
|
18526_NT | Awakening Slave | How does this artwork elucidate its abstract? | The Awakening Slave is a 2.67m high marble statue by Michelangelo, dated to 1525-1530. It is one of the 'Prisoners', the series of unfinished sculptures for the tomb of Pope Julius II. It is now held in the Galleria dell'Accademia in Florence.
It seems that from the first project for the tomb of Julius II (1505) in the lower register of the mausoleum were planned a series of "Prisons", that is, a series of statues larger than the life of figures chained in various poses as prisoners, precisely, to be placed on the pillars that framed niches and topped with Hermes. Paired with each niche (in which a winged victory was planned) they were to initially be sixteen or twenty, being gradually reduced in the projects that followed, to twelve (second project, 1513), eight (third project, 1516) and finally perhaps only four (perhaps from the fourth or fifth project, 1526 and 1532), and then definitively eliminated in the final project of 1542.
The first of the series, of which traces can be found in Michelangelo's chart, are the two Prisons of Paris, called from the nineteenth century "Slaves": the Dying Slave and the Rebel Slave. They were carved in Rome around 1513.
The Florentine Prisons (Young Slave, Bearded Slave, Atlas, Slave who is reamed) may have been carved in the second half of the 1520s, while the master was engaged at San Lorenzo in Florence (but historians have proposed dating ranging from 1519 to 1534). It is known that they were in the artist's workshop in Via Mozza again in 1544, when Michelangelo's nephew, Leonardo Buonarroti, asked permission to sell them (Michelangelo did not set foot in Florence again after 1534). The permit was denied and only in 1564 they were donated, with the Genius of Victory, to Grand Duke Cosimo I who then placed them at the four corners of the Cave of Buontalenti, by 1591.
From there they were removed in 1908 to gather them at the michelangiolesco corpus that was forming in the Florentine Gallery.
As for the dating Justi (and others) they proposed 1519 on the basis of a letter of 13 February in which Jacopo Salviati promised Cardinal Aginesis, heir to Julius II, that the sculptor would perform four figures for the tomb by the summer of that year; Wilde the 1523, referring to a hint of Cardinal Giulio de' Medici (future Clement VII)who would see them before leaving for Rome on that date; finally de Tolnay gave them to 1530-1534, based on style, frequent references to unfinished sculptures for the tomb of Pope Julius in the paperwork of 1531-1532 and on the basis of the pottery mention that they were made while the artist prepared the cardboard of the Universal Judgment. | [
"Young Slave",
"Michelangelo",
"Dying Slave",
"Florence",
"Bearded Slave",
"marble",
"Galleria dell'Accademia",
"tomb of Pope Julius II"
] |
|
18527_T | Food for the Spirit | Focus on Food for the Spirit and analyze the Outline. | Piper had begun Food for the Spirit out of a temporary isolated lifestyle that she took upon in her New York loft, including doing yoga, reading, writing, and fasting. However, most integral to the piece was Immanuel Kant's metaphysical work, the Critique of Pure Reason, which she became so intensely engaged with that, by her intention, she began to disassociate and question her material existence. Around the end of this period, where she started to lose all sense of being, intentionally strictly influenced by Kant's perspective on Being and obsessed with Kantian thought, she finalized the piece by ritualistically taking photographs of herself in the mirror, undressed in various ways, as she chanted key phrases from Kant's text that made her feel existentially questioned. Food for the Spirit is an essential piece of artwork in the contribution to the development of conceptual art.
"I rigged up a camera and tape recorder next to [a] mirror, so that every time the fear of losing myself overtook me and drove me to the 'reality check' of the mirror, I was able to both record my physical appearance objectively and also record myself on tape repeating the passage in Critique that was currently driving me to self-transcendence." | [
"Being",
"conceptual art",
"Immanuel Kant",
"Kantian",
"Critique of Pure Reason",
"disassociate",
"metaphysical"
] |
|
18527_NT | Food for the Spirit | Focus on this artwork and analyze the Outline. | Piper had begun Food for the Spirit out of a temporary isolated lifestyle that she took upon in her New York loft, including doing yoga, reading, writing, and fasting. However, most integral to the piece was Immanuel Kant's metaphysical work, the Critique of Pure Reason, which she became so intensely engaged with that, by her intention, she began to disassociate and question her material existence. Around the end of this period, where she started to lose all sense of being, intentionally strictly influenced by Kant's perspective on Being and obsessed with Kantian thought, she finalized the piece by ritualistically taking photographs of herself in the mirror, undressed in various ways, as she chanted key phrases from Kant's text that made her feel existentially questioned. Food for the Spirit is an essential piece of artwork in the contribution to the development of conceptual art.
"I rigged up a camera and tape recorder next to [a] mirror, so that every time the fear of losing myself overtook me and drove me to the 'reality check' of the mirror, I was able to both record my physical appearance objectively and also record myself on tape repeating the passage in Critique that was currently driving me to self-transcendence." | [
"Being",
"conceptual art",
"Immanuel Kant",
"Kantian",
"Critique of Pure Reason",
"disassociate",
"metaphysical"
] |
|
18528_T | Self-portrait in a Convex Mirror | In Self-portrait in a Convex Mirror, how is the abstract discussed? | Self-portrait in a Convex Mirror (c. 1524) is a painting by the Italian late Renaissance artist Parmigianino. It is housed in the Kunsthistorisches Museum, Vienna, Austria. | [
"Parmigianino",
"Renaissance",
"Kunsthistorisches Museum",
"Austria",
"Italian",
"Self-portrait",
"Vienna"
] |
|
18528_NT | Self-portrait in a Convex Mirror | In this artwork, how is the abstract discussed? | Self-portrait in a Convex Mirror (c. 1524) is a painting by the Italian late Renaissance artist Parmigianino. It is housed in the Kunsthistorisches Museum, Vienna, Austria. | [
"Parmigianino",
"Renaissance",
"Kunsthistorisches Museum",
"Austria",
"Italian",
"Self-portrait",
"Vienna"
] |
|
18529_T | Self-portrait in a Convex Mirror | Focus on Self-portrait in a Convex Mirror and explore the History. | The work is mentioned by Late Renaissance art biographer Giorgio Vasari, who lists it as one of three small-size paintings that the artist brought to Rome with him in 1525. Vasari relays that the self-portrait was created by Parmigianino as an example to showcase his talent to potential customers.The portrait was donated to pope Clement VII, and later to writer Pietro Aretino, in whose house Vasari himself, then still a child, saw it. It was later acquired by Vicentine sculptor Valerio Belli and, after his death in 1546, by his son Elio. Through the intercession of Andrea Palladio, in 1560 the work went to Venetian sculptor Alessandro Vittoria, who bequeathed it to emperor Rudolf II. It arrived in Prague in 1608, and later it became part of the Habsburg imperial collections in Vienna (1777), although attributed to Correggio. | [
"Giorgio Vasari",
"Parmigianino",
"Renaissance",
"Andrea Palladio",
"Rudolf II",
"Alessandro Vittoria",
"Valerio Belli",
"Pietro Aretino",
"Correggio",
"Vienna",
"Clement VII",
"Prague"
] |
|
18529_NT | Self-portrait in a Convex Mirror | Focus on this artwork and explore the History. | The work is mentioned by Late Renaissance art biographer Giorgio Vasari, who lists it as one of three small-size paintings that the artist brought to Rome with him in 1525. Vasari relays that the self-portrait was created by Parmigianino as an example to showcase his talent to potential customers.The portrait was donated to pope Clement VII, and later to writer Pietro Aretino, in whose house Vasari himself, then still a child, saw it. It was later acquired by Vicentine sculptor Valerio Belli and, after his death in 1546, by his son Elio. Through the intercession of Andrea Palladio, in 1560 the work went to Venetian sculptor Alessandro Vittoria, who bequeathed it to emperor Rudolf II. It arrived in Prague in 1608, and later it became part of the Habsburg imperial collections in Vienna (1777), although attributed to Correggio. | [
"Giorgio Vasari",
"Parmigianino",
"Renaissance",
"Andrea Palladio",
"Rudolf II",
"Alessandro Vittoria",
"Valerio Belli",
"Pietro Aretino",
"Correggio",
"Vienna",
"Clement VII",
"Prague"
] |
|
18530_T | Self-portrait in a Convex Mirror | Focus on Self-portrait in a Convex Mirror and explain the Description. | The painting depicts the young artist (then twenty one) in the middle of a room, distorted by the use of a convex mirror. The hand in the foreground is greatly elongated and distorted by the mirror. The work was painted on a specially-prepared convex panel in order to mimic the curve of the mirror used. | [
"convex mirror"
] |
|
18530_NT | Self-portrait in a Convex Mirror | Focus on this artwork and explain the Description. | The painting depicts the young artist (then twenty one) in the middle of a room, distorted by the use of a convex mirror. The hand in the foreground is greatly elongated and distorted by the mirror. The work was painted on a specially-prepared convex panel in order to mimic the curve of the mirror used. | [
"convex mirror"
] |
|
18531_T | Washington Gate | Explore the abstract of this artwork, Washington Gate. | The Washington Gate, or Washington Memorial Gate, is a Milford pink granite gate installed at Cambridge Common in Cambridge, Massachusetts, United States. Each of the walls extending from the gate has a bronze tablet. It was presented by the Daughters of the American Revolution and dedicated on October 19, 1906. | [
"Cambridge Common",
"Massachusetts",
"Daughters of the American Revolution",
"Cambridge, Massachusetts"
] |
|
18531_NT | Washington Gate | Explore the abstract of this artwork. | The Washington Gate, or Washington Memorial Gate, is a Milford pink granite gate installed at Cambridge Common in Cambridge, Massachusetts, United States. Each of the walls extending from the gate has a bronze tablet. It was presented by the Daughters of the American Revolution and dedicated on October 19, 1906. | [
"Cambridge Common",
"Massachusetts",
"Daughters of the American Revolution",
"Cambridge, Massachusetts"
] |
|
18532_T | Man and Woman (Léger) | Focus on Man and Woman (Léger) and discuss the abstract. | Man and Woman is an oil-on-canvas painting executed in 1921 by the French artist Fernand Léger. The painting is a cubist portrait of a man and a woman locked in a passionate embrace at odds with their depersonalized, industrialized setting. The painting is held by the Indianapolis Museum of Art, United States. | [
"canvas",
"painting",
"Fernand Léger",
"French",
"cubist",
"Indianapolis Museum of Art",
"Indianapolis"
] |
|
18532_NT | Man and Woman (Léger) | Focus on this artwork and discuss the abstract. | Man and Woman is an oil-on-canvas painting executed in 1921 by the French artist Fernand Léger. The painting is a cubist portrait of a man and a woman locked in a passionate embrace at odds with their depersonalized, industrialized setting. The painting is held by the Indianapolis Museum of Art, United States. | [
"canvas",
"painting",
"Fernand Léger",
"French",
"cubist",
"Indianapolis Museum of Art",
"Indianapolis"
] |
|
18533_T | Man and Woman (Léger) | How does Man and Woman (Léger) elucidate its Description? | Léger rejected many aspects of cubism, such as multiple simultaneous vantage points, but retained the trait of reducing figures to their most basic, geometric components. To that end, the woman in this painting consists of curves and the color orange, while the man is depicted in columns and blue. They are scarcely distinguishable from the background, an industrial latticework of beams and girders. In this way, Léger illustrated his belief that, although it might be a struggle, humans could maintain their humanity in a mechanized age, coexisting with technology and burgeoning urbanization. Léger's technique underscores this message, with flat brushwork emulating mass production. The disjointed figures force rapid visual shifts, which simulates the increasing sensory complexity of the machine age. | [
"painting"
] |
|
18533_NT | Man and Woman (Léger) | How does this artwork elucidate its Description? | Léger rejected many aspects of cubism, such as multiple simultaneous vantage points, but retained the trait of reducing figures to their most basic, geometric components. To that end, the woman in this painting consists of curves and the color orange, while the man is depicted in columns and blue. They are scarcely distinguishable from the background, an industrial latticework of beams and girders. In this way, Léger illustrated his belief that, although it might be a struggle, humans could maintain their humanity in a mechanized age, coexisting with technology and burgeoning urbanization. Léger's technique underscores this message, with flat brushwork emulating mass production. The disjointed figures force rapid visual shifts, which simulates the increasing sensory complexity of the machine age. | [
"painting"
] |
|
18534_T | Man and Woman (Léger) | Focus on Man and Woman (Léger) and analyze the Historical information. | Léger's battlefront experiences during World War I instilled in him the conviction that art should reflect the new, mechanized world, and be accessible to the average person. He identified strongly with the working class. Man and Woman was created in the middle of his "mechanica" period, when he created grand figures in a mechanical style. | [] |
|
18534_NT | Man and Woman (Léger) | Focus on this artwork and analyze the Historical information. | Léger's battlefront experiences during World War I instilled in him the conviction that art should reflect the new, mechanized world, and be accessible to the average person. He identified strongly with the working class. Man and Woman was created in the middle of his "mechanica" period, when he created grand figures in a mechanical style. | [] |
|
18535_T | Man and Woman (Léger) | In Man and Woman (Léger), how is the Acquisition discussed? | Man and Woman was acquired by the IMA in 1952, courtesy of the Martha Delzell Memorial Fund. It has the acquisition number 52.28. | [] |
|
18535_NT | Man and Woman (Léger) | In this artwork, how is the Acquisition discussed? | Man and Woman was acquired by the IMA in 1952, courtesy of the Martha Delzell Memorial Fund. It has the acquisition number 52.28. | [] |
|
18536_T | St Antoninus Giving Alms | Focus on St Antoninus Giving Alms and explore the abstract. | St Antoninus Giving Alms or The Alms of St Antoninus is an oil-on-canvas painting by the Italian artist Lorenzo Lotto, created c. 1540–1542. It depicts Archbishop Antoninus of Florence giving alms as an allegorical ideal for bureaucratic charity. The painting is now displayed in the Basilica dei Santi Giovanni e Paolo in Venice. | [
"Lorenzo Lotto",
"Basilica dei Santi Giovanni e Paolo",
"Antoninus of Florence",
"Venice",
"Santi Giovanni e Paolo"
] |
|
18536_NT | St Antoninus Giving Alms | Focus on this artwork and explore the abstract. | St Antoninus Giving Alms or The Alms of St Antoninus is an oil-on-canvas painting by the Italian artist Lorenzo Lotto, created c. 1540–1542. It depicts Archbishop Antoninus of Florence giving alms as an allegorical ideal for bureaucratic charity. The painting is now displayed in the Basilica dei Santi Giovanni e Paolo in Venice. | [
"Lorenzo Lotto",
"Basilica dei Santi Giovanni e Paolo",
"Antoninus of Florence",
"Venice",
"Santi Giovanni e Paolo"
] |
|
18537_T | Octetra | Focus on Octetra and explain the abstract. | Octetra is a concrete sculpture by Isamu Noguchi (1904–1988) from 1968. | [
"Isamu Noguchi"
] |
|
18537_NT | Octetra | Focus on this artwork and explain the abstract. | Octetra is a concrete sculpture by Isamu Noguchi (1904–1988) from 1968. | [
"Isamu Noguchi"
] |
|
18538_T | Octetra | Explore the Description of this artwork, Octetra. | It is an abstract painted concrete sculpture. It was designed to be a play structure. | [] |
|
18538_NT | Octetra | Explore the Description of this artwork. | It is an abstract painted concrete sculpture. It was designed to be a play structure. | [] |
|
18539_T | Octetra | Focus on Octetra and discuss the History. | It was first exhibited near Spoleto CathedralThere are examples at Robert T. Webb Sculpture Garden, Takamatsu Japan, Moerenuma Park.It was shown at the Pace Gallery. | [
"Takamatsu",
"Spoleto Cathedral",
"Robert T. Webb Sculpture Garden",
"Moerenuma Park",
"Pace Gallery"
] |
|
18539_NT | Octetra | Focus on this artwork and discuss the History. | It was first exhibited near Spoleto CathedralThere are examples at Robert T. Webb Sculpture Garden, Takamatsu Japan, Moerenuma Park.It was shown at the Pace Gallery. | [
"Takamatsu",
"Spoleto Cathedral",
"Robert T. Webb Sculpture Garden",
"Moerenuma Park",
"Pace Gallery"
] |
|
18540_T | The Pipes of Pan (painting) | How does The Pipes of Pan (painting) elucidate its abstract? | The Pipes of Pan (French: La flûte de Pan) is an oil-on-canvas by Spanish artist Pablo Picasso. Painted in 1923 during Picasso's classical period, the painting depicts two statuesque men of mythological origins. Frequently acknowledged to be his cornerstone work during this era, the painting makes use of a large canvas and a classical color palette that are acutely reminiscent of the ancient world. The subjects which Picasso chooses to explore within this work– male Greek youth, musical pipes, as well as the Mediterranean setting– all hark back to classical ancient art. | [
"Picasso's classical period",
"Pablo Picasso",
"oil-on-canvas"
] |
|
18540_NT | The Pipes of Pan (painting) | How does this artwork elucidate its abstract? | The Pipes of Pan (French: La flûte de Pan) is an oil-on-canvas by Spanish artist Pablo Picasso. Painted in 1923 during Picasso's classical period, the painting depicts two statuesque men of mythological origins. Frequently acknowledged to be his cornerstone work during this era, the painting makes use of a large canvas and a classical color palette that are acutely reminiscent of the ancient world. The subjects which Picasso chooses to explore within this work– male Greek youth, musical pipes, as well as the Mediterranean setting– all hark back to classical ancient art. | [
"Picasso's classical period",
"Pablo Picasso",
"oil-on-canvas"
] |
|
18541_T | The Pipes of Pan (painting) | Focus on The Pipes of Pan (painting) and analyze the Controversy. | There has been known controversy in the past regarding the so-called “true nature” of the subject for this particular painting. At the era of this painting, Picasso, who was deep into his fascination with classical art, met Sara Murphy in 1921. She was a beautiful and wealthy American expatriate who became flirtatiously involved with Picasso, their relations leading all the way up to the conception of this painting. Infrared photographs of The Pipes of Pan taken in the 90s revealed an initial composition that included four total figures. Many art scholars believe that one figure was to be Venus, depicted as Sara, and that another figure was to be Mars, depicted as Picasso. However, a possible reason why this initial idea was scrapped was because Picasso's infatuation came to a head– perhaps Sara rejected him, and so he erased her from the painting composition. | [] |
|
18541_NT | The Pipes of Pan (painting) | Focus on this artwork and analyze the Controversy. | There has been known controversy in the past regarding the so-called “true nature” of the subject for this particular painting. At the era of this painting, Picasso, who was deep into his fascination with classical art, met Sara Murphy in 1921. She was a beautiful and wealthy American expatriate who became flirtatiously involved with Picasso, their relations leading all the way up to the conception of this painting. Infrared photographs of The Pipes of Pan taken in the 90s revealed an initial composition that included four total figures. Many art scholars believe that one figure was to be Venus, depicted as Sara, and that another figure was to be Mars, depicted as Picasso. However, a possible reason why this initial idea was scrapped was because Picasso's infatuation came to a head– perhaps Sara rejected him, and so he erased her from the painting composition. | [] |
|
18542_T | Pitcher and Violin | In Pitcher and Violin, how is the abstract discussed? | Pitcher and Violin is an oil-on-canvas painting by the French artist Georges Braque, created in 1909–10. It was made at the beginning of the development of what would be analytical cubism. The painting is held the Kunstmuseum, in Basel. | [
"analytical cubism",
"Kunstmuseum",
"Basel",
"Georges Braque"
] |
|
18542_NT | Pitcher and Violin | In this artwork, how is the abstract discussed? | Pitcher and Violin is an oil-on-canvas painting by the French artist Georges Braque, created in 1909–10. It was made at the beginning of the development of what would be analytical cubism. The painting is held the Kunstmuseum, in Basel. | [
"analytical cubism",
"Kunstmuseum",
"Basel",
"Georges Braque"
] |
|
18543_T | Pitcher and Violin | Focus on Pitcher and Violin and explore the History. | Pitcher and Violin was part of a series of remarkable still lifes that Braque painted in 1910–1912. The painting depicts a violin and a pitcher, but far from the tradition of typical still lives: the outlines of the objects are extremely abstract and monochrome. This style is typical of the stage of analytical cubism, which flourished in 1910–1912. | [
"analytical cubism"
] |
|
18543_NT | Pitcher and Violin | Focus on this artwork and explore the History. | Pitcher and Violin was part of a series of remarkable still lifes that Braque painted in 1910–1912. The painting depicts a violin and a pitcher, but far from the tradition of typical still lives: the outlines of the objects are extremely abstract and monochrome. This style is typical of the stage of analytical cubism, which flourished in 1910–1912. | [
"analytical cubism"
] |
|
18544_T | A Donkey, 3 Rocks, and a Bird. | Focus on A Donkey, 3 Rocks, and a Bird. and explain the abstract. | A Donkey, 3 Rocks, and a Bird., also known as Donkey, Bird and Rocks and Donkey, Three Rocks, and a Bird, is an outdoor 1992 sculpture by Brad Rude, installed at Catlin Gabel School in West Haven-Sylvan, a census-designated place in Washington County and the Portland metropolitan area, in the U.S. state of Oregon. | [
"Oregon",
"Portland metropolitan area",
"West Haven-Sylvan",
"Brad Rude",
"Catlin Gabel School",
"Washington County",
"U.S. state",
"census-designated place"
] |
|
18544_NT | A Donkey, 3 Rocks, and a Bird. | Focus on this artwork and explain the abstract. | A Donkey, 3 Rocks, and a Bird., also known as Donkey, Bird and Rocks and Donkey, Three Rocks, and a Bird, is an outdoor 1992 sculpture by Brad Rude, installed at Catlin Gabel School in West Haven-Sylvan, a census-designated place in Washington County and the Portland metropolitan area, in the U.S. state of Oregon. | [
"Oregon",
"Portland metropolitan area",
"West Haven-Sylvan",
"Brad Rude",
"Catlin Gabel School",
"Washington County",
"U.S. state",
"census-designated place"
] |
|
18545_T | A Donkey, 3 Rocks, and a Bird. | Explore the Description and history of this artwork, A Donkey, 3 Rocks, and a Bird.. | Brad Rude's A Donkey, 3 Rocks, and a Bird. (1992), installed at Catlin Gabel School between the Lower School's science room and the Art Barn, is a cast bronze and stone sculpture depicting a life-size donkey and a bird facing one another. The donkey has a rock balanced on its back, while the bird is both standing on a rock and balancing one on its head. The donkey has surfaces decorations, including glyphs and figures, and is coated in polychrome bronze. The bird is coated in blue, green, orange, red and yellow. The sculpture measures approximately 55 inches (1.4 m) x 108 inches (2.7 m) x 20 inches (0.51 m). Its base is made of exposed aggregate concrete and measures approximately 10 inches (0.25 m) x 108 inches (2.7 m) x 20 inches (0.51 m). One plaque on the base reads, "A DONKEY / 3 ROCKS, / AND A BIRD." / BY BRAD RUDE '92. Another reads, Donkey, Bird and Rocks / by Brad Rude / Cast Bronze / a gift from / Dori Schnitzer '71 and Susan Schnitzer '74 / A CAMPAIGN FOR CATLIN GABEL / Breaking Ground for the 21st Century / September 1992. Inscriptions near the donkey's crotch displays the artist's last name, a copyright symbol, and the year of completion, plus the founder's mark for Will Willie. The Smithsonian Institution describes the work as abstract. Its condition was deemed "well maintained" by Smithsonian's "Save Outdoor Sculpture!" program in November 1993. | [
"Brad Rude",
"Catlin Gabel School",
"Smithsonian Institution",
"Save Outdoor Sculpture!",
"abstract"
] |
|
18545_NT | A Donkey, 3 Rocks, and a Bird. | Explore the Description and history of this artwork. | Brad Rude's A Donkey, 3 Rocks, and a Bird. (1992), installed at Catlin Gabel School between the Lower School's science room and the Art Barn, is a cast bronze and stone sculpture depicting a life-size donkey and a bird facing one another. The donkey has a rock balanced on its back, while the bird is both standing on a rock and balancing one on its head. The donkey has surfaces decorations, including glyphs and figures, and is coated in polychrome bronze. The bird is coated in blue, green, orange, red and yellow. The sculpture measures approximately 55 inches (1.4 m) x 108 inches (2.7 m) x 20 inches (0.51 m). Its base is made of exposed aggregate concrete and measures approximately 10 inches (0.25 m) x 108 inches (2.7 m) x 20 inches (0.51 m). One plaque on the base reads, "A DONKEY / 3 ROCKS, / AND A BIRD." / BY BRAD RUDE '92. Another reads, Donkey, Bird and Rocks / by Brad Rude / Cast Bronze / a gift from / Dori Schnitzer '71 and Susan Schnitzer '74 / A CAMPAIGN FOR CATLIN GABEL / Breaking Ground for the 21st Century / September 1992. Inscriptions near the donkey's crotch displays the artist's last name, a copyright symbol, and the year of completion, plus the founder's mark for Will Willie. The Smithsonian Institution describes the work as abstract. Its condition was deemed "well maintained" by Smithsonian's "Save Outdoor Sculpture!" program in November 1993. | [
"Brad Rude",
"Catlin Gabel School",
"Smithsonian Institution",
"Save Outdoor Sculpture!",
"abstract"
] |
|
18546_T | Killing a Deer | Focus on Killing a Deer and discuss the abstract. | Killing a Deer or A Deer Hunt – The Kill (French: L'Hallali du cerf), is a very large painting (355 by 505 cm) representing a hunting scene, completed in 1867 by the French Realist painter Gustave Courbet. The picture is currently on display in the Musée des Beaux-Arts et d'Archéologie of Besançon. | [
"Realist",
"Besançon",
"Musée des Beaux-Arts et d'Archéologie",
"Gustave Courbet",
"hunt"
] |
|
18546_NT | Killing a Deer | Focus on this artwork and discuss the abstract. | Killing a Deer or A Deer Hunt – The Kill (French: L'Hallali du cerf), is a very large painting (355 by 505 cm) representing a hunting scene, completed in 1867 by the French Realist painter Gustave Courbet. The picture is currently on display in the Musée des Beaux-Arts et d'Archéologie of Besançon. | [
"Realist",
"Besançon",
"Musée des Beaux-Arts et d'Archéologie",
"Gustave Courbet",
"hunt"
] |
|
18547_T | Killing a Deer | How does Killing a Deer elucidate its History? | The painting was done during the winter of 1866–1867. It is in the large format newly adopted by Courbet, as also in A Burial at Ornans and The Artist's Studio. The work was exhibited at the French art salons and academies of 1869. The picture caused some scandal, major formats being previously reserved for noble history paintings rather than hunting scenes. | [
"history painting",
"Ornans",
"A Burial at Ornans",
"The Artist's Studio",
"hunt",
"French art salons and academies"
] |
|
18547_NT | Killing a Deer | How does this artwork elucidate its History? | The painting was done during the winter of 1866–1867. It is in the large format newly adopted by Courbet, as also in A Burial at Ornans and The Artist's Studio. The work was exhibited at the French art salons and academies of 1869. The picture caused some scandal, major formats being previously reserved for noble history paintings rather than hunting scenes. | [
"history painting",
"Ornans",
"A Burial at Ornans",
"The Artist's Studio",
"hunt",
"French art salons and academies"
] |
|
18548_T | Killing a Deer | Focus on Killing a Deer and analyze the Iconography. | The scene shows a deer attacked by a pack of hunting dogs, collapsed on the snowy ground. Two characters are on the right. The drill is Cusenier Jules, a resident of Ornans while the man on horseback is Felix Gaudy, of Vuillafans. L'Hallali is in the tradition of representation of the scene hunt, from the seventeenth century. Courbet uses a harsh realistic representation closer to Flemish models. Hunting scenes are common in the paintings of Courbet; every step of the chase is represented | [
"right",
"Ornans",
"Hunting",
"hunt",
"Vuillafans"
] |
|
18548_NT | Killing a Deer | Focus on this artwork and analyze the Iconography. | The scene shows a deer attacked by a pack of hunting dogs, collapsed on the snowy ground. Two characters are on the right. The drill is Cusenier Jules, a resident of Ornans while the man on horseback is Felix Gaudy, of Vuillafans. L'Hallali is in the tradition of representation of the scene hunt, from the seventeenth century. Courbet uses a harsh realistic representation closer to Flemish models. Hunting scenes are common in the paintings of Courbet; every step of the chase is represented | [
"right",
"Ornans",
"Hunting",
"hunt",
"Vuillafans"
] |
|
18549_T | Isaac Newton Gargoyle | In Isaac Newton Gargoyle, how is the abstract discussed? | Isaac Newton Gargoyle is an outdoor 1988–1989 hammered copper sheet relief depicting Isaac Newton by Wayne Chabre, installed on the exterior of Willamette Hall on the University of Oregon campus, in Eugene, Oregon. The sculpture is part of the collection of the Oregon Arts Commission, and administered by the University of Oregon. It was surveyed by the Smithsonian Institution's "Save Outdoor Sculpture!" program in 1994.The piece is one of a series by Chabre at the Eugene campus that includes scientists and mathematicians Albert Einstein (Einstein Gargoyle, 1986), Marie Curie (Marie Curie Gargoyle, 1989), James Clerk Maxwell (Maxwell & Demon Gargoyle, 1989), Alan Turing (Alan Turing, 1988), John von Neumann (John von Neumann, 1987), and Thomas Condon; a fruit fly (Drosophila Fly Head, 1988); and a school of zebrafish. | [
"Oregon Arts Commission",
"John von Neumann",
"Marie Curie Gargoyle",
"University of Oregon",
"zebrafish",
"Alan Turing",
"Isaac Newton",
"Smithsonian Institution",
"Marie Curie",
"Drosophila Fly Head",
"Wayne Chabre",
"Einstein Gargoyle",
"Willamette Hall",
"Save Outdoor Sculpture!",
"Maxwell & Demon Gargoyle",
"Eugene, Oregon"
] |
|
18549_NT | Isaac Newton Gargoyle | In this artwork, how is the abstract discussed? | Isaac Newton Gargoyle is an outdoor 1988–1989 hammered copper sheet relief depicting Isaac Newton by Wayne Chabre, installed on the exterior of Willamette Hall on the University of Oregon campus, in Eugene, Oregon. The sculpture is part of the collection of the Oregon Arts Commission, and administered by the University of Oregon. It was surveyed by the Smithsonian Institution's "Save Outdoor Sculpture!" program in 1994.The piece is one of a series by Chabre at the Eugene campus that includes scientists and mathematicians Albert Einstein (Einstein Gargoyle, 1986), Marie Curie (Marie Curie Gargoyle, 1989), James Clerk Maxwell (Maxwell & Demon Gargoyle, 1989), Alan Turing (Alan Turing, 1988), John von Neumann (John von Neumann, 1987), and Thomas Condon; a fruit fly (Drosophila Fly Head, 1988); and a school of zebrafish. | [
"Oregon Arts Commission",
"John von Neumann",
"Marie Curie Gargoyle",
"University of Oregon",
"zebrafish",
"Alan Turing",
"Isaac Newton",
"Smithsonian Institution",
"Marie Curie",
"Drosophila Fly Head",
"Wayne Chabre",
"Einstein Gargoyle",
"Willamette Hall",
"Save Outdoor Sculpture!",
"Maxwell & Demon Gargoyle",
"Eugene, Oregon"
] |
|
18550_T | Portrait of a Man with a Medal of Cosimo the Elder | Focus on Portrait of a Man with a Medal of Cosimo the Elder and explore the abstract. | Portrait of a Man with a Medal of Cosimo the Elder, also known as Portrait of a Youth with a Medal, is a tempera painting by Italian Renaissance painter Sandro Botticelli. The painting features a young man displaying in triangled hands a medal stamped with the likeness of Cosimo de' Medici. The identity of the young man has been a long-enduring mystery. Completed in approximately 1475, it is on display in the Uffizi Gallery of Florence.
Central to the painting, seated before a landscape, is a young man with a medal between his hands. The man gazes out into the audience, while the medal displays the profiled likeness of Cosimo de' Medici. The medal is a pastiglia imitation of a real metal medal, made of gilded gesso and inset into the portrait. As the medal is not reversed, evidently Botticelli either had access to the original mold or made a cast from the medal to produce his gesso. The medal appears to be the same as one possibly designed by Donatello and cast in 1465, an example of which is in the collection of the Victoria and Albert Museum in London, England, called "Cosimo de' Medici as Pater Patriae". | [
"Florence",
"pastiglia",
"Italian Renaissance",
"Uffizi",
"tempera",
"Sandro Botticelli",
"Medal",
"gesso",
"Medici",
"Donatello",
"medal",
"Victoria and Albert Museum",
"Cosimo de' Medici",
"Man"
] |
|
18550_NT | Portrait of a Man with a Medal of Cosimo the Elder | Focus on this artwork and explore the abstract. | Portrait of a Man with a Medal of Cosimo the Elder, also known as Portrait of a Youth with a Medal, is a tempera painting by Italian Renaissance painter Sandro Botticelli. The painting features a young man displaying in triangled hands a medal stamped with the likeness of Cosimo de' Medici. The identity of the young man has been a long-enduring mystery. Completed in approximately 1475, it is on display in the Uffizi Gallery of Florence.
Central to the painting, seated before a landscape, is a young man with a medal between his hands. The man gazes out into the audience, while the medal displays the profiled likeness of Cosimo de' Medici. The medal is a pastiglia imitation of a real metal medal, made of gilded gesso and inset into the portrait. As the medal is not reversed, evidently Botticelli either had access to the original mold or made a cast from the medal to produce his gesso. The medal appears to be the same as one possibly designed by Donatello and cast in 1465, an example of which is in the collection of the Victoria and Albert Museum in London, England, called "Cosimo de' Medici as Pater Patriae". | [
"Florence",
"pastiglia",
"Italian Renaissance",
"Uffizi",
"tempera",
"Sandro Botticelli",
"Medal",
"gesso",
"Medici",
"Donatello",
"medal",
"Victoria and Albert Museum",
"Cosimo de' Medici",
"Man"
] |
Subsets and Splits
No saved queries yet
Save your SQL queries to embed, download, and access them later. Queries will appear here once saved.