Rembrandt is the most famous of the seventeenth-century Dutch painters. However, there are doubts whether some paintings attributed to Rembrandt were actually painted by him. One such painting is known as attributed to Rembrandt because of its style, and indeed the representation of the woman’s face is very much like that of portraits known to be by Rembrandt. But there are problems with the painting that suggest it could not be a work by Rembrandt. First, there is something inconsistent about the way the woman in the portrait is dressed. She is wearing a white linen cap of a kind that only servants would wear-yet the coat she is wearing has a luxurious fur collar that no servant could afford. Rembrandt, who was known for his attention to the details of his subjects’ clothing, would not have been guilty of such inconsistency. Second, Rembrandt was a master of painting light and shadow, but in this painting, these elements do not fit together. The face appears to be illuminated by light reflected onto it from below. But below the face is the dark fur collar, which would absorb light rather than reflect it. So the face should appear partially in shadow-which is not how it appears. Rembrandt would never have made such an error. Finally, examination of the back of the painting reveals that it was painted on a panel made of several pieces of wood glued together. Although Rembrandt often painted on wood panels, no painting known to be by Rembrandt uses a panel glued together in this way from several pieces of wood. For these reasons, the painting was removed from the official catalog of Rembrandt’s paintings in the 1930s.
Audio
Professor
Everything you just read about “Portrait of an Elderly Woman in a White Bonnet” is true, and yet after a thorough re-examination of the painting, a panel of experts has recently concluded that it’s indeed a work by Rembrandt. Here is why.
First, the fur collar. X-rays and analysis of the pigments in the paint have shown that the fur collar wasn’t part of the original painting. The fur collar was painted over the top of the original painting about a hundred years after the painting was made. Why? Someone probably wanted to increase the value of the painting by making it look like a formal portrait of an aristocratic lady.
Second, the supposed error with light and shadow. Once the paint of the added fur color was removed, the original could be seen, in the original painting, the woman is wearing a simple collar of light-colored cloth. The light-colored cloth of this collar reflects light that illuminates part of the woman’s face. That’s why the face is not in partial shadow. So in the original painting, light and shadow are very realistic and just what we would expect from Rembrandt.
Finally, the wood panel. It turns out that when the fur collar was added, the wood panel was also enlarged with extra wood pieces glued to the sides and the top to make the painting more grand and more valuable. So the original painting is actually painted on a single piece of wood, as would be expected from a Rembrandt painting.
And in fact, researchers have found that the piece of wood in the original form of “Portrait of an Elderly Woman in a White Bonnet” is from the very same tree as the wood panel used for another painting by Rembrandt, his “Self-portrait with a Hat”.
Both the article and the lecture discuss whether Rembrandt was the real painter of the lady portrait or not. The article suggested that there are several pieces of evidence question about attributing the painter to Rembrandt. The lecturer acknowledged the facts mentioned in the article, but she revealed that lady portrait was indeed done by Rembrandt.
To begin with, the article stated that the painting lack of many details. The article added that such details could not be missed by Rembrandt, who was known for his attention to details. However, the lecturer argued that several examinations were done on the painting and the results indicated that fur was added later on the painting to increase the value of it. She added that the original painting, which was worked by Rembrandt, did not have fur detail.
Second, the article claimed that the light and shadow technique in the painting was not used properly. Whereas, according to the article, Rembrandt was skillful in this technique, and he could not miss this point in his painting. In contrast, the lecturer explained that the original paint was very realistic in the light and shadow aspect. She added that later modification on the painting made it lack light and shadow technique.
Finally, the author of the article stressed that lady portrait consists of panel glued together. The article also suggested that Rembrandt had never painted on several panels, and he used to paint on one single piece of wood. The lecturer, on the other hand, pointed out that the original painting was done on single piece of wood and the wood type was similar to other wood used by Rembrandt in his painting. She elaborated that the glued panels were added on the original painting.
Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
---|---|---|---|
2023-08-02 | nusybah | 73 | view |
2023-06-06 | YasamanEsml | 73 | view |
2023-06-06 | YasamanEsml | 70 | view |
2023-04-23 | Yam Kumar Oli | 70 | view |
2023-02-24 | Muggle | 80 | view |
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement?Parents today are more involved in their children's education than parents were in the past.Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer 73
- Scientists are considering the possibility of sending humans to Mars in the coming decades Although there have been successful manned missions to the Moon in the 1960s and 1970s Mars is 150 times further away from Earth than the Moon is Thus the project o 3
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement?In order to become financially responsible adults, children should learn to manage their own money at a young age. Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer. 3
- Many scientists believe it would be possible to maintain a permanent human presence on Mars or the Moon. On the other hand, conditions on Venus are so extreme and inhospitable that maintaining a human presence there would be impossible.First, atmospheric 71
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement The knowledge we gain from personal experiences is more valuable than the knowledge we gain from books Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer Do not use memorized examples 60
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, finally, however, if, second, so, whereas, in contrast, to begin with, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 10.4613686534 134% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 2.0 5.04856512141 40% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 7.30242825607 137% => OK
Relative clauses : 16.0 12.0772626932 132% => OK
Pronoun: 27.0 22.412803532 120% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 38.0 30.3222958057 125% => OK
Nominalization: 4.0 5.01324503311 80% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1449.0 1373.03311258 106% => OK
No of words: 290.0 270.72406181 107% => OK
Chars per words: 4.99655172414 5.08290768461 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.12666770723 4.04702891845 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.47092245697 2.5805825403 96% => OK
Unique words: 131.0 145.348785872 90% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.451724137931 0.540411800872 84% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 436.5 419.366225166 104% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 3.25607064018 92% => OK
Article: 10.0 8.23620309051 121% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 3.0 1.51434878587 198% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 2.5761589404 155% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 13.0662251656 115% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 21.2450331126 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 30.5689748311 49.2860985944 62% => OK
Chars per sentence: 96.6 110.228320801 88% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.3333333333 21.698381199 89% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.6 7.06452816374 93% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 4.19205298013 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 4.33554083885 161% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 4.45695364238 67% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.27373068433 117% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.255895814041 0.272083759551 94% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0976464247435 0.0996497079465 98% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0558342469528 0.0662205650399 84% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.167277191173 0.162205337803 103% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0274143484239 0.0443174109184 62% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.8 13.3589403974 88% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 60.65 53.8541721854 113% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.5 11.0289183223 86% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.72 12.2367328918 96% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.85 8.42419426049 93% => OK
difficult_words: 60.0 63.6247240618 94% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 10.7273730684 75% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.498013245 91% => OK
text_standard: 8.0 11.2008830022 71% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 73.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 22.0 Out of 30
---------------------
Note: the e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.