Jacopo de' Barbari

Prompt: Explain the Dating of artwork about the Work of this artwork, Jacopo de' Barbari.

De' Barberi spent a year in Nuremberg, where Dürer lived, in 1500–1, and influences flowed in both directions between him and Dürer for a number of years. None of his engravings are dated, so much of the dating of them depends on resemblances to dated prints by Dürer; this is complicated by uncertainty in some cases as to who was influencing whom. Five of his engravings were in an album of Hartmann Schedel's, which was bound up in December 1504, which gives further evidence as to dating. De' Barberi had probably made some engravings before leaving Italy, but his best engravings (and perhaps all of them) were probably done after his move to Germany in 1500.Some of his paintings are dated as: 1500, 1503, 1504, 1508. Documents relating to his employment by Maximilian suggest his work was to include illuminating manuscripts, but no work in this medium has been generally attributed to him. His only generally accepted drawing is a Cleopatra in the British Museum, apparently done as a study for an engraving which has not survived.

File:Jacopo de' Barbari - Victory Reclining Amid Trophies (Minneapolis Institute of Art).jpg

''[[Still-Life with Partridge and Gauntlets

Category:Painters from the Republic of Venice

''Victory Reclining Amid Trophies'', engraving, c. 1510.

Joachim I Nestor, Elector of Brandenburg


Jacopo de' Barbari

Prompt: In Jacopo de' Barbari, how is the Dating of artwork of the Work explained?

De' Barberi spent a year in Nuremberg, where Dürer lived, in 1500–1, and influences flowed in both directions between him and Dürer for a number of years. None of his engravings are dated, so much of the dating of them depends on resemblances to dated prints by Dürer; this is complicated by uncertainty in some cases as to who was influencing whom. Five of his engravings were in an album of Hartmann Schedel's, which was bound up in December 1504, which gives further evidence as to dating. De' Barberi had probably made some engravings before leaving Italy, but his best engravings (and perhaps all of them) were probably done after his move to Germany in 1500.Some of his paintings are dated as: 1500, 1503, 1504, 1508. Documents relating to his employment by Maximilian suggest his work was to include illuminating manuscripts, but no work in this medium has been generally attributed to him. His only generally accepted drawing is a Cleopatra in the British Museum, apparently done as a study for an engraving which has not survived.

File:Jacopo de' Barbari - Victory Reclining Amid Trophies (Minneapolis Institute of Art).jpg

''[[Still-Life with Partridge and Gauntlets

Category:Painters from the Republic of Venice

''Victory Reclining Amid Trophies'', engraving, c. 1510.

Joachim I Nestor, Elector of Brandenburg


Jacopo de' Barbari

Prompt: Describe the characteristics of the Dating of artwork in Jacopo de' Barbari's Work.

De' Barberi spent a year in Nuremberg, where Dürer lived, in 1500–1, and influences flowed in both directions between him and Dürer for a number of years. None of his engravings are dated, so much of the dating of them depends on resemblances to dated prints by Dürer; this is complicated by uncertainty in some cases as to who was influencing whom. Five of his engravings were in an album of Hartmann Schedel's, which was bound up in December 1504, which gives further evidence as to dating. De' Barberi had probably made some engravings before leaving Italy, but his best engravings (and perhaps all of them) were probably done after his move to Germany in 1500.Some of his paintings are dated as: 1500, 1503, 1504, 1508. Documents relating to his employment by Maximilian suggest his work was to include illuminating manuscripts, but no work in this medium has been generally attributed to him. His only generally accepted drawing is a Cleopatra in the British Museum, apparently done as a study for an engraving which has not survived.

File:Jacopo de' Barbari - Victory Reclining Amid Trophies (Minneapolis Institute of Art).jpg

''[[Still-Life with Partridge and Gauntlets

Category:Painters from the Republic of Venice

''Victory Reclining Amid Trophies'', engraving, c. 1510.

Joachim I Nestor, Elector of Brandenburg


Jacopo de' Barbari

Prompt: In the context of Jacopo de' Barbari, explain the Engravings and the Work.

His style is related to his possible master, Alvise Vivarini and to Giovanni Bellini, but has a languorous quality all its own. Apart from Dürer, the influence of Mantegna's technique also appears in what are probably the earlier engravings, done around the turn of the century, with parallel hatching. His engravings are mostly small, showing just a few figures. Truculent satyrs feature in several prints; there are a number of mythological subjects, including two Sacrifices to Priapus.The earlier prints show figures with "small heads and somewhat shapeless bodies, with sloping shoulders and thick torsos supported by slender legs" — also seen in his paintings. Probably from a middle period come several nudes, the most famous being Apollo and Diana, St Sebastian and the Three Bound Captives.  In these his ability to organise the whole composition has greatly improved.In a final group, the style becomes more Italianate, and the compositions more complex. These have an enigmatic, haunting atmosphere, and a very refined technique. Levenson has proposed that they date from his period in the Netherlands and were influenced by the young Lucas van Leyden. The transmission between the Netherlands and Venice during this time was also prominent as both regions were port cities booming with trade. As a result, not only were economies tied to one another, but art as well.

File:Jacopo de' Barbari - Victory Reclining Amid Trophies (Minneapolis Institute of Art).jpg

''[[Still-Life with Partridge and Gauntlets

Category:Painters from the Republic of Venice

''Victory Reclining Amid Trophies'', engraving, c. 1510.

Joachim I Nestor, Elector of Brandenburg


Jacopo de' Barbari

Prompt: Explain the Engravings about the Work of this artwork, Jacopo de' Barbari.

His style is related to his possible master, Alvise Vivarini and to Giovanni Bellini, but has a languorous quality all its own. Apart from Dürer, the influence of Mantegna's technique also appears in what are probably the earlier engravings, done around the turn of the century, with parallel hatching. His engravings are mostly small, showing just a few figures. Truculent satyrs feature in several prints; there are a number of mythological subjects, including two Sacrifices to Priapus.The earlier prints show figures with "small heads and somewhat shapeless bodies, with sloping shoulders and thick torsos supported by slender legs" — also seen in his paintings. Probably from a middle period come several nudes, the most famous being Apollo and Diana, St Sebastian and the Three Bound Captives.  In these his ability to organise the whole composition has greatly improved.In a final group, the style becomes more Italianate, and the compositions more complex. These have an enigmatic, haunting atmosphere, and a very refined technique. Levenson has proposed that they date from his period in the Netherlands and were influenced by the young Lucas van Leyden. The transmission between the Netherlands and Venice during this time was also prominent as both regions were port cities booming with trade. As a result, not only were economies tied to one another, but art as well.

File:Jacopo de' Barbari - Victory Reclining Amid Trophies (Minneapolis Institute of Art).jpg

''[[Still-Life with Partridge and Gauntlets

Category:Painters from the Republic of Venice

''Victory Reclining Amid Trophies'', engraving, c. 1510.

Joachim I Nestor, Elector of Brandenburg


Jacopo de' Barbari

Prompt: In Jacopo de' Barbari, how is the Engravings of the Work explained?

His style is related to his possible master, Alvise Vivarini and to Giovanni Bellini, but has a languorous quality all its own. Apart from Dürer, the influence of Mantegna's technique also appears in what are probably the earlier engravings, done around the turn of the century, with parallel hatching. His engravings are mostly small, showing just a few figures. Truculent satyrs feature in several prints; there are a number of mythological subjects, including two Sacrifices to Priapus.The earlier prints show figures with "small heads and somewhat shapeless bodies, with sloping shoulders and thick torsos supported by slender legs" — also seen in his paintings. Probably from a middle period come several nudes, the most famous being Apollo and Diana, St Sebastian and the Three Bound Captives.  In these his ability to organise the whole composition has greatly improved.In a final group, the style becomes more Italianate, and the compositions more complex. These have an enigmatic, haunting atmosphere, and a very refined technique. Levenson has proposed that they date from his period in the Netherlands and were influenced by the young Lucas van Leyden. The transmission between the Netherlands and Venice during this time was also prominent as both regions were port cities booming with trade. As a result, not only were economies tied to one another, but art as well.

File:Jacopo de' Barbari - Victory Reclining Amid Trophies (Minneapolis Institute of Art).jpg

''[[Still-Life with Partridge and Gauntlets

Category:Painters from the Republic of Venice

''Victory Reclining Amid Trophies'', engraving, c. 1510.

Joachim I Nestor, Elector of Brandenburg


Jacopo de' Barbari

Prompt: Describe the characteristics of the Engravings in Jacopo de' Barbari's Work.

His style is related to his possible master, Alvise Vivarini and to Giovanni Bellini, but has a languorous quality all its own. Apart from Dürer, the influence of Mantegna's technique also appears in what are probably the earlier engravings, done around the turn of the century, with parallel hatching. His engravings are mostly small, showing just a few figures. Truculent satyrs feature in several prints; there are a number of mythological subjects, including two Sacrifices to Priapus.The earlier prints show figures with "small heads and somewhat shapeless bodies, with sloping shoulders and thick torsos supported by slender legs" — also seen in his paintings. Probably from a middle period come several nudes, the most famous being Apollo and Diana, St Sebastian and the Three Bound Captives.  In these his ability to organise the whole composition has greatly improved.In a final group, the style becomes more Italianate, and the compositions more complex. These have an enigmatic, haunting atmosphere, and a very refined technique. Levenson has proposed that they date from his period in the Netherlands and were influenced by the young Lucas van Leyden. The transmission between the Netherlands and Venice during this time was also prominent as both regions were port cities booming with trade. As a result, not only were economies tied to one another, but art as well.

File:Jacopo de' Barbari - Victory Reclining Amid Trophies (Minneapolis Institute of Art).jpg

''[[Still-Life with Partridge and Gauntlets

Category:Painters from the Republic of Venice

''Victory Reclining Amid Trophies'', engraving, c. 1510.

Joachim I Nestor, Elector of Brandenburg


Jacopo de' Barbari

Prompt: In the context of Jacopo de' Barbari, explain the Paintings and the Work.

His paintings are mostly portraits or half-length groups of religious figures. He painted a live Sparrowhawk(National Gallery, London), which is probably a fragment of a larger work. The very early still-life of a Still-Life with Partridge and Gauntlets (Alte Pinakothek, Munich) is often called the first small scale trompe-l'œil painting since antiquity; it may well have been the cover or reverse of a portrait (however, a fragmentary panel by another Venetian, Vittorio Carpaccio, has a trompe-l'œil letter-rack of about 1490 on the reverse). In the Gemäldegalerie, Berlin there is a Portrait of a German Man and a religious subject. The Louvre has a religious group, and Philadelphia a pair of figures.A disputed but famous work, the Portrait of Fra Luca Pacioli is in the Museo di Capodimonte in Naples. This shows the Franciscan mathematician and expert on perspective demonstrating geometry at a table on which lie his own Summa and a work by Euclid. He is accompanied by a not clearly identified student. The work is signed "IACO. BAR VIGEN/NIS 1495". Jacopo de' Barbari is attributed a Christ Blessing displayed at the Snite Museum of Art in Notre Dame University, Indiana.

File:Jacopo de' Barbari - Victory Reclining Amid Trophies (Minneapolis Institute of Art).jpg

''[[Still-Life with Partridge and Gauntlets

Category:Painters from the Republic of Venice

''Victory Reclining Amid Trophies'', engraving, c. 1510.

Joachim I Nestor, Elector of Brandenburg


Jacopo de' Barbari

Prompt: Explain the Paintings about the Work of this artwork, Jacopo de' Barbari.

His paintings are mostly portraits or half-length groups of religious figures. He painted a live Sparrowhawk(National Gallery, London), which is probably a fragment of a larger work. The very early still-life of a Still-Life with Partridge and Gauntlets (Alte Pinakothek, Munich) is often called the first small scale trompe-l'œil painting since antiquity; it may well have been the cover or reverse of a portrait (however, a fragmentary panel by another Venetian, Vittorio Carpaccio, has a trompe-l'œil letter-rack of about 1490 on the reverse). In the Gemäldegalerie, Berlin there is a Portrait of a German Man and a religious subject. The Louvre has a religious group, and Philadelphia a pair of figures.A disputed but famous work, the Portrait of Fra Luca Pacioli is in the Museo di Capodimonte in Naples. This shows the Franciscan mathematician and expert on perspective demonstrating geometry at a table on which lie his own Summa and a work by Euclid. He is accompanied by a not clearly identified student. The work is signed "IACO. BAR VIGEN/NIS 1495". Jacopo de' Barbari is attributed a Christ Blessing displayed at the Snite Museum of Art in Notre Dame University, Indiana.

File:Jacopo de' Barbari - Victory Reclining Amid Trophies (Minneapolis Institute of Art).jpg

''[[Still-Life with Partridge and Gauntlets

Category:Painters from the Republic of Venice

''Victory Reclining Amid Trophies'', engraving, c. 1510.

Joachim I Nestor, Elector of Brandenburg


Jacopo de' Barbari

Prompt: In Jacopo de' Barbari, how is the Paintings of the Work explained?

His paintings are mostly portraits or half-length groups of religious figures. He painted a live Sparrowhawk(National Gallery, London), which is probably a fragment of a larger work. The very early still-life of a Still-Life with Partridge and Gauntlets (Alte Pinakothek, Munich) is often called the first small scale trompe-l'œil painting since antiquity; it may well have been the cover or reverse of a portrait (however, a fragmentary panel by another Venetian, Vittorio Carpaccio, has a trompe-l'œil letter-rack of about 1490 on the reverse). In the Gemäldegalerie, Berlin there is a Portrait of a German Man and a religious subject. The Louvre has a religious group, and Philadelphia a pair of figures.A disputed but famous work, the Portrait of Fra Luca Pacioli is in the Museo di Capodimonte in Naples. This shows the Franciscan mathematician and expert on perspective demonstrating geometry at a table on which lie his own Summa and a work by Euclid. He is accompanied by a not clearly identified student. The work is signed "IACO. BAR VIGEN/NIS 1495". Jacopo de' Barbari is attributed a Christ Blessing displayed at the Snite Museum of Art in Notre Dame University, Indiana.

File:Jacopo de' Barbari - Victory Reclining Amid Trophies (Minneapolis Institute of Art).jpg

''[[Still-Life with Partridge and Gauntlets

Category:Painters from the Republic of Venice

''Victory Reclining Amid Trophies'', engraving, c. 1510.

Joachim I Nestor, Elector of Brandenburg


Jacopo de' Barbari

Prompt: Describe the characteristics of the Paintings in Jacopo de' Barbari's Work.

His paintings are mostly portraits or half-length groups of religious figures. He painted a live Sparrowhawk(National Gallery, London), which is probably a fragment of a larger work. The very early still-life of a Still-Life with Partridge and Gauntlets (Alte Pinakothek, Munich) is often called the first small scale trompe-l'œil painting since antiquity; it may well have been the cover or reverse of a portrait (however, a fragmentary panel by another Venetian, Vittorio Carpaccio, has a trompe-l'œil letter-rack of about 1490 on the reverse). In the Gemäldegalerie, Berlin there is a Portrait of a German Man and a religious subject. The Louvre has a religious group, and Philadelphia a pair of figures.A disputed but famous work, the Portrait of Fra Luca Pacioli is in the Museo di Capodimonte in Naples. This shows the Franciscan mathematician and expert on perspective demonstrating geometry at a table on which lie his own Summa and a work by Euclid. He is accompanied by a not clearly identified student. The work is signed "IACO. BAR VIGEN/NIS 1495". Jacopo de' Barbari is attributed a Christ Blessing displayed at the Snite Museum of Art in Notre Dame University, Indiana.

File:Jacopo de' Barbari - Victory Reclining Amid Trophies (Minneapolis Institute of Art).jpg

''[[Still-Life with Partridge and Gauntlets

Category:Painters from the Republic of Venice

''Victory Reclining Amid Trophies'', engraving, c. 1510.

Joachim I Nestor, Elector of Brandenburg


Salon des Refusés

Prompt: Focus on Salon des Refusés and explain the abstract.

The Salon des Refusés, French for "exhibition of rejects" (French pronunciation: [salɔ̃ de ʁəfyze]), is generally known as an exhibition of works rejected by the jury of the official Paris Salon, but the term is most famously used to refer to the Salon des Refusés of 1863.Today, by extension, salon des refusés refers to any exhibition of works rejected from a juried art show.

Symphony in White, No. 1: The White Girl

File:Palais de l'Industrie - Édouard Baldus.jpg


Salon des Refusés

Prompt: Explain the abstract of this artwork, Salon des Refusés.

The Salon des Refusés, French for "exhibition of rejects" (French pronunciation: [salɔ̃ de ʁəfyze]), is generally known as an exhibition of works rejected by the jury of the official Paris Salon, but the term is most famously used to refer to the Salon des Refusés of 1863.Today, by extension, salon des refusés refers to any exhibition of works rejected from a juried art show.

Symphony in White, No. 1: The White Girl

File:Palais de l'Industrie - Édouard Baldus.jpg


Salon des Refusés

Prompt: How does Salon des Refusés explain its abstract?

The Salon des Refusés, French for "exhibition of rejects" (French pronunciation: [salɔ̃ de ʁəfyze]), is generally known as an exhibition of works rejected by the jury of the official Paris Salon, but the term is most famously used to refer to the Salon des Refusés of 1863.Today, by extension, salon des refusés refers to any exhibition of works rejected from a juried art show.

Symphony in White, No. 1: The White Girl

File:Palais de l'Industrie - Édouard Baldus.jpg


Salon des Refusés

Prompt: In Salon des Refusés, how is the abstract discussed?

The Salon des Refusés, French for "exhibition of rejects" (French pronunciation: [salɔ̃ de ʁəfyze]), is generally known as an exhibition of works rejected by the jury of the official Paris Salon, but the term is most famously used to refer to the Salon des Refusés of 1863.Today, by extension, salon des refusés refers to any exhibition of works rejected from a juried art show.

Symphony in White, No. 1: The White Girl

File:Palais de l'Industrie - Édouard Baldus.jpg


Salon des Refusés

Prompt: Focus on Salon des Refusés and explain the Background of the Salon of 1863.

The Paris Salon, sponsored by the French government and the Academy of Fine Arts, took place annually, and was an exhibition of the best academic art.  A medal from the Salon was assurance of a successful artistic career; winners were given official commissions by the French government and were sought after for portraits and private commissions.  Since the 18th century, the paintings were classified by genre, following a hierarchy;  history paintings were ranked first, followed by the portrait, the landscape, the "genre scene" and the still life.  The jury, headed by the Comte de Nieuwerkerke, the head of the Academy of Fine Arts, was very conservative; near-photographic but idealized realism was expected.Much intrigue often went on to get acceptance, and to be given a good place in the galleries.  In 1851, Gustave Courbet managed to get one painting into the Salon, Enterrement à Ornans, and in 1852 his Baigneuses was accepted, scandalizing critics and the public, who expected romanticized nudes in classical settings, but in 1855 the Salon refused all of Courbet's paintings.  As early as the 1830s, Paris art galleries mounted small, private exhibitions of works rejected by the Salon jurors.  Courbet was obliged to organize his own exhibit, called The Pavillon of Realism, at a private gallery.  Private exhibits attracted far less attention from the press and patrons, and limited the access of the artists to a small public.In 1863 the Salon jury refused two thirds of the paintings presented, including the works of Gustave Courbet,  Édouard Manet, Camille Pissarro, Antoine Chintreuil, and Johan Jongkind. The rejected artists and their friends protested, and the protests reached Emperor Napoleon III. The Emperor's tastes in art were traditional; he commissioned and bought works by artists such as Alexandre Cabanel and Franz Xaver Winterhalter, but he was also sensitive to public opinion. His office issued a statement: "Numerous complaints have come to the Emperor on the subject of the works of art which were refused by the jury of the Exposition.  His Majesty, wishing to let the public judge the legitimacy of these complaints, has decided that the works of art which were refused should be displayed in another part of the Palace of Industry."More than a thousand visitors a day visited the Salon des Refusés. The journalist Émile Zola reported that visitors pushed to get into the crowded galleries where the refused paintings were hung, and the rooms were full of the laughter of the spectators. Critics and the public ridiculed the refusés, which included such famous paintings as Édouard Manet's Déjeuner sur l'herbe and James McNeill Whistler's Symphony in White, No. 1: The White Girl. The critical attention also legitimized the emerging avant-garde in painting. The Impressionists exhibited their works outside the traditional Salon beginning in 1874. Subsequent Salons des Refusés were mounted in Paris in 1874, 1875, and 1886, by which time the popularity of the Paris Salon had declined for those who were more interested in Impressionism.

File:Palais de l'Industrie - Édouard Baldus.jpg


Salon des Refusés

Prompt: Explain the Background of the Salon of 1863 of this artwork, Salon des Refusés.

The Paris Salon, sponsored by the French government and the Academy of Fine Arts, took place annually, and was an exhibition of the best academic art.  A medal from the Salon was assurance of a successful artistic career; winners were given official commissions by the French government and were sought after for portraits and private commissions.  Since the 18th century, the paintings were classified by genre, following a hierarchy;  history paintings were ranked first, followed by the portrait, the landscape, the "genre scene" and the still life.  The jury, headed by the Comte de Nieuwerkerke, the head of the Academy of Fine Arts, was very conservative; near-photographic but idealized realism was expected.Much intrigue often went on to get acceptance, and to be given a good place in the galleries.  In 1851, Gustave Courbet managed to get one painting into the Salon, Enterrement à Ornans, and in 1852 his Baigneuses was accepted, scandalizing critics and the public, who expected romanticized nudes in classical settings, but in 1855 the Salon refused all of Courbet's paintings.  As early as the 1830s, Paris art galleries mounted small, private exhibitions of works rejected by the Salon jurors.  Courbet was obliged to organize his own exhibit, called The Pavillon of Realism, at a private gallery.  Private exhibits attracted far less attention from the press and patrons, and limited the access of the artists to a small public.In 1863 the Salon jury refused two thirds of the paintings presented, including the works of Gustave Courbet,  Édouard Manet, Camille Pissarro, Antoine Chintreuil, and Johan Jongkind. The rejected artists and their friends protested, and the protests reached Emperor Napoleon III. The Emperor's tastes in art were traditional; he commissioned and bought works by artists such as Alexandre Cabanel and Franz Xaver Winterhalter, but he was also sensitive to public opinion. His office issued a statement: "Numerous complaints have come to the Emperor on the subject of the works of art which were refused by the jury of the Exposition.  His Majesty, wishing to let the public judge the legitimacy of these complaints, has decided that the works of art which were refused should be displayed in another part of the Palace of Industry."More than a thousand visitors a day visited the Salon des Refusés. The journalist Émile Zola reported that visitors pushed to get into the crowded galleries where the refused paintings were hung, and the rooms were full of the laughter of the spectators. Critics and the public ridiculed the refusés, which included such famous paintings as Édouard Manet's Déjeuner sur l'herbe and James McNeill Whistler's Symphony in White, No. 1: The White Girl. The critical attention also legitimized the emerging avant-garde in painting. The Impressionists exhibited their works outside the traditional Salon beginning in 1874. Subsequent Salons des Refusés were mounted in Paris in 1874, 1875, and 1886, by which time the popularity of the Paris Salon had declined for those who were more interested in Impressionism.

File:Palais de l'Industrie - Édouard Baldus.jpg


Salon des Refusés

Prompt: How does Salon des Refusés explain its Background of the Salon of 1863?

The Paris Salon, sponsored by the French government and the Academy of Fine Arts, took place annually, and was an exhibition of the best academic art.  A medal from the Salon was assurance of a successful artistic career; winners were given official commissions by the French government and were sought after for portraits and private commissions.  Since the 18th century, the paintings were classified by genre, following a hierarchy;  history paintings were ranked first, followed by the portrait, the landscape, the "genre scene" and the still life.  The jury, headed by the Comte de Nieuwerkerke, the head of the Academy of Fine Arts, was very conservative; near-photographic but idealized realism was expected.Much intrigue often went on to get acceptance, and to be given a good place in the galleries.  In 1851, Gustave Courbet managed to get one painting into the Salon, Enterrement à Ornans, and in 1852 his Baigneuses was accepted, scandalizing critics and the public, who expected romanticized nudes in classical settings, but in 1855 the Salon refused all of Courbet's paintings.  As early as the 1830s, Paris art galleries mounted small, private exhibitions of works rejected by the Salon jurors.  Courbet was obliged to organize his own exhibit, called The Pavillon of Realism, at a private gallery.  Private exhibits attracted far less attention from the press and patrons, and limited the access of the artists to a small public.In 1863 the Salon jury refused two thirds of the paintings presented, including the works of Gustave Courbet,  Édouard Manet, Camille Pissarro, Antoine Chintreuil, and Johan Jongkind. The rejected artists and their friends protested, and the protests reached Emperor Napoleon III. The Emperor's tastes in art were traditional; he commissioned and bought works by artists such as Alexandre Cabanel and Franz Xaver Winterhalter, but he was also sensitive to public opinion. His office issued a statement: "Numerous complaints have come to the Emperor on the subject of the works of art which were refused by the jury of the Exposition.  His Majesty, wishing to let the public judge the legitimacy of these complaints, has decided that the works of art which were refused should be displayed in another part of the Palace of Industry."More than a thousand visitors a day visited the Salon des Refusés. The journalist Émile Zola reported that visitors pushed to get into the crowded galleries where the refused paintings were hung, and the rooms were full of the laughter of the spectators. Critics and the public ridiculed the refusés, which included such famous paintings as Édouard Manet's Déjeuner sur l'herbe and James McNeill Whistler's Symphony in White, No. 1: The White Girl. The critical attention also legitimized the emerging avant-garde in painting. The Impressionists exhibited their works outside the traditional Salon beginning in 1874. Subsequent Salons des Refusés were mounted in Paris in 1874, 1875, and 1886, by which time the popularity of the Paris Salon had declined for those who were more interested in Impressionism.

File:Palais de l'Industrie - Édouard Baldus.jpg


Salon des Refusés

Prompt: In Salon des Refusés, how is the Background of the Salon of 1863 discussed?

The Paris Salon, sponsored by the French government and the Academy of Fine Arts, took place annually, and was an exhibition of the best academic art.  A medal from the Salon was assurance of a successful artistic career; winners were given official commissions by the French government and were sought after for portraits and private commissions.  Since the 18th century, the paintings were classified by genre, following a hierarchy;  history paintings were ranked first, followed by the portrait, the landscape, the "genre scene" and the still life.  The jury, headed by the Comte de Nieuwerkerke, the head of the Academy of Fine Arts, was very conservative; near-photographic but idealized realism was expected.Much intrigue often went on to get acceptance, and to be given a good place in the galleries.  In 1851, Gustave Courbet managed to get one painting into the Salon, Enterrement à Ornans, and in 1852 his Baigneuses was accepted, scandalizing critics and the public, who expected romanticized nudes in classical settings, but in 1855 the Salon refused all of Courbet's paintings.  As early as the 1830s, Paris art galleries mounted small, private exhibitions of works rejected by the Salon jurors.  Courbet was obliged to organize his own exhibit, called The Pavillon of Realism, at a private gallery.  Private exhibits attracted far less attention from the press and patrons, and limited the access of the artists to a small public.In 1863 the Salon jury refused two thirds of the paintings presented, including the works of Gustave Courbet,  Édouard Manet, Camille Pissarro, Antoine Chintreuil, and Johan Jongkind. The rejected artists and their friends protested, and the protests reached Emperor Napoleon III. The Emperor's tastes in art were traditional; he commissioned and bought works by artists such as Alexandre Cabanel and Franz Xaver Winterhalter, but he was also sensitive to public opinion. His office issued a statement: "Numerous complaints have come to the Emperor on the subject of the works of art which were refused by the jury of the Exposition.  His Majesty, wishing to let the public judge the legitimacy of these complaints, has decided that the works of art which were refused should be displayed in another part of the Palace of Industry."More than a thousand visitors a day visited the Salon des Refusés. The journalist Émile Zola reported that visitors pushed to get into the crowded galleries where the refused paintings were hung, and the rooms were full of the laughter of the spectators. Critics and the public ridiculed the refusés, which included such famous paintings as Édouard Manet's Déjeuner sur l'herbe and James McNeill Whistler's Symphony in White, No. 1: The White Girl. The critical attention also legitimized the emerging avant-garde in painting. The Impressionists exhibited their works outside the traditional Salon beginning in 1874. Subsequent Salons des Refusés were mounted in Paris in 1874, 1875, and 1886, by which time the popularity of the Paris Salon had declined for those who were more interested in Impressionism.

File:Palais de l'Industrie - Édouard Baldus.jpg


Salon des Refusés

Prompt: In the context of Salon des Refusés, explain the Le déjeuner sur l'herbe and the Works in the exhibition.

Rejected by the Salon jury of 1863, Manet seized the opportunity to exhibit Déjeuner sur l'herbe and two other paintings in the 1863 Salon des Refusés. Déjeuner sur l'herbe depicts the juxtaposition of a female nude and a scantily dressed female bather in the background, on a picnic with two fully dressed men in a rural setting. The painting sparked public notoriety and stirred up controversy and has remained controversial, even to this day. There is a discussion of it, from this point of view, in Proust's Remembrance of Things Past.One interpretation of the work is that it depicts the rampant prostitution in the Bois de Boulogne, a large park at the western outskirts of Paris, at the time. This prostitution was common knowledge in Paris, but was considered a taboo subject unsuitable for a painting.Émile Zola comments about Déjeuner sur l'herbe:The Luncheon on the Grass is the greatest work of Édouard Manet, one in which he realizes the dream of all painters: to place figures of natural grandeur in a landscape.  We know the power with which he vanquished this difficulty.  There are some leaves, some tree trunks, and, in the background, a river in which a chemise-wearing woman bathes; in the foreground, two young men are seated across from a second woman who has just exited the water and who dries her naked skin in the open air.  This nude woman has scandalized the public, who see only her in the canvas.  My God!  What indecency: a woman without the slightest covering between two clothed men!  That has never been seen.  And this belief is a gross error, for in the Louvre there are more than fifty paintings in which are found mixes of persons clothed and nude.  But no one goes to the Louvre to be scandalized.  The crowd has kept itself moreover from judging The Luncheon on the Grass like a veritable work of art should be judged; they see in it only some people who are having a picnic, finishing bathing, and they believed that the artist had placed an obscene intent in the disposition of the subject, while the artist had simply sought to obtain vibrant oppositions and a straightforward audience.  Painters, especially Édouard Manet, who is an analytic painter, do not have this preoccupation with the subject which torments the crowd above all; the subject, for them, is merely a pretext to paint, while for the crowd, the subject alone exists.  Thus, assuredly, the nude woman of The Luncheon on the Grass is only there to furnish the artist the occasion to paint a bit of flesh.  That which must be seen in the painting is not a luncheon on the grass; it is the entire landscape, with its vigors and its finesses, with its foregrounds so large, so solid, and its backgrounds of a light delicateness; it is this firm modeled flesh under great spots of light, these tissues supple and strong, and particularly this delicious silhouette of a woman wearing a chemise who makes, in the background, an adorable dapple of white in the milieu of green leaves.  It is, in short, this vast ensemble, full of atmosphere, this corner of nature rendered with a simplicity so just, all of this admirable page in which an artist has placed all the particular and rare elements which are in him.Émile Zola incorporated a fictionalized account of the 1863 scandal in his novel L'Œuvre (The Masterpiece) (1886).

Symphony in White, No. 1: The White Girl

File:Palais de l'Industrie - Édouard Baldus.jpg


Salon des Refusés

Prompt: Explain the Le déjeuner sur l'herbe about the Works in the exhibition of this artwork, Salon des Refusés.

Rejected by the Salon jury of 1863, Manet seized the opportunity to exhibit Déjeuner sur l'herbe and two other paintings in the 1863 Salon des Refusés. Déjeuner sur l'herbe depicts the juxtaposition of a female nude and a scantily dressed female bather in the background, on a picnic with two fully dressed men in a rural setting. The painting sparked public notoriety and stirred up controversy and has remained controversial, even to this day. There is a discussion of it, from this point of view, in Proust's Remembrance of Things Past.One interpretation of the work is that it depicts the rampant prostitution in the Bois de Boulogne, a large park at the western outskirts of Paris, at the time. This prostitution was common knowledge in Paris, but was considered a taboo subject unsuitable for a painting.Émile Zola comments about Déjeuner sur l'herbe:The Luncheon on the Grass is the greatest work of Édouard Manet, one in which he realizes the dream of all painters: to place figures of natural grandeur in a landscape.  We know the power with which he vanquished this difficulty.  There are some leaves, some tree trunks, and, in the background, a river in which a chemise-wearing woman bathes; in the foreground, two young men are seated across from a second woman who has just exited the water and who dries her naked skin in the open air.  This nude woman has scandalized the public, who see only her in the canvas.  My God!  What indecency: a woman without the slightest covering between two clothed men!  That has never been seen.  And this belief is a gross error, for in the Louvre there are more than fifty paintings in which are found mixes of persons clothed and nude.  But no one goes to the Louvre to be scandalized.  The crowd has kept itself moreover from judging The Luncheon on the Grass like a veritable work of art should be judged; they see in it only some people who are having a picnic, finishing bathing, and they believed that the artist had placed an obscene intent in the disposition of the subject, while the artist had simply sought to obtain vibrant oppositions and a straightforward audience.  Painters, especially Édouard Manet, who is an analytic painter, do not have this preoccupation with the subject which torments the crowd above all; the subject, for them, is merely a pretext to paint, while for the crowd, the subject alone exists.  Thus, assuredly, the nude woman of The Luncheon on the Grass is only there to furnish the artist the occasion to paint a bit of flesh.  That which must be seen in the painting is not a luncheon on the grass; it is the entire landscape, with its vigors and its finesses, with its foregrounds so large, so solid, and its backgrounds of a light delicateness; it is this firm modeled flesh under great spots of light, these tissues supple and strong, and particularly this delicious silhouette of a woman wearing a chemise who makes, in the background, an adorable dapple of white in the milieu of green leaves.  It is, in short, this vast ensemble, full of atmosphere, this corner of nature rendered with a simplicity so just, all of this admirable page in which an artist has placed all the particular and rare elements which are in him.Émile Zola incorporated a fictionalized account of the 1863 scandal in his novel L'Œuvre (The Masterpiece) (1886).

Symphony in White, No. 1: The White Girl

File:Palais de l'Industrie - Édouard Baldus.jpg


Salon des Refusés

Prompt: In Salon des Refusés, how is the Le déjeuner sur l'herbe of the Works in the exhibition explained?

Rejected by the Salon jury of 1863, Manet seized the opportunity to exhibit Déjeuner sur l'herbe and two other paintings in the 1863 Salon des Refusés. Déjeuner sur l'herbe depicts the juxtaposition of a female nude and a scantily dressed female bather in the background, on a picnic with two fully dressed men in a rural setting. The painting sparked public notoriety and stirred up controversy and has remained controversial, even to this day. There is a discussion of it, from this point of view, in Proust's Remembrance of Things Past.One interpretation of the work is that it depicts the rampant prostitution in the Bois de Boulogne, a large park at the western outskirts of Paris, at the time. This prostitution was common knowledge in Paris, but was considered a taboo subject unsuitable for a painting.Émile Zola comments about Déjeuner sur l'herbe:The Luncheon on the Grass is the greatest work of Édouard Manet, one in which he realizes the dream of all painters: to place figures of natural grandeur in a landscape.  We know the power with which he vanquished this difficulty.  There are some leaves, some tree trunks, and, in the background, a river in which a chemise-wearing woman bathes; in the foreground, two young men are seated across from a second woman who has just exited the water and who dries her naked skin in the open air.  This nude woman has scandalized the public, who see only her in the canvas.  My God!  What indecency: a woman without the slightest covering between two clothed men!  That has never been seen.  And this belief is a gross error, for in the Louvre there are more than fifty paintings in which are found mixes of persons clothed and nude.  But no one goes to the Louvre to be scandalized.  The crowd has kept itself moreover from judging The Luncheon on the Grass like a veritable work of art should be judged; they see in it only some people who are having a picnic, finishing bathing, and they believed that the artist had placed an obscene intent in the disposition of the subject, while the artist had simply sought to obtain vibrant oppositions and a straightforward audience.  Painters, especially Édouard Manet, who is an analytic painter, do not have this preoccupation with the subject which torments the crowd above all; the subject, for them, is merely a pretext to paint, while for the crowd, the subject alone exists.  Thus, assuredly, the nude woman of The Luncheon on the Grass is only there to furnish the artist the occasion to paint a bit of flesh.  That which must be seen in the painting is not a luncheon on the grass; it is the entire landscape, with its vigors and its finesses, with its foregrounds so large, so solid, and its backgrounds of a light delicateness; it is this firm modeled flesh under great spots of light, these tissues supple and strong, and particularly this delicious silhouette of a woman wearing a chemise who makes, in the background, an adorable dapple of white in the milieu of green leaves.  It is, in short, this vast ensemble, full of atmosphere, this corner of nature rendered with a simplicity so just, all of this admirable page in which an artist has placed all the particular and rare elements which are in him.Émile Zola incorporated a fictionalized account of the 1863 scandal in his novel L'Œuvre (The Masterpiece) (1886).

Symphony in White, No. 1: The White Girl

File:Palais de l'Industrie - Édouard Baldus.jpg


Salon des Refusés

Prompt: Describe the characteristics of the Le déjeuner sur l'herbe in Salon des Refusés's Works in the exhibition.

Rejected by the Salon jury of 1863, Manet seized the opportunity to exhibit Déjeuner sur l'herbe and two other paintings in the 1863 Salon des Refusés. Déjeuner sur l'herbe depicts the juxtaposition of a female nude and a scantily dressed female bather in the background, on a picnic with two fully dressed men in a rural setting. The painting sparked public notoriety and stirred up controversy and has remained controversial, even to this day. There is a discussion of it, from this point of view, in Proust's Remembrance of Things Past.One interpretation of the work is that it depicts the rampant prostitution in the Bois de Boulogne, a large park at the western outskirts of Paris, at the time. This prostitution was common knowledge in Paris, but was considered a taboo subject unsuitable for a painting.Émile Zola comments about Déjeuner sur l'herbe:The Luncheon on the Grass is the greatest work of Édouard Manet, one in which he realizes the dream of all painters: to place figures of natural grandeur in a landscape.  We know the power with which he vanquished this difficulty.  There are some leaves, some tree trunks, and, in the background, a river in which a chemise-wearing woman bathes; in the foreground, two young men are seated across from a second woman who has just exited the water and who dries her naked skin in the open air.  This nude woman has scandalized the public, who see only her in the canvas.  My God!  What indecency: a woman without the slightest covering between two clothed men!  That has never been seen.  And this belief is a gross error, for in the Louvre there are more than fifty paintings in which are found mixes of persons clothed and nude.  But no one goes to the Louvre to be scandalized.  The crowd has kept itself moreover from judging The Luncheon on the Grass like a veritable work of art should be judged; they see in it only some people who are having a picnic, finishing bathing, and they believed that the artist had placed an obscene intent in the disposition of the subject, while the artist had simply sought to obtain vibrant oppositions and a straightforward audience.  Painters, especially Édouard Manet, who is an analytic painter, do not have this preoccupation with the subject which torments the crowd above all; the subject, for them, is merely a pretext to paint, while for the crowd, the subject alone exists.  Thus, assuredly, the nude woman of The Luncheon on the Grass is only there to furnish the artist the occasion to paint a bit of flesh.  That which must be seen in the painting is not a luncheon on the grass; it is the entire landscape, with its vigors and its finesses, with its foregrounds so large, so solid, and its backgrounds of a light delicateness; it is this firm modeled flesh under great spots of light, these tissues supple and strong, and particularly this delicious silhouette of a woman wearing a chemise who makes, in the background, an adorable dapple of white in the milieu of green leaves.  It is, in short, this vast ensemble, full of atmosphere, this corner of nature rendered with a simplicity so just, all of this admirable page in which an artist has placed all the particular and rare elements which are in him.Émile Zola incorporated a fictionalized account of the 1863 scandal in his novel L'Œuvre (The Masterpiece) (1886).

Symphony in White, No. 1: The White Girl

File:Palais de l'Industrie - Édouard Baldus.jpg


Salon des Refusés

Prompt: In the context of Salon des Refusés, explain the Symphony in White no 1 and the Works in the exhibition.

In 1861, after returning to Paris for a time, James Abbott McNeill Whistler painted his first famous work, Symphony in White, No. 1: The White Girl. This portrait of his mistress and business manager Joanna Hiffernan was created as a simple study in white; however, others saw it differently. The critic Jules-Antoine Castagnary thought the painting an allegory of a new bride's lost innocence. Others linked it to Wilkie Collins's The Woman in White, a popular novel of the time, or various other literary sources. In England, some considered it a painting in the Pre-Raphaelite manner. In the painting, Hiffernan holds a lily in her left hand and stands upon a wolf skin rug (interpreted by some to represent masculinity and lust) with the wolf's head staring menacingly at the viewer.Countering criticism by traditionalists, Whistler's supporters insisted that the painting was "an apparition with a spiritual content" and that it epitomized his theory that art should be concerned essentially with the arrangement of colors in harmony, not with a literal portrayal of the natural world.Whistler started working on The White Girl shortly after December 3, 1861, with the intention of submitting it to the prestigious annual exhibition of the Royal Academy. In spite of bouts of illness, he finished the painting by April. The white paint Whistler used contained lead, and his work on the seven-foot-high canvas had given the artist a dose of lead poisoning. The portrait was refused for exhibition at the conservative Royal Academy in London.  Whistler then submitted the painting to the Paris Salon of 1863, where it was also rejected. The public was able to see the painting exhibited with other rejected works, in the Salon des Refusés.  The Salon des Refusés was an event sanctioned by Emperor Napoleon III, to appease the large number of artists who joined forces to protest the harsh jury decisions in 1863 Of the over 5,000 paintings submitted in 1863, 2,217 were rejected.  In a letter to George du Maurier in early 1862 Whistler wrote of the painting:... a woman in a beautiful white cambric dress, standing against a window which filters the light through a transparent white muslin curtain – but the figure receives a strong light from the right and therefore the picture, barring the red hair, is one gorgeous mass of brilliant white.Whistler submitted the painting to the Academy, but according to Joanna Hiffernan, he expected it to be rejected. The previous year, in 1861, another painting had caused a minor scandal. Edwin Henry Landseer's The Shrew Tamed showed a horse with a woman resting on the ground nearby. The model was named as Ann Gilbert, a noted equestrienne of the period, however it was soon rumored that it was actually Catherine Walters, the notorious London courtesan. Whistler's painting was reminiscent enough of Landseer's that the judges were wary of admitting it. White Girl was submitted to the Academy along with three etchings, all three of which were accepted, while the painting was not. Whistler exhibited it at the small Berners Street Gallery in London instead. The next year, Whistler tried to have the painting exhibited at the Salon in Paris – the official art exhibition of the Académie des Beaux-Arts – but it was rejected there as well. Instead, it was accepted at the alternative Salon des Refusés – the "exhibition of rejects" that opened on May 15, two weeks after the official Salon.Although Whistler's painting was widely noticed, he was upstaged by Manet's more shocking painting Le déjeuner sur l'herbe. The controversy surrounding the paintings was described in Émile Zola's novel L'Œuvre (1886). The reception Whistler's painting received was mostly favourable, however, and largely vindicated him after the rejection he had experienced both in London and in Paris. The painting was greatly admired by his colleagues and friends Manet, the painter Gustave Courbet and the poet Charles Baudelaire. The art critic Théophile Thoré-Bürger saw it in the tradition of Goya and Velázquez. There were, however, those who were less favourable; certain French critics saw the English Pre-Raphaelite trend as somewhat eccentric.

File:Palais de l'Industrie - Édouard Baldus.jpg


Salon des Refusés

Prompt: Explain the Symphony in White no 1 about the Works in the exhibition of this artwork, Salon des Refusés.

In 1861, after returning to Paris for a time, James Abbott McNeill Whistler painted his first famous work, Symphony in White, No. 1: The White Girl. This portrait of his mistress and business manager Joanna Hiffernan was created as a simple study in white; however, others saw it differently. The critic Jules-Antoine Castagnary thought the painting an allegory of a new bride's lost innocence. Others linked it to Wilkie Collins's The Woman in White, a popular novel of the time, or various other literary sources. In England, some considered it a painting in the Pre-Raphaelite manner. In the painting, Hiffernan holds a lily in her left hand and stands upon a wolf skin rug (interpreted by some to represent masculinity and lust) with the wolf's head staring menacingly at the viewer.Countering criticism by traditionalists, Whistler's supporters insisted that the painting was "an apparition with a spiritual content" and that it epitomized his theory that art should be concerned essentially with the arrangement of colors in harmony, not with a literal portrayal of the natural world.Whistler started working on The White Girl shortly after December 3, 1861, with the intention of submitting it to the prestigious annual exhibition of the Royal Academy. In spite of bouts of illness, he finished the painting by April. The white paint Whistler used contained lead, and his work on the seven-foot-high canvas had given the artist a dose of lead poisoning. The portrait was refused for exhibition at the conservative Royal Academy in London.  Whistler then submitted the painting to the Paris Salon of 1863, where it was also rejected. The public was able to see the painting exhibited with other rejected works, in the Salon des Refusés.  The Salon des Refusés was an event sanctioned by Emperor Napoleon III, to appease the large number of artists who joined forces to protest the harsh jury decisions in 1863 Of the over 5,000 paintings submitted in 1863, 2,217 were rejected.  In a letter to George du Maurier in early 1862 Whistler wrote of the painting:... a woman in a beautiful white cambric dress, standing against a window which filters the light through a transparent white muslin curtain – but the figure receives a strong light from the right and therefore the picture, barring the red hair, is one gorgeous mass of brilliant white.Whistler submitted the painting to the Academy, but according to Joanna Hiffernan, he expected it to be rejected. The previous year, in 1861, another painting had caused a minor scandal. Edwin Henry Landseer's The Shrew Tamed showed a horse with a woman resting on the ground nearby. The model was named as Ann Gilbert, a noted equestrienne of the period, however it was soon rumored that it was actually Catherine Walters, the notorious London courtesan. Whistler's painting was reminiscent enough of Landseer's that the judges were wary of admitting it. White Girl was submitted to the Academy along with three etchings, all three of which were accepted, while the painting was not. Whistler exhibited it at the small Berners Street Gallery in London instead. The next year, Whistler tried to have the painting exhibited at the Salon in Paris – the official art exhibition of the Académie des Beaux-Arts – but it was rejected there as well. Instead, it was accepted at the alternative Salon des Refusés – the "exhibition of rejects" that opened on May 15, two weeks after the official Salon.Although Whistler's painting was widely noticed, he was upstaged by Manet's more shocking painting Le déjeuner sur l'herbe. The controversy surrounding the paintings was described in Émile Zola's novel L'Œuvre (1886). The reception Whistler's painting received was mostly favourable, however, and largely vindicated him after the rejection he had experienced both in London and in Paris. The painting was greatly admired by his colleagues and friends Manet, the painter Gustave Courbet and the poet Charles Baudelaire. The art critic Théophile Thoré-Bürger saw it in the tradition of Goya and Velázquez. There were, however, those who were less favourable; certain French critics saw the English Pre-Raphaelite trend as somewhat eccentric.

File:Palais de l'Industrie - Édouard Baldus.jpg


Salon des Refusés

Prompt: In Salon des Refusés, how is the Symphony in White no 1 of the Works in the exhibition explained?

In 1861, after returning to Paris for a time, James Abbott McNeill Whistler painted his first famous work, Symphony in White, No. 1: The White Girl. This portrait of his mistress and business manager Joanna Hiffernan was created as a simple study in white; however, others saw it differently. The critic Jules-Antoine Castagnary thought the painting an allegory of a new bride's lost innocence. Others linked it to Wilkie Collins's The Woman in White, a popular novel of the time, or various other literary sources. In England, some considered it a painting in the Pre-Raphaelite manner. In the painting, Hiffernan holds a lily in her left hand and stands upon a wolf skin rug (interpreted by some to represent masculinity and lust) with the wolf's head staring menacingly at the viewer.Countering criticism by traditionalists, Whistler's supporters insisted that the painting was "an apparition with a spiritual content" and that it epitomized his theory that art should be concerned essentially with the arrangement of colors in harmony, not with a literal portrayal of the natural world.Whistler started working on The White Girl shortly after December 3, 1861, with the intention of submitting it to the prestigious annual exhibition of the Royal Academy. In spite of bouts of illness, he finished the painting by April. The white paint Whistler used contained lead, and his work on the seven-foot-high canvas had given the artist a dose of lead poisoning. The portrait was refused for exhibition at the conservative Royal Academy in London.  Whistler then submitted the painting to the Paris Salon of 1863, where it was also rejected. The public was able to see the painting exhibited with other rejected works, in the Salon des Refusés.  The Salon des Refusés was an event sanctioned by Emperor Napoleon III, to appease the large number of artists who joined forces to protest the harsh jury decisions in 1863 Of the over 5,000 paintings submitted in 1863, 2,217 were rejected.  In a letter to George du Maurier in early 1862 Whistler wrote of the painting:... a woman in a beautiful white cambric dress, standing against a window which filters the light through a transparent white muslin curtain – but the figure receives a strong light from the right and therefore the picture, barring the red hair, is one gorgeous mass of brilliant white.Whistler submitted the painting to the Academy, but according to Joanna Hiffernan, he expected it to be rejected. The previous year, in 1861, another painting had caused a minor scandal. Edwin Henry Landseer's The Shrew Tamed showed a horse with a woman resting on the ground nearby. The model was named as Ann Gilbert, a noted equestrienne of the period, however it was soon rumored that it was actually Catherine Walters, the notorious London courtesan. Whistler's painting was reminiscent enough of Landseer's that the judges were wary of admitting it. White Girl was submitted to the Academy along with three etchings, all three of which were accepted, while the painting was not. Whistler exhibited it at the small Berners Street Gallery in London instead. The next year, Whistler tried to have the painting exhibited at the Salon in Paris – the official art exhibition of the Académie des Beaux-Arts – but it was rejected there as well. Instead, it was accepted at the alternative Salon des Refusés – the "exhibition of rejects" that opened on May 15, two weeks after the official Salon.Although Whistler's painting was widely noticed, he was upstaged by Manet's more shocking painting Le déjeuner sur l'herbe. The controversy surrounding the paintings was described in Émile Zola's novel L'Œuvre (1886). The reception Whistler's painting received was mostly favourable, however, and largely vindicated him after the rejection he had experienced both in London and in Paris. The painting was greatly admired by his colleagues and friends Manet, the painter Gustave Courbet and the poet Charles Baudelaire. The art critic Théophile Thoré-Bürger saw it in the tradition of Goya and Velázquez. There were, however, those who were less favourable; certain French critics saw the English Pre-Raphaelite trend as somewhat eccentric.

File:Palais de l'Industrie - Édouard Baldus.jpg


Salon des Refusés

Prompt: Describe the characteristics of the Symphony in White no 1 in Salon des Refusés's Works in the exhibition.

In 1861, after returning to Paris for a time, James Abbott McNeill Whistler painted his first famous work, Symphony in White, No. 1: The White Girl. This portrait of his mistress and business manager Joanna Hiffernan was created as a simple study in white; however, others saw it differently. The critic Jules-Antoine Castagnary thought the painting an allegory of a new bride's lost innocence. Others linked it to Wilkie Collins's The Woman in White, a popular novel of the time, or various other literary sources. In England, some considered it a painting in the Pre-Raphaelite manner. In the painting, Hiffernan holds a lily in her left hand and stands upon a wolf skin rug (interpreted by some to represent masculinity and lust) with the wolf's head staring menacingly at the viewer.Countering criticism by traditionalists, Whistler's supporters insisted that the painting was "an apparition with a spiritual content" and that it epitomized his theory that art should be concerned essentially with the arrangement of colors in harmony, not with a literal portrayal of the natural world.Whistler started working on The White Girl shortly after December 3, 1861, with the intention of submitting it to the prestigious annual exhibition of the Royal Academy. In spite of bouts of illness, he finished the painting by April. The white paint Whistler used contained lead, and his work on the seven-foot-high canvas had given the artist a dose of lead poisoning. The portrait was refused for exhibition at the conservative Royal Academy in London.  Whistler then submitted the painting to the Paris Salon of 1863, where it was also rejected. The public was able to see the painting exhibited with other rejected works, in the Salon des Refusés.  The Salon des Refusés was an event sanctioned by Emperor Napoleon III, to appease the large number of artists who joined forces to protest the harsh jury decisions in 1863 Of the over 5,000 paintings submitted in 1863, 2,217 were rejected.  In a letter to George du Maurier in early 1862 Whistler wrote of the painting:... a woman in a beautiful white cambric dress, standing against a window which filters the light through a transparent white muslin curtain – but the figure receives a strong light from the right and therefore the picture, barring the red hair, is one gorgeous mass of brilliant white.Whistler submitted the painting to the Academy, but according to Joanna Hiffernan, he expected it to be rejected. The previous year, in 1861, another painting had caused a minor scandal. Edwin Henry Landseer's The Shrew Tamed showed a horse with a woman resting on the ground nearby. The model was named as Ann Gilbert, a noted equestrienne of the period, however it was soon rumored that it was actually Catherine Walters, the notorious London courtesan. Whistler's painting was reminiscent enough of Landseer's that the judges were wary of admitting it. White Girl was submitted to the Academy along with three etchings, all three of which were accepted, while the painting was not. Whistler exhibited it at the small Berners Street Gallery in London instead. The next year, Whistler tried to have the painting exhibited at the Salon in Paris – the official art exhibition of the Académie des Beaux-Arts – but it was rejected there as well. Instead, it was accepted at the alternative Salon des Refusés – the "exhibition of rejects" that opened on May 15, two weeks after the official Salon.Although Whistler's painting was widely noticed, he was upstaged by Manet's more shocking painting Le déjeuner sur l'herbe. The controversy surrounding the paintings was described in Émile Zola's novel L'Œuvre (1886). The reception Whistler's painting received was mostly favourable, however, and largely vindicated him after the rejection he had experienced both in London and in Paris. The painting was greatly admired by his colleagues and friends Manet, the painter Gustave Courbet and the poet Charles Baudelaire. The art critic Théophile Thoré-Bürger saw it in the tradition of Goya and Velázquez. There were, however, those who were less favourable; certain French critics saw the English Pre-Raphaelite trend as somewhat eccentric.

File:Palais de l'Industrie - Édouard Baldus.jpg


Salon des Refusés

Prompt: Focus on Salon des Refusés and explain the Legacy.

Art historian Albert Boime wrote: "The Salon des Refusés introduced the democratic concept of a multi-style system (much like a multi-party system) subject to the review of the general jury of the public."

Symphony in White, No. 1: The White Girl

File:Palais de l'Industrie - Édouard Baldus.jpg


Salon des Refusés

Prompt: Explain the Legacy of this artwork, Salon des Refusés.

Art historian Albert Boime wrote: "The Salon des Refusés introduced the democratic concept of a multi-style system (much like a multi-party system) subject to the review of the general jury of the public."

Symphony in White, No. 1: The White Girl

File:Palais de l'Industrie - Édouard Baldus.jpg


Salon des Refusés

Prompt: How does Salon des Refusés explain its Legacy?

Art historian Albert Boime wrote: "The Salon des Refusés introduced the democratic concept of a multi-style system (much like a multi-party system) subject to the review of the general jury of the public."

Symphony in White, No. 1: The White Girl

File:Palais de l'Industrie - Édouard Baldus.jpg


Salon des Refusés

Prompt: In Salon des Refusés, how is the Legacy discussed?

Art historian Albert Boime wrote: "The Salon des Refusés introduced the democratic concept of a multi-style system (much like a multi-party system) subject to the review of the general jury of the public."

Symphony in White, No. 1: The White Girl

File:Palais de l'Industrie - Édouard Baldus.jpg


Sunset at Montmajour

Prompt: Focus on Sunset at Montmajour and explain the abstract.

Sunset at Montmajour is a landscape in oils painted by the Dutch artist Vincent van Gogh on 4 July 1888. It was painted while the artist was at Arles, France and depicts a landscape of garrigue with the ruins of Montmajour Abbey in the background. The painting is 73.3 cm × 93.3 cm (28.9 in × 36.7 in). For over 100 years, it was in a Norwegian industrialist's private collection and wrongly assumed to be fake, before being re-examined, authenticated and sold to its current private owner. The painting was temporarily on display from 24 September 2013 until 12 January 2014 as part of an exhibition at the Van Gogh Museum in Amsterdam.Its authenticity was questioned several times before it was confirmed as a genuine van Gogh work in 2013. It is the first full-sized painting by Van Gogh to be newly confirmed since 1928.

Category:Paintings of Arles by Vincent van Gogh


Sunset at Montmajour

Prompt: Explain the abstract of this artwork, Sunset at Montmajour.

Sunset at Montmajour is a landscape in oils painted by the Dutch artist Vincent van Gogh on 4 July 1888. It was painted while the artist was at Arles, France and depicts a landscape of garrigue with the ruins of Montmajour Abbey in the background. The painting is 73.3 cm × 93.3 cm (28.9 in × 36.7 in). For over 100 years, it was in a Norwegian industrialist's private collection and wrongly assumed to be fake, before being re-examined, authenticated and sold to its current private owner. The painting was temporarily on display from 24 September 2013 until 12 January 2014 as part of an exhibition at the Van Gogh Museum in Amsterdam.Its authenticity was questioned several times before it was confirmed as a genuine van Gogh work in 2013. It is the first full-sized painting by Van Gogh to be newly confirmed since 1928.

Category:Paintings of Arles by Vincent van Gogh


Sunset at Montmajour

Prompt: How does Sunset at Montmajour explain its abstract?

Sunset at Montmajour is a landscape in oils painted by the Dutch artist Vincent van Gogh on 4 July 1888. It was painted while the artist was at Arles, France and depicts a landscape of garrigue with the ruins of Montmajour Abbey in the background. The painting is 73.3 cm × 93.3 cm (28.9 in × 36.7 in). For over 100 years, it was in a Norwegian industrialist's private collection and wrongly assumed to be fake, before being re-examined, authenticated and sold to its current private owner. The painting was temporarily on display from 24 September 2013 until 12 January 2014 as part of an exhibition at the Van Gogh Museum in Amsterdam.Its authenticity was questioned several times before it was confirmed as a genuine van Gogh work in 2013. It is the first full-sized painting by Van Gogh to be newly confirmed since 1928.

Category:Paintings of Arles by Vincent van Gogh


Sunset at Montmajour

Prompt: In Sunset at Montmajour, how is the abstract discussed?

Sunset at Montmajour is a landscape in oils painted by the Dutch artist Vincent van Gogh on 4 July 1888. It was painted while the artist was at Arles, France and depicts a landscape of garrigue with the ruins of Montmajour Abbey in the background. The painting is 73.3 cm × 93.3 cm (28.9 in × 36.7 in). For over 100 years, it was in a Norwegian industrialist's private collection and wrongly assumed to be fake, before being re-examined, authenticated and sold to its current private owner. The painting was temporarily on display from 24 September 2013 until 12 January 2014 as part of an exhibition at the Van Gogh Museum in Amsterdam.Its authenticity was questioned several times before it was confirmed as a genuine van Gogh work in 2013. It is the first full-sized painting by Van Gogh to be newly confirmed since 1928.

Category:Paintings of Arles by Vincent van Gogh


Sunset at Montmajour

Prompt: Focus on Sunset at Montmajour and explain the History.

The painting was inventoried among Theo van Gogh's collection of his brother's works in 1890. It was sold in 1901 by his widow, Johanna van Gogh-Bonger, to a Paris art dealer. In 1908, the art dealer sold it to Christian Nicolai Mustad.In 1908 a Norwegian industrialist, Christian Nicolai Mustad, who believed it to be the work of van Gogh, purchased and displayed the painting at his home. According to Mustad's family, the French ambassador to Sweden, while a guest at Mustad's home, advised that it probably was not by van Gogh. At that time Mustad took it down from display. The painting remained stored in his attic until Mustad's death, when it reappeared as part of his estate.

Category:Paintings of Arles by Vincent van Gogh


Sunset at Montmajour

Prompt: Explain the History of this artwork, Sunset at Montmajour.

The painting was inventoried among Theo van Gogh's collection of his brother's works in 1890. It was sold in 1901 by his widow, Johanna van Gogh-Bonger, to a Paris art dealer. In 1908, the art dealer sold it to Christian Nicolai Mustad.In 1908 a Norwegian industrialist, Christian Nicolai Mustad, who believed it to be the work of van Gogh, purchased and displayed the painting at his home. According to Mustad's family, the French ambassador to Sweden, while a guest at Mustad's home, advised that it probably was not by van Gogh. At that time Mustad took it down from display. The painting remained stored in his attic until Mustad's death, when it reappeared as part of his estate.

Category:Paintings of Arles by Vincent van Gogh


Sunset at Montmajour

Prompt: How does Sunset at Montmajour explain its History?

The painting was inventoried among Theo van Gogh's collection of his brother's works in 1890. It was sold in 1901 by his widow, Johanna van Gogh-Bonger, to a Paris art dealer. In 1908, the art dealer sold it to Christian Nicolai Mustad.In 1908 a Norwegian industrialist, Christian Nicolai Mustad, who believed it to be the work of van Gogh, purchased and displayed the painting at his home. According to Mustad's family, the French ambassador to Sweden, while a guest at Mustad's home, advised that it probably was not by van Gogh. At that time Mustad took it down from display. The painting remained stored in his attic until Mustad's death, when it reappeared as part of his estate.

Category:Paintings of Arles by Vincent van Gogh


Sunset at Montmajour

Prompt: In Sunset at Montmajour, how is the History discussed?

The painting was inventoried among Theo van Gogh's collection of his brother's works in 1890. It was sold in 1901 by his widow, Johanna van Gogh-Bonger, to a Paris art dealer. In 1908, the art dealer sold it to Christian Nicolai Mustad.In 1908 a Norwegian industrialist, Christian Nicolai Mustad, who believed it to be the work of van Gogh, purchased and displayed the painting at his home. According to Mustad's family, the French ambassador to Sweden, while a guest at Mustad's home, advised that it probably was not by van Gogh. At that time Mustad took it down from display. The painting remained stored in his attic until Mustad's death, when it reappeared as part of his estate.

Category:Paintings of Arles by Vincent van Gogh


Sunset at Montmajour

Prompt: Focus on Sunset at Montmajour and explain the Authentication.

In the 1990s, the painting was shown to staff at the Van Gogh Museum, but it was dismissed as not the work of van Gogh because it was not signed. With the development of improved investigative techniques, however, in 2011 a two-year investigation was launched by the Van Gogh Museum to examine the possible authenticity of the painting. The painting was subjected to a detailed investigation of style and materials. It was discovered to have been painted in the same range of paints that appears in works by van Gogh at that period, which led to further research. Among the evidence that confirmed the painting's authenticity was a letter written by Vincent van Gogh to his brother Theo on 5 July 1888, describing a landscape that he had painted the previous day: "Yesterday, at sunset, I was on a stony heath where very small, twisted oaks grow, in the background a ruin on the hill, and wheatfields in the valley. It was romantic, it couldn’t be more so, à la Monticelli, the sun was pouring its very yellow rays over the bushes and the ground, absolutely a shower of gold. And all the lines were beautiful, the whole scene had a charming nobility. You wouldn’t have been at all surprised to see knights and ladies suddenly appear, returning from hunting with hawks, or to hear the voice of an old Provençal troubadour. The fields seemed purple, the distances blue.  And I brought back a study of it too, but it was well below what I’d wished to do."On 9 September 2013, the Van Gogh Museum announced in a public unveiling of the painting, that the work had been confirmed as a painting by van Gogh.

Category:Paintings of Arles by Vincent van Gogh


Sunset at Montmajour

Prompt: Explain the Authentication of this artwork, Sunset at Montmajour.

In the 1990s, the painting was shown to staff at the Van Gogh Museum, but it was dismissed as not the work of van Gogh because it was not signed. With the development of improved investigative techniques, however, in 2011 a two-year investigation was launched by the Van Gogh Museum to examine the possible authenticity of the painting. The painting was subjected to a detailed investigation of style and materials. It was discovered to have been painted in the same range of paints that appears in works by van Gogh at that period, which led to further research. Among the evidence that confirmed the painting's authenticity was a letter written by Vincent van Gogh to his brother Theo on 5 July 1888, describing a landscape that he had painted the previous day: "Yesterday, at sunset, I was on a stony heath where very small, twisted oaks grow, in the background a ruin on the hill, and wheatfields in the valley. It was romantic, it couldn’t be more so, à la Monticelli, the sun was pouring its very yellow rays over the bushes and the ground, absolutely a shower of gold. And all the lines were beautiful, the whole scene had a charming nobility. You wouldn’t have been at all surprised to see knights and ladies suddenly appear, returning from hunting with hawks, or to hear the voice of an old Provençal troubadour. The fields seemed purple, the distances blue.  And I brought back a study of it too, but it was well below what I’d wished to do."On 9 September 2013, the Van Gogh Museum announced in a public unveiling of the painting, that the work had been confirmed as a painting by van Gogh.

Category:Paintings of Arles by Vincent van Gogh


Sunset at Montmajour

Prompt: How does Sunset at Montmajour explain its Authentication?

In the 1990s, the painting was shown to staff at the Van Gogh Museum, but it was dismissed as not the work of van Gogh because it was not signed. With the development of improved investigative techniques, however, in 2011 a two-year investigation was launched by the Van Gogh Museum to examine the possible authenticity of the painting. The painting was subjected to a detailed investigation of style and materials. It was discovered to have been painted in the same range of paints that appears in works by van Gogh at that period, which led to further research. Among the evidence that confirmed the painting's authenticity was a letter written by Vincent van Gogh to his brother Theo on 5 July 1888, describing a landscape that he had painted the previous day: "Yesterday, at sunset, I was on a stony heath where very small, twisted oaks grow, in the background a ruin on the hill, and wheatfields in the valley. It was romantic, it couldn’t be more so, à la Monticelli, the sun was pouring its very yellow rays over the bushes and the ground, absolutely a shower of gold. And all the lines were beautiful, the whole scene had a charming nobility. You wouldn’t have been at all surprised to see knights and ladies suddenly appear, returning from hunting with hawks, or to hear the voice of an old Provençal troubadour. The fields seemed purple, the distances blue.  And I brought back a study of it too, but it was well below what I’d wished to do."On 9 September 2013, the Van Gogh Museum announced in a public unveiling of the painting, that the work had been confirmed as a painting by van Gogh.

Category:Paintings of Arles by Vincent van Gogh


Sunset at Montmajour

Prompt: In Sunset at Montmajour, how is the Authentication discussed?

In the 1990s, the painting was shown to staff at the Van Gogh Museum, but it was dismissed as not the work of van Gogh because it was not signed. With the development of improved investigative techniques, however, in 2011 a two-year investigation was launched by the Van Gogh Museum to examine the possible authenticity of the painting. The painting was subjected to a detailed investigation of style and materials. It was discovered to have been painted in the same range of paints that appears in works by van Gogh at that period, which led to further research. Among the evidence that confirmed the painting's authenticity was a letter written by Vincent van Gogh to his brother Theo on 5 July 1888, describing a landscape that he had painted the previous day: "Yesterday, at sunset, I was on a stony heath where very small, twisted oaks grow, in the background a ruin on the hill, and wheatfields in the valley. It was romantic, it couldn’t be more so, à la Monticelli, the sun was pouring its very yellow rays over the bushes and the ground, absolutely a shower of gold. And all the lines were beautiful, the whole scene had a charming nobility. You wouldn’t have been at all surprised to see knights and ladies suddenly appear, returning from hunting with hawks, or to hear the voice of an old Provençal troubadour. The fields seemed purple, the distances blue.  And I brought back a study of it too, but it was well below what I’d wished to do."On 9 September 2013, the Van Gogh Museum announced in a public unveiling of the painting, that the work had been confirmed as a painting by van Gogh.

Category:Paintings of Arles by Vincent van Gogh


Sunset at Montmajour

Prompt: Focus on Sunset at Montmajour and explain the Reception.

Martin Bailey praised Sunset at Montmajour as "a major addition to [van Gogh's] oeuvre."

Category:Paintings of Arles by Vincent van Gogh


Sunset at Montmajour

Prompt: Explain the Reception of this artwork, Sunset at Montmajour.

Martin Bailey praised Sunset at Montmajour as "a major addition to [van Gogh's] oeuvre."

Category:Paintings of Arles by Vincent van Gogh


Sunset at Montmajour

Prompt: How does Sunset at Montmajour explain its Reception?

Martin Bailey praised Sunset at Montmajour as "a major addition to [van Gogh's] oeuvre."

Category:Paintings of Arles by Vincent van Gogh


Sunset at Montmajour

Prompt: In Sunset at Montmajour, how is the Reception discussed?

Martin Bailey praised Sunset at Montmajour as "a major addition to [van Gogh's] oeuvre."

Category:Paintings of Arles by Vincent van Gogh


The Spirit of Detroit

Prompt: Focus on The Spirit of Detroit and explain the abstract.

The Spirit of Detroit is a monument with a large bronze statue created by Marshall Fredericks and located at the Coleman A. Young Municipal Center on Woodward Avenue in Detroit, Michigan.

Category:Sculptures by Marshall Fredericks

Category:Monuments and memorials in Detroit

Category:Colossal statues in the United States

Category:1958 establishments in Michigan


The Spirit of Detroit

Prompt: Explain the abstract of this artwork, The Spirit of Detroit.

The Spirit of Detroit is a monument with a large bronze statue created by Marshall Fredericks and located at the Coleman A. Young Municipal Center on Woodward Avenue in Detroit, Michigan.

Category:Sculptures by Marshall Fredericks

Category:Monuments and memorials in Detroit

Category:Colossal statues in the United States

Category:1958 establishments in Michigan


The Spirit of Detroit

Prompt: How does The Spirit of Detroit explain its abstract?

The Spirit of Detroit is a monument with a large bronze statue created by Marshall Fredericks and located at the Coleman A. Young Municipal Center on Woodward Avenue in Detroit, Michigan.

Category:Sculptures by Marshall Fredericks

Category:Monuments and memorials in Detroit

Category:Colossal statues in the United States

Category:1958 establishments in Michigan


The Spirit of Detroit

Prompt: In The Spirit of Detroit, how is the abstract discussed?

The Spirit of Detroit is a monument with a large bronze statue created by Marshall Fredericks and located at the Coleman A. Young Municipal Center on Woodward Avenue in Detroit, Michigan.

Category:Sculptures by Marshall Fredericks

Category:Monuments and memorials in Detroit

Category:Colossal statues in the United States

Category:1958 establishments in Michigan


The Spirit of Detroit

Prompt: Focus on The Spirit of Detroit and explain the Description.

The Spirit of Detroit is a monument with a large bronze statue created by Marshall Fredericks and located at the Coleman A. Young Municipal Center on Woodward Avenue in Detroit, Michigan. Fredericks also designed the seal of Wayne County at the time he was designing The Spirit of Detroit, as it was a part of the work and the county had no seal at the time. The seal is still used today and is also featured on the county's flag. Cast in Oslo, Norway, the 26-foot (7.9 m), 9-ton sculpture sits on a 60-ton marble base and it was the largest cast bronze statue since the Renaissance.In its left hand, the large seated figure holds a gilt bronze sphere emanating rays to symbolize God. The people in the figure's right hand are a family group symbolizing all human relationships.Fredericks did not originally name the sculpture and the name came from the citizens of Detroit based on an inscription from 2 Corinthians (3:17) on the marble wall behind it, underneath the seals of Wayne County and the City of Detroit:The 36 x 45 foot semicircular wall includes the seals of the City of Detroit and Wayne County. The Wayne County seal was created by Fredericks specifically for The Spirit of Detroit, as the county did not have a seal beforehand. A plaque in front of the sculpture bears the following inscription: "The artist expresses the concept that God, through the spirit of man, is manifested in the family, the noblest human relationship."

Category:Sculptures by Marshall Fredericks

Category:Monuments and memorials in Detroit

Category:Colossal statues in the United States

Category:1958 establishments in Michigan


The Spirit of Detroit

Prompt: Explain the Description of this artwork, The Spirit of Detroit.

The Spirit of Detroit is a monument with a large bronze statue created by Marshall Fredericks and located at the Coleman A. Young Municipal Center on Woodward Avenue in Detroit, Michigan. Fredericks also designed the seal of Wayne County at the time he was designing The Spirit of Detroit, as it was a part of the work and the county had no seal at the time. The seal is still used today and is also featured on the county's flag. Cast in Oslo, Norway, the 26-foot (7.9 m), 9-ton sculpture sits on a 60-ton marble base and it was the largest cast bronze statue since the Renaissance.In its left hand, the large seated figure holds a gilt bronze sphere emanating rays to symbolize God. The people in the figure's right hand are a family group symbolizing all human relationships.Fredericks did not originally name the sculpture and the name came from the citizens of Detroit based on an inscription from 2 Corinthians (3:17) on the marble wall behind it, underneath the seals of Wayne County and the City of Detroit:The 36 x 45 foot semicircular wall includes the seals of the City of Detroit and Wayne County. The Wayne County seal was created by Fredericks specifically for The Spirit of Detroit, as the county did not have a seal beforehand. A plaque in front of the sculpture bears the following inscription: "The artist expresses the concept that God, through the spirit of man, is manifested in the family, the noblest human relationship."

Category:Sculptures by Marshall Fredericks

Category:Monuments and memorials in Detroit

Category:Colossal statues in the United States

Category:1958 establishments in Michigan


The Spirit of Detroit

Prompt: How does The Spirit of Detroit explain its Description?

The Spirit of Detroit is a monument with a large bronze statue created by Marshall Fredericks and located at the Coleman A. Young Municipal Center on Woodward Avenue in Detroit, Michigan. Fredericks also designed the seal of Wayne County at the time he was designing The Spirit of Detroit, as it was a part of the work and the county had no seal at the time. The seal is still used today and is also featured on the county's flag. Cast in Oslo, Norway, the 26-foot (7.9 m), 9-ton sculpture sits on a 60-ton marble base and it was the largest cast bronze statue since the Renaissance.In its left hand, the large seated figure holds a gilt bronze sphere emanating rays to symbolize God. The people in the figure's right hand are a family group symbolizing all human relationships.Fredericks did not originally name the sculpture and the name came from the citizens of Detroit based on an inscription from 2 Corinthians (3:17) on the marble wall behind it, underneath the seals of Wayne County and the City of Detroit:The 36 x 45 foot semicircular wall includes the seals of the City of Detroit and Wayne County. The Wayne County seal was created by Fredericks specifically for The Spirit of Detroit, as the county did not have a seal beforehand. A plaque in front of the sculpture bears the following inscription: "The artist expresses the concept that God, through the spirit of man, is manifested in the family, the noblest human relationship."

Category:Sculptures by Marshall Fredericks

Category:Monuments and memorials in Detroit

Category:Colossal statues in the United States

Category:1958 establishments in Michigan


The Spirit of Detroit

Prompt: In The Spirit of Detroit, how is the Description discussed?

The Spirit of Detroit is a monument with a large bronze statue created by Marshall Fredericks and located at the Coleman A. Young Municipal Center on Woodward Avenue in Detroit, Michigan. Fredericks also designed the seal of Wayne County at the time he was designing The Spirit of Detroit, as it was a part of the work and the county had no seal at the time. The seal is still used today and is also featured on the county's flag. Cast in Oslo, Norway, the 26-foot (7.9 m), 9-ton sculpture sits on a 60-ton marble base and it was the largest cast bronze statue since the Renaissance.In its left hand, the large seated figure holds a gilt bronze sphere emanating rays to symbolize God. The people in the figure's right hand are a family group symbolizing all human relationships.Fredericks did not originally name the sculpture and the name came from the citizens of Detroit based on an inscription from 2 Corinthians (3:17) on the marble wall behind it, underneath the seals of Wayne County and the City of Detroit:The 36 x 45 foot semicircular wall includes the seals of the City of Detroit and Wayne County. The Wayne County seal was created by Fredericks specifically for The Spirit of Detroit, as the county did not have a seal beforehand. A plaque in front of the sculpture bears the following inscription: "The artist expresses the concept that God, through the spirit of man, is manifested in the family, the noblest human relationship."

Category:Sculptures by Marshall Fredericks

Category:Monuments and memorials in Detroit

Category:Colossal statues in the United States

Category:1958 establishments in Michigan


The Spirit of Detroit

Prompt: Focus on The Spirit of Detroit and explain the History.

The sculpture was commissioned on August 2, 1955 for a cost of $58,000 (equivalent to $415,000 in 2023). Fredericks considered the statue to be part of his civic responsibility and waived the commissioning cost. As part of the design of the divine elements of the sculpture, Fredericks met with several religious groups. Fredericks shipped a scale model from the United States to Oslo, Norway for casting. After casting, the sculpture underwent acidic treatments for several weeks to oxidize the bronze and to create the warm, aged green color. the thickness of the bronze is 3/8 inches up to 1.5 inches. Steel framework was constructed to protect the sculpture during transport. Additional protection for the sculpture was provided using wooden beams, wooden platforms, and burlap covering, for a total shipping weight of 12 tons. For shipping, the sculpture was placed facedown onto a wooden platform. The sculpture was transported by the Fjell Line, who chartered the German freighter Thomas Schulte. After the 4,800 mile journey across the Atlantic Ocean and through the Saint Lawrence Seaway, the freighter arrived at the Port of Detroit on September 20, 1958. The Thomas Schulte was the only freighter with sufficient below deck storage space to accommodate the sculpture while still being able to navigate the Saint Lawrence Seaway.As part of the shipment, four miniature scale models of the sculpture were included to aid with customs clearance. The sculpture was delivered to the Detroit City-County Building (now the Coleman A. Young Municipal Center) and installed onto the marble base for the September 23, 1958 dedication ceremony.The Marshall M. Fredericks Sculpture Museum has the original plaster head for The Spirit of Detroit, as well as a quarter-scale plaster model.The sculpture has regular maintenance, as well as restorations. Once a year, the sculpture is cleaned with non-ionic, biogradable detergents and customized petroleum-based waxes are used for protection. The annual maintenance also includes applying heat to the bronze surface and cupric nitrate in order to preserve the green color and patina. In 1984, the sculpture was covered in plastic while the marble panels behind the statue were replaced. The statue underwent a restoration in 2006, funded by foundations and other private donations.For the sculpture's 50th anniversary, funds from operational savings and energy conservation totalling $170,000 were used for restoration improvements. In 2018, the sculpture had routine maintenance completed which involved touching up the green patina, as well as the gold figures and sphere. On September 21, 2018, the City of Detroit had a ceremony to celebrate the 60th anniversary of the sculpture.In 2017, Spirit Plaza was initially constructed and subsequent upgrades completed in 2019 and paid for by $800,000 in bond funds have yielded a 20,000 square-foot plaza with a playground, stationary musical instruments, tables, chairs, vehicle charging stations, and drinking fountains.In 2013 art dealer and art historian Eric Ian Hornak Spoutz was quoted in The Detroit News stating that the value of the statue is in excess of $1 million. In 2017, the Detroit-Wayne Joint Building Authority said that based on the most recent appraisal of the sculpture, it would cost $6 million to repair significant damage.

Category:Sculptures by Marshall Fredericks

Category:Monuments and memorials in Detroit

Category:Colossal statues in the United States

Category:1958 establishments in Michigan


The Spirit of Detroit

Prompt: Explain the History of this artwork, The Spirit of Detroit.

The sculpture was commissioned on August 2, 1955 for a cost of $58,000 (equivalent to $415,000 in 2023). Fredericks considered the statue to be part of his civic responsibility and waived the commissioning cost. As part of the design of the divine elements of the sculpture, Fredericks met with several religious groups. Fredericks shipped a scale model from the United States to Oslo, Norway for casting. After casting, the sculpture underwent acidic treatments for several weeks to oxidize the bronze and to create the warm, aged green color. the thickness of the bronze is 3/8 inches up to 1.5 inches. Steel framework was constructed to protect the sculpture during transport. Additional protection for the sculpture was provided using wooden beams, wooden platforms, and burlap covering, for a total shipping weight of 12 tons. For shipping, the sculpture was placed facedown onto a wooden platform. The sculpture was transported by the Fjell Line, who chartered the German freighter Thomas Schulte. After the 4,800 mile journey across the Atlantic Ocean and through the Saint Lawrence Seaway, the freighter arrived at the Port of Detroit on September 20, 1958. The Thomas Schulte was the only freighter with sufficient below deck storage space to accommodate the sculpture while still being able to navigate the Saint Lawrence Seaway.As part of the shipment, four miniature scale models of the sculpture were included to aid with customs clearance. The sculpture was delivered to the Detroit City-County Building (now the Coleman A. Young Municipal Center) and installed onto the marble base for the September 23, 1958 dedication ceremony.The Marshall M. Fredericks Sculpture Museum has the original plaster head for The Spirit of Detroit, as well as a quarter-scale plaster model.The sculpture has regular maintenance, as well as restorations. Once a year, the sculpture is cleaned with non-ionic, biogradable detergents and customized petroleum-based waxes are used for protection. The annual maintenance also includes applying heat to the bronze surface and cupric nitrate in order to preserve the green color and patina. In 1984, the sculpture was covered in plastic while the marble panels behind the statue were replaced. The statue underwent a restoration in 2006, funded by foundations and other private donations.For the sculpture's 50th anniversary, funds from operational savings and energy conservation totalling $170,000 were used for restoration improvements. In 2018, the sculpture had routine maintenance completed which involved touching up the green patina, as well as the gold figures and sphere. On September 21, 2018, the City of Detroit had a ceremony to celebrate the 60th anniversary of the sculpture.In 2017, Spirit Plaza was initially constructed and subsequent upgrades completed in 2019 and paid for by $800,000 in bond funds have yielded a 20,000 square-foot plaza with a playground, stationary musical instruments, tables, chairs, vehicle charging stations, and drinking fountains.In 2013 art dealer and art historian Eric Ian Hornak Spoutz was quoted in The Detroit News stating that the value of the statue is in excess of $1 million. In 2017, the Detroit-Wayne Joint Building Authority said that based on the most recent appraisal of the sculpture, it would cost $6 million to repair significant damage.

Category:Sculptures by Marshall Fredericks

Category:Monuments and memorials in Detroit

Category:Colossal statues in the United States

Category:1958 establishments in Michigan