Monument to Leonardo da Vinci

Prompt: Describe the characteristics of the The 1857 competition in Monument to Leonardo da Vinci's History.

In 1856, among the competitions of the Academy of Fine Arts in Milan, the design of a monument to Leonardo in the form of a fountain to be placed in the courtyard of the Palazzo Brera was requested.A rich honorary monument to Leonardo da Vinci, composed of marble and bronze, serving at the same time as a source of drinking water, to be placed in the Palazzo Brera facing the main gate, and set where the present trumpet stands. The project may be both in drawing and in relief. The drawing will be of the precise measurement of 0.54 meters by 0.81 meters; the model will be 1.08 meters high, and it will be marked how much there is of marble and how much of bronze.Prize = A gold medal of the intrinsic value of twenty sequins.On February 8, 1857, the Emperor Franz Joseph determined that a proper monument should be erected in Piazza San Fedele with a marble statue 3.6 meters high. A new program was therefore established on October 1, 1857, with a deadline of October 31, 1858.On December 22, 1858, the commission unanimously decided to choose the "Think in marble" model submitted by Pietro Magni; however, it was also pointed out that it would require an expenditure greater than the 60,000 Austrian liras stipulated in the call for proposals. It was also decided that the monument would be destined for Piazza della Scala.

Click on the image to [{{filepath:Monumento_a_Leonardo_da_Vinci_a_Milano.svg}} open the SVG file] and have an interactive three-dimensional view.

The revised design, as it appeared in 1864

Category:Monuments and memorials in Milan


Monument to Leonardo da Vinci

Prompt: In the context of Monument to Leonardo da Vinci, explain the Construction and the History.

Magni set to work, but the outcome of the Second Italian War of Independence forced him to turn first to Urbano Rattazzi, at that time the minister of the interior, and then to Cavour, president of the Council of Ministers. In fact, the government believed that it had no obligation to Magni since the competition had not been approved by the authorities and the amount of expenditure planned for his work was greater than that established by the competition. However, Cavour instructed Massimo d'Azeglio, Governor of Milan, to examine the situation in the sculptor's studio and make a decision.D'Azeglio not only confirmed the design but also suggested essential changes that increased the cost of the monument.And it was especially following V. E.'s wise observations and suggestions that the thought arose to detach from the monument the said 4 statues of the pupils and to place them on separate pedestals around the monument, thus obtaining a much more homogeneous eurhythmic line. Moreover, having substituted for the primitive model with a round base, the other with an octangular base of pure Bramantesque style with the addition of the various ornaments, and with the introduction of 4 large bronze bas-reliefs representing scenes from the life and works of the great artist, it was achieved, as the E. V. had also very appropriately suggested, that the monument be givenall that majesty and grandeur that was required of it, both because of the importance of the subject and because of the size of the square for which it is intended.Magni left for Bologna as standard-bearer of the National Guard and on his return in 1861 found Giuseppe Pasolini as the new governor; in order to try to obtain confirmation of the commission to build the monument, he thus contacted the Academy, d'Azeglio (who had retired from politics), Pasolini, the mayor of Milan Antonio Beretta and the president of the Council of Ministers Bettino Ricasoli.A value of about 100,000 liras (corresponding to the 60,000 Austrian liras of the competition plus another 47,000 Italian liras) was estimated for the monument's construction. In 1862 the authorities requested changes to the project to reduce the expense to 90,200 liras, and the city of Milan pledged a contribution of 20,000 liras.Magni carried on with the monument by incurring expenses for materials; by 1867, however, he had received no payment and the ministerial file had made no progress. He then decided to take advantage of the inauguration of the Galleria Vittorio Emanuele II alongside the Piazza della Scala, scheduled for September 15; he installed a model of the monument at his own expense for the entire month of September, hoping that the authorities, seeing it, would finally allow the work to be completed.In 1868 Magni was informed that the government intended to award him only the original amount of the competition, which amounted to about 52,000 Italian liras; even counting the 20,000 for which the municipality of Milan had pledged, he would suffer a net loss of at least 15,000 liras for out-of-pocket expenses.As a last hope, in 1879 Magni wrote to Filippo Antonio Gualterio, minister of the Royal Household, to try to get the sovereign to intervene, but to no avail. At the same time he was presented with a warning from the Royal State Property Office because he was late in paying rent for the premises he used for his studio; in early 1870 all his models and all his works were seized for auction. Giovanni Battista Brambilla bought them all to return them to the sculptor.Seeing the impossibility of obtaining what was owed, Magni in August 1870 presented a writ of judicial warning to the Ministry of Public Education. Finally, with the contract signed on March 23, 1871, he managed to obtain a total of 72,000 liras. The amount was less than that allocated for other monuments, such as that to King Charles Albert in Turin (700,000 liras) or that to Cavour in Milan (more than 100,000 liras).According to Ettore Verga, the general hostility toward the monument's construction was not due to the sculptor Magni, but to the monument's origin itself. It was Elia Lombardini, head of the office of public constructions under the Austrian government, who proposed its construction, and it was Lombardini himself who tried to get it accepted after the unification of Italy by presenting Leonardo as the "true creator of hydraulic science".

Click on the image to [{{filepath:Monumento_a_Leonardo_da_Vinci_a_Milano.svg}} open the SVG file] and have an interactive three-dimensional view.

The revised design, as it appeared in 1864

Category:Monuments and memorials in Milan


Monument to Leonardo da Vinci

Prompt: Explain the Construction about the History of this artwork, Monument to Leonardo da Vinci.

Magni set to work, but the outcome of the Second Italian War of Independence forced him to turn first to Urbano Rattazzi, at that time the minister of the interior, and then to Cavour, president of the Council of Ministers. In fact, the government believed that it had no obligation to Magni since the competition had not been approved by the authorities and the amount of expenditure planned for his work was greater than that established by the competition. However, Cavour instructed Massimo d'Azeglio, Governor of Milan, to examine the situation in the sculptor's studio and make a decision.D'Azeglio not only confirmed the design but also suggested essential changes that increased the cost of the monument.And it was especially following V. E.'s wise observations and suggestions that the thought arose to detach from the monument the said 4 statues of the pupils and to place them on separate pedestals around the monument, thus obtaining a much more homogeneous eurhythmic line. Moreover, having substituted for the primitive model with a round base, the other with an octangular base of pure Bramantesque style with the addition of the various ornaments, and with the introduction of 4 large bronze bas-reliefs representing scenes from the life and works of the great artist, it was achieved, as the E. V. had also very appropriately suggested, that the monument be givenall that majesty and grandeur that was required of it, both because of the importance of the subject and because of the size of the square for which it is intended.Magni left for Bologna as standard-bearer of the National Guard and on his return in 1861 found Giuseppe Pasolini as the new governor; in order to try to obtain confirmation of the commission to build the monument, he thus contacted the Academy, d'Azeglio (who had retired from politics), Pasolini, the mayor of Milan Antonio Beretta and the president of the Council of Ministers Bettino Ricasoli.A value of about 100,000 liras (corresponding to the 60,000 Austrian liras of the competition plus another 47,000 Italian liras) was estimated for the monument's construction. In 1862 the authorities requested changes to the project to reduce the expense to 90,200 liras, and the city of Milan pledged a contribution of 20,000 liras.Magni carried on with the monument by incurring expenses for materials; by 1867, however, he had received no payment and the ministerial file had made no progress. He then decided to take advantage of the inauguration of the Galleria Vittorio Emanuele II alongside the Piazza della Scala, scheduled for September 15; he installed a model of the monument at his own expense for the entire month of September, hoping that the authorities, seeing it, would finally allow the work to be completed.In 1868 Magni was informed that the government intended to award him only the original amount of the competition, which amounted to about 52,000 Italian liras; even counting the 20,000 for which the municipality of Milan had pledged, he would suffer a net loss of at least 15,000 liras for out-of-pocket expenses.As a last hope, in 1879 Magni wrote to Filippo Antonio Gualterio, minister of the Royal Household, to try to get the sovereign to intervene, but to no avail. At the same time he was presented with a warning from the Royal State Property Office because he was late in paying rent for the premises he used for his studio; in early 1870 all his models and all his works were seized for auction. Giovanni Battista Brambilla bought them all to return them to the sculptor.Seeing the impossibility of obtaining what was owed, Magni in August 1870 presented a writ of judicial warning to the Ministry of Public Education. Finally, with the contract signed on March 23, 1871, he managed to obtain a total of 72,000 liras. The amount was less than that allocated for other monuments, such as that to King Charles Albert in Turin (700,000 liras) or that to Cavour in Milan (more than 100,000 liras).According to Ettore Verga, the general hostility toward the monument's construction was not due to the sculptor Magni, but to the monument's origin itself. It was Elia Lombardini, head of the office of public constructions under the Austrian government, who proposed its construction, and it was Lombardini himself who tried to get it accepted after the unification of Italy by presenting Leonardo as the "true creator of hydraulic science".

Click on the image to [{{filepath:Monumento_a_Leonardo_da_Vinci_a_Milano.svg}} open the SVG file] and have an interactive three-dimensional view.

The revised design, as it appeared in 1864

Category:Monuments and memorials in Milan


Monument to Leonardo da Vinci

Prompt: In Monument to Leonardo da Vinci, how is the Construction of the History explained?

Magni set to work, but the outcome of the Second Italian War of Independence forced him to turn first to Urbano Rattazzi, at that time the minister of the interior, and then to Cavour, president of the Council of Ministers. In fact, the government believed that it had no obligation to Magni since the competition had not been approved by the authorities and the amount of expenditure planned for his work was greater than that established by the competition. However, Cavour instructed Massimo d'Azeglio, Governor of Milan, to examine the situation in the sculptor's studio and make a decision.D'Azeglio not only confirmed the design but also suggested essential changes that increased the cost of the monument.And it was especially following V. E.'s wise observations and suggestions that the thought arose to detach from the monument the said 4 statues of the pupils and to place them on separate pedestals around the monument, thus obtaining a much more homogeneous eurhythmic line. Moreover, having substituted for the primitive model with a round base, the other with an octangular base of pure Bramantesque style with the addition of the various ornaments, and with the introduction of 4 large bronze bas-reliefs representing scenes from the life and works of the great artist, it was achieved, as the E. V. had also very appropriately suggested, that the monument be givenall that majesty and grandeur that was required of it, both because of the importance of the subject and because of the size of the square for which it is intended.Magni left for Bologna as standard-bearer of the National Guard and on his return in 1861 found Giuseppe Pasolini as the new governor; in order to try to obtain confirmation of the commission to build the monument, he thus contacted the Academy, d'Azeglio (who had retired from politics), Pasolini, the mayor of Milan Antonio Beretta and the president of the Council of Ministers Bettino Ricasoli.A value of about 100,000 liras (corresponding to the 60,000 Austrian liras of the competition plus another 47,000 Italian liras) was estimated for the monument's construction. In 1862 the authorities requested changes to the project to reduce the expense to 90,200 liras, and the city of Milan pledged a contribution of 20,000 liras.Magni carried on with the monument by incurring expenses for materials; by 1867, however, he had received no payment and the ministerial file had made no progress. He then decided to take advantage of the inauguration of the Galleria Vittorio Emanuele II alongside the Piazza della Scala, scheduled for September 15; he installed a model of the monument at his own expense for the entire month of September, hoping that the authorities, seeing it, would finally allow the work to be completed.In 1868 Magni was informed that the government intended to award him only the original amount of the competition, which amounted to about 52,000 Italian liras; even counting the 20,000 for which the municipality of Milan had pledged, he would suffer a net loss of at least 15,000 liras for out-of-pocket expenses.As a last hope, in 1879 Magni wrote to Filippo Antonio Gualterio, minister of the Royal Household, to try to get the sovereign to intervene, but to no avail. At the same time he was presented with a warning from the Royal State Property Office because he was late in paying rent for the premises he used for his studio; in early 1870 all his models and all his works were seized for auction. Giovanni Battista Brambilla bought them all to return them to the sculptor.Seeing the impossibility of obtaining what was owed, Magni in August 1870 presented a writ of judicial warning to the Ministry of Public Education. Finally, with the contract signed on March 23, 1871, he managed to obtain a total of 72,000 liras. The amount was less than that allocated for other monuments, such as that to King Charles Albert in Turin (700,000 liras) or that to Cavour in Milan (more than 100,000 liras).According to Ettore Verga, the general hostility toward the monument's construction was not due to the sculptor Magni, but to the monument's origin itself. It was Elia Lombardini, head of the office of public constructions under the Austrian government, who proposed its construction, and it was Lombardini himself who tried to get it accepted after the unification of Italy by presenting Leonardo as the "true creator of hydraulic science".

Click on the image to [{{filepath:Monumento_a_Leonardo_da_Vinci_a_Milano.svg}} open the SVG file] and have an interactive three-dimensional view.

The revised design, as it appeared in 1864

Category:Monuments and memorials in Milan


Monument to Leonardo da Vinci

Prompt: Describe the characteristics of the Construction in Monument to Leonardo da Vinci's History.

Magni set to work, but the outcome of the Second Italian War of Independence forced him to turn first to Urbano Rattazzi, at that time the minister of the interior, and then to Cavour, president of the Council of Ministers. In fact, the government believed that it had no obligation to Magni since the competition had not been approved by the authorities and the amount of expenditure planned for his work was greater than that established by the competition. However, Cavour instructed Massimo d'Azeglio, Governor of Milan, to examine the situation in the sculptor's studio and make a decision.D'Azeglio not only confirmed the design but also suggested essential changes that increased the cost of the monument.And it was especially following V. E.'s wise observations and suggestions that the thought arose to detach from the monument the said 4 statues of the pupils and to place them on separate pedestals around the monument, thus obtaining a much more homogeneous eurhythmic line. Moreover, having substituted for the primitive model with a round base, the other with an octangular base of pure Bramantesque style with the addition of the various ornaments, and with the introduction of 4 large bronze bas-reliefs representing scenes from the life and works of the great artist, it was achieved, as the E. V. had also very appropriately suggested, that the monument be givenall that majesty and grandeur that was required of it, both because of the importance of the subject and because of the size of the square for which it is intended.Magni left for Bologna as standard-bearer of the National Guard and on his return in 1861 found Giuseppe Pasolini as the new governor; in order to try to obtain confirmation of the commission to build the monument, he thus contacted the Academy, d'Azeglio (who had retired from politics), Pasolini, the mayor of Milan Antonio Beretta and the president of the Council of Ministers Bettino Ricasoli.A value of about 100,000 liras (corresponding to the 60,000 Austrian liras of the competition plus another 47,000 Italian liras) was estimated for the monument's construction. In 1862 the authorities requested changes to the project to reduce the expense to 90,200 liras, and the city of Milan pledged a contribution of 20,000 liras.Magni carried on with the monument by incurring expenses for materials; by 1867, however, he had received no payment and the ministerial file had made no progress. He then decided to take advantage of the inauguration of the Galleria Vittorio Emanuele II alongside the Piazza della Scala, scheduled for September 15; he installed a model of the monument at his own expense for the entire month of September, hoping that the authorities, seeing it, would finally allow the work to be completed.In 1868 Magni was informed that the government intended to award him only the original amount of the competition, which amounted to about 52,000 Italian liras; even counting the 20,000 for which the municipality of Milan had pledged, he would suffer a net loss of at least 15,000 liras for out-of-pocket expenses.As a last hope, in 1879 Magni wrote to Filippo Antonio Gualterio, minister of the Royal Household, to try to get the sovereign to intervene, but to no avail. At the same time he was presented with a warning from the Royal State Property Office because he was late in paying rent for the premises he used for his studio; in early 1870 all his models and all his works were seized for auction. Giovanni Battista Brambilla bought them all to return them to the sculptor.Seeing the impossibility of obtaining what was owed, Magni in August 1870 presented a writ of judicial warning to the Ministry of Public Education. Finally, with the contract signed on March 23, 1871, he managed to obtain a total of 72,000 liras. The amount was less than that allocated for other monuments, such as that to King Charles Albert in Turin (700,000 liras) or that to Cavour in Milan (more than 100,000 liras).According to Ettore Verga, the general hostility toward the monument's construction was not due to the sculptor Magni, but to the monument's origin itself. It was Elia Lombardini, head of the office of public constructions under the Austrian government, who proposed its construction, and it was Lombardini himself who tried to get it accepted after the unification of Italy by presenting Leonardo as the "true creator of hydraulic science".

Click on the image to [{{filepath:Monumento_a_Leonardo_da_Vinci_a_Milano.svg}} open the SVG file] and have an interactive three-dimensional view.

The revised design, as it appeared in 1864

Category:Monuments and memorials in Milan


Monument to Leonardo da Vinci

Prompt: In the context of Monument to Leonardo da Vinci, explain the Inauguration and the History.

The monument was unveiled on September 4, 1872, in the presence of Prince Umberto, to coincide with the opening in Milan of the first congress of engineers and architects. The National Exhibition of Fine Arts was also underway.On September 4, the solemn unveiling of the monument to Leonardo da Vinci took place in Milan, erected on the square of the Teatro alla Scala, which presented a marvelous spectacle on that day. In the middle stood the monument all veiled by curtains, with red and white flagpoles around it. In the wide space between it and the theater an elegant white and gold pavilion had been erected, adorned with white and blue draperies and baskets of flowers. The windows and balconies of the houses surrounding the square were adorned with flags and tapestries. The ceremony was very simple and beautiful. At three o'clock in the afternoon Prince Umberto, the mayor, the aldermen, all the members of the Artistic Congress and the members of the Italian Engineers and Architects Congress with other guests went to take their places in the pavilion. The canvases covering the monument then fell, and it suddenly appeared in all its splendor, amid the thunderous applause of the assembled people, and the harmonies of the music of the National band.After the mayor's speech, the minutes were read by which the monument was handed over to the city of Milan, and, after the handover, the band resumed playing the royal march, the guests moved around the monument, followed by the flags of the workers' guilds, and with that the ceremony ended.In the evening, celebrations were also held in the Piazza del Duomo with flares. An electric light was projected from a window of the Teatro alla Scala, illuminating the monument in various colors.In the depictions made on the occasion of the inauguration, the four pedestals with the statues of the students were no longer separate (as planned in earlier versions), but joined to the central octagonal base.

Click on the image to [{{filepath:Monumento_a_Leonardo_da_Vinci_a_Milano.svg}} open the SVG file] and have an interactive three-dimensional view.

The revised design, as it appeared in 1864

Category:Monuments and memorials in Milan


Monument to Leonardo da Vinci

Prompt: Explain the Inauguration about the History of this artwork, Monument to Leonardo da Vinci.

The monument was unveiled on September 4, 1872, in the presence of Prince Umberto, to coincide with the opening in Milan of the first congress of engineers and architects. The National Exhibition of Fine Arts was also underway.On September 4, the solemn unveiling of the monument to Leonardo da Vinci took place in Milan, erected on the square of the Teatro alla Scala, which presented a marvelous spectacle on that day. In the middle stood the monument all veiled by curtains, with red and white flagpoles around it. In the wide space between it and the theater an elegant white and gold pavilion had been erected, adorned with white and blue draperies and baskets of flowers. The windows and balconies of the houses surrounding the square were adorned with flags and tapestries. The ceremony was very simple and beautiful. At three o'clock in the afternoon Prince Umberto, the mayor, the aldermen, all the members of the Artistic Congress and the members of the Italian Engineers and Architects Congress with other guests went to take their places in the pavilion. The canvases covering the monument then fell, and it suddenly appeared in all its splendor, amid the thunderous applause of the assembled people, and the harmonies of the music of the National band.After the mayor's speech, the minutes were read by which the monument was handed over to the city of Milan, and, after the handover, the band resumed playing the royal march, the guests moved around the monument, followed by the flags of the workers' guilds, and with that the ceremony ended.In the evening, celebrations were also held in the Piazza del Duomo with flares. An electric light was projected from a window of the Teatro alla Scala, illuminating the monument in various colors.In the depictions made on the occasion of the inauguration, the four pedestals with the statues of the students were no longer separate (as planned in earlier versions), but joined to the central octagonal base.

Click on the image to [{{filepath:Monumento_a_Leonardo_da_Vinci_a_Milano.svg}} open the SVG file] and have an interactive three-dimensional view.

The revised design, as it appeared in 1864

Category:Monuments and memorials in Milan


Monument to Leonardo da Vinci

Prompt: In Monument to Leonardo da Vinci, how is the Inauguration of the History explained?

The monument was unveiled on September 4, 1872, in the presence of Prince Umberto, to coincide with the opening in Milan of the first congress of engineers and architects. The National Exhibition of Fine Arts was also underway.On September 4, the solemn unveiling of the monument to Leonardo da Vinci took place in Milan, erected on the square of the Teatro alla Scala, which presented a marvelous spectacle on that day. In the middle stood the monument all veiled by curtains, with red and white flagpoles around it. In the wide space between it and the theater an elegant white and gold pavilion had been erected, adorned with white and blue draperies and baskets of flowers. The windows and balconies of the houses surrounding the square were adorned with flags and tapestries. The ceremony was very simple and beautiful. At three o'clock in the afternoon Prince Umberto, the mayor, the aldermen, all the members of the Artistic Congress and the members of the Italian Engineers and Architects Congress with other guests went to take their places in the pavilion. The canvases covering the monument then fell, and it suddenly appeared in all its splendor, amid the thunderous applause of the assembled people, and the harmonies of the music of the National band.After the mayor's speech, the minutes were read by which the monument was handed over to the city of Milan, and, after the handover, the band resumed playing the royal march, the guests moved around the monument, followed by the flags of the workers' guilds, and with that the ceremony ended.In the evening, celebrations were also held in the Piazza del Duomo with flares. An electric light was projected from a window of the Teatro alla Scala, illuminating the monument in various colors.In the depictions made on the occasion of the inauguration, the four pedestals with the statues of the students were no longer separate (as planned in earlier versions), but joined to the central octagonal base.

Click on the image to [{{filepath:Monumento_a_Leonardo_da_Vinci_a_Milano.svg}} open the SVG file] and have an interactive three-dimensional view.

The revised design, as it appeared in 1864

Category:Monuments and memorials in Milan


Monument to Leonardo da Vinci

Prompt: Describe the characteristics of the Inauguration in Monument to Leonardo da Vinci's History.

The monument was unveiled on September 4, 1872, in the presence of Prince Umberto, to coincide with the opening in Milan of the first congress of engineers and architects. The National Exhibition of Fine Arts was also underway.On September 4, the solemn unveiling of the monument to Leonardo da Vinci took place in Milan, erected on the square of the Teatro alla Scala, which presented a marvelous spectacle on that day. In the middle stood the monument all veiled by curtains, with red and white flagpoles around it. In the wide space between it and the theater an elegant white and gold pavilion had been erected, adorned with white and blue draperies and baskets of flowers. The windows and balconies of the houses surrounding the square were adorned with flags and tapestries. The ceremony was very simple and beautiful. At three o'clock in the afternoon Prince Umberto, the mayor, the aldermen, all the members of the Artistic Congress and the members of the Italian Engineers and Architects Congress with other guests went to take their places in the pavilion. The canvases covering the monument then fell, and it suddenly appeared in all its splendor, amid the thunderous applause of the assembled people, and the harmonies of the music of the National band.After the mayor's speech, the minutes were read by which the monument was handed over to the city of Milan, and, after the handover, the band resumed playing the royal march, the guests moved around the monument, followed by the flags of the workers' guilds, and with that the ceremony ended.In the evening, celebrations were also held in the Piazza del Duomo with flares. An electric light was projected from a window of the Teatro alla Scala, illuminating the monument in various colors.In the depictions made on the occasion of the inauguration, the four pedestals with the statues of the students were no longer separate (as planned in earlier versions), but joined to the central octagonal base.

Click on the image to [{{filepath:Monumento_a_Leonardo_da_Vinci_a_Milano.svg}} open the SVG file] and have an interactive three-dimensional view.

The revised design, as it appeared in 1864

Category:Monuments and memorials in Milan


Monument to Leonardo da Vinci

Prompt: Focus on Monument to Leonardo da Vinci and explain the Description.

The monument consists of five statues placed on a plinth of pink granite from Baveno, 7.08 meters high. The central body of the plinth has an octagonal shape with unequal sides. Its center is placed in axis with the Galleria Vittorio Emmanuele II.In the center is a 4.40 meter–high marble statue of Leonardo da Vinci. He is portrayed in a pensive pose with his hands clasped to his chest. The name LEONARDO is inscribed on the front of the statue's base; whereas on the back the inscription reads PIETRO MAGNI FECE.At a lower level, four pedestals protrude from the short sides of the octagonal plinth on which the other four marble sculptures, 2.60 meters high, stand. They represent four of Leonardo's pupils: Giovanni Antonio Boltraffio, Marco d'Oggiono, Cesare da Sesto, and Gian Giacomo Caprotti (under the name Andrea Salaino).On the major sides of the octagonal plinth, four marble bas-reliefs depict four aspects of Leonardo's life in Milan: Leonardo the Painter, which shows him painting the Last Supper in the refectory of Santa Maria delle Grazie; Leonardo the Sculptor, in which he is shown modeling the equestrian statue of Francesco Sforza; Leonardo the Architect and Strategist, in which he directs the building of Cesare Borgia's fortifications in Romagna; and Leonardo the Plumber, in which he attends to the pipeline work for the irrigation of Lombardy.Below the bas-reliefs, between the pedestals, is a four-part inscription dictated by Professor Gilberto Govi and inscribed in gilded bronze letters with the dedication:

Click on the image to [{{filepath:Monumento_a_Leonardo_da_Vinci_a_Milano.svg}} open the SVG file] and have an interactive three-dimensional view.

The revised design, as it appeared in 1864

Category:Monuments and memorials in Milan


Monument to Leonardo da Vinci

Prompt: Explain the Description of this artwork, Monument to Leonardo da Vinci.

The monument consists of five statues placed on a plinth of pink granite from Baveno, 7.08 meters high. The central body of the plinth has an octagonal shape with unequal sides. Its center is placed in axis with the Galleria Vittorio Emmanuele II.In the center is a 4.40 meter–high marble statue of Leonardo da Vinci. He is portrayed in a pensive pose with his hands clasped to his chest. The name LEONARDO is inscribed on the front of the statue's base; whereas on the back the inscription reads PIETRO MAGNI FECE.At a lower level, four pedestals protrude from the short sides of the octagonal plinth on which the other four marble sculptures, 2.60 meters high, stand. They represent four of Leonardo's pupils: Giovanni Antonio Boltraffio, Marco d'Oggiono, Cesare da Sesto, and Gian Giacomo Caprotti (under the name Andrea Salaino).On the major sides of the octagonal plinth, four marble bas-reliefs depict four aspects of Leonardo's life in Milan: Leonardo the Painter, which shows him painting the Last Supper in the refectory of Santa Maria delle Grazie; Leonardo the Sculptor, in which he is shown modeling the equestrian statue of Francesco Sforza; Leonardo the Architect and Strategist, in which he directs the building of Cesare Borgia's fortifications in Romagna; and Leonardo the Plumber, in which he attends to the pipeline work for the irrigation of Lombardy.Below the bas-reliefs, between the pedestals, is a four-part inscription dictated by Professor Gilberto Govi and inscribed in gilded bronze letters with the dedication:

Click on the image to [{{filepath:Monumento_a_Leonardo_da_Vinci_a_Milano.svg}} open the SVG file] and have an interactive three-dimensional view.

The revised design, as it appeared in 1864

Category:Monuments and memorials in Milan


Monument to Leonardo da Vinci

Prompt: How does Monument to Leonardo da Vinci explain its Description?

The monument consists of five statues placed on a plinth of pink granite from Baveno, 7.08 meters high. The central body of the plinth has an octagonal shape with unequal sides. Its center is placed in axis with the Galleria Vittorio Emmanuele II.In the center is a 4.40 meter–high marble statue of Leonardo da Vinci. He is portrayed in a pensive pose with his hands clasped to his chest. The name LEONARDO is inscribed on the front of the statue's base; whereas on the back the inscription reads PIETRO MAGNI FECE.At a lower level, four pedestals protrude from the short sides of the octagonal plinth on which the other four marble sculptures, 2.60 meters high, stand. They represent four of Leonardo's pupils: Giovanni Antonio Boltraffio, Marco d'Oggiono, Cesare da Sesto, and Gian Giacomo Caprotti (under the name Andrea Salaino).On the major sides of the octagonal plinth, four marble bas-reliefs depict four aspects of Leonardo's life in Milan: Leonardo the Painter, which shows him painting the Last Supper in the refectory of Santa Maria delle Grazie; Leonardo the Sculptor, in which he is shown modeling the equestrian statue of Francesco Sforza; Leonardo the Architect and Strategist, in which he directs the building of Cesare Borgia's fortifications in Romagna; and Leonardo the Plumber, in which he attends to the pipeline work for the irrigation of Lombardy.Below the bas-reliefs, between the pedestals, is a four-part inscription dictated by Professor Gilberto Govi and inscribed in gilded bronze letters with the dedication:

Click on the image to [{{filepath:Monumento_a_Leonardo_da_Vinci_a_Milano.svg}} open the SVG file] and have an interactive three-dimensional view.

The revised design, as it appeared in 1864

Category:Monuments and memorials in Milan


Monument to Leonardo da Vinci

Prompt: In Monument to Leonardo da Vinci, how is the Description discussed?

The monument consists of five statues placed on a plinth of pink granite from Baveno, 7.08 meters high. The central body of the plinth has an octagonal shape with unequal sides. Its center is placed in axis with the Galleria Vittorio Emmanuele II.In the center is a 4.40 meter–high marble statue of Leonardo da Vinci. He is portrayed in a pensive pose with his hands clasped to his chest. The name LEONARDO is inscribed on the front of the statue's base; whereas on the back the inscription reads PIETRO MAGNI FECE.At a lower level, four pedestals protrude from the short sides of the octagonal plinth on which the other four marble sculptures, 2.60 meters high, stand. They represent four of Leonardo's pupils: Giovanni Antonio Boltraffio, Marco d'Oggiono, Cesare da Sesto, and Gian Giacomo Caprotti (under the name Andrea Salaino).On the major sides of the octagonal plinth, four marble bas-reliefs depict four aspects of Leonardo's life in Milan: Leonardo the Painter, which shows him painting the Last Supper in the refectory of Santa Maria delle Grazie; Leonardo the Sculptor, in which he is shown modeling the equestrian statue of Francesco Sforza; Leonardo the Architect and Strategist, in which he directs the building of Cesare Borgia's fortifications in Romagna; and Leonardo the Plumber, in which he attends to the pipeline work for the irrigation of Lombardy.Below the bas-reliefs, between the pedestals, is a four-part inscription dictated by Professor Gilberto Govi and inscribed in gilded bronze letters with the dedication:

Click on the image to [{{filepath:Monumento_a_Leonardo_da_Vinci_a_Milano.svg}} open the SVG file] and have an interactive three-dimensional view.

The revised design, as it appeared in 1864

Category:Monuments and memorials in Milan


Monument to Leonardo da Vinci

Prompt: Focus on Monument to Leonardo da Vinci and explain the Criticism.

There were varying degrees of negative criticism of the monument, which was not considered Magni's best work; some would have liked Francesco Melzi among the student statues, while others would have preferred to replace them with personifications of mechanics, music, geometry, and philosophy. The pose of the figures, likened to puppets "with their hands hanging down – like hands of lead," was also criticized.In Piazza della Scala, hands were laid on the foundations of the monument to Vinci. I would have loved to see it placed in the small courtyard of Brera, not in front of an opera house like a singer or music master. The model we saw on the spot, if it is not modified and altered from scratch, was indeed ugly! Magni, who can neither read nor write, made himself famous with his Reading Girl, which he later repeated many dozens of times. A monument to Leonardo required bronze and granite and an artist who understood his art a little better.I swear to everyone that the Leonardo monument is a horror.

Click on the image to [{{filepath:Monumento_a_Leonardo_da_Vinci_a_Milano.svg}} open the SVG file] and have an interactive three-dimensional view.

The revised design, as it appeared in 1864

Category:Monuments and memorials in Milan


Monument to Leonardo da Vinci

Prompt: Explain the Criticism of this artwork, Monument to Leonardo da Vinci.

There were varying degrees of negative criticism of the monument, which was not considered Magni's best work; some would have liked Francesco Melzi among the student statues, while others would have preferred to replace them with personifications of mechanics, music, geometry, and philosophy. The pose of the figures, likened to puppets "with their hands hanging down – like hands of lead," was also criticized.In Piazza della Scala, hands were laid on the foundations of the monument to Vinci. I would have loved to see it placed in the small courtyard of Brera, not in front of an opera house like a singer or music master. The model we saw on the spot, if it is not modified and altered from scratch, was indeed ugly! Magni, who can neither read nor write, made himself famous with his Reading Girl, which he later repeated many dozens of times. A monument to Leonardo required bronze and granite and an artist who understood his art a little better.I swear to everyone that the Leonardo monument is a horror.

Click on the image to [{{filepath:Monumento_a_Leonardo_da_Vinci_a_Milano.svg}} open the SVG file] and have an interactive three-dimensional view.

The revised design, as it appeared in 1864

Category:Monuments and memorials in Milan


Monument to Leonardo da Vinci

Prompt: How does Monument to Leonardo da Vinci explain its Criticism?

There were varying degrees of negative criticism of the monument, which was not considered Magni's best work; some would have liked Francesco Melzi among the student statues, while others would have preferred to replace them with personifications of mechanics, music, geometry, and philosophy. The pose of the figures, likened to puppets "with their hands hanging down – like hands of lead," was also criticized.In Piazza della Scala, hands were laid on the foundations of the monument to Vinci. I would have loved to see it placed in the small courtyard of Brera, not in front of an opera house like a singer or music master. The model we saw on the spot, if it is not modified and altered from scratch, was indeed ugly! Magni, who can neither read nor write, made himself famous with his Reading Girl, which he later repeated many dozens of times. A monument to Leonardo required bronze and granite and an artist who understood his art a little better.I swear to everyone that the Leonardo monument is a horror.

Click on the image to [{{filepath:Monumento_a_Leonardo_da_Vinci_a_Milano.svg}} open the SVG file] and have an interactive three-dimensional view.

The revised design, as it appeared in 1864

Category:Monuments and memorials in Milan


Monument to Leonardo da Vinci

Prompt: In Monument to Leonardo da Vinci, how is the Criticism discussed?

There were varying degrees of negative criticism of the monument, which was not considered Magni's best work; some would have liked Francesco Melzi among the student statues, while others would have preferred to replace them with personifications of mechanics, music, geometry, and philosophy. The pose of the figures, likened to puppets "with their hands hanging down – like hands of lead," was also criticized.In Piazza della Scala, hands were laid on the foundations of the monument to Vinci. I would have loved to see it placed in the small courtyard of Brera, not in front of an opera house like a singer or music master. The model we saw on the spot, if it is not modified and altered from scratch, was indeed ugly! Magni, who can neither read nor write, made himself famous with his Reading Girl, which he later repeated many dozens of times. A monument to Leonardo required bronze and granite and an artist who understood his art a little better.I swear to everyone that the Leonardo monument is a horror.

Click on the image to [{{filepath:Monumento_a_Leonardo_da_Vinci_a_Milano.svg}} open the SVG file] and have an interactive three-dimensional view.

The revised design, as it appeared in 1864

Category:Monuments and memorials in Milan


Monument to Leonardo da Vinci

Prompt: In the context of Monument to Leonardo da Vinci, explain the Nickname and the Criticism.

The monument's nickname "un litro in quattro" ('one liter in four'), popular in the late 19th century, was due to the resemblance of the monument's five statues to a wine bottle with four glasses around it. Several sources of the time attribute the creation of this nickname to Giuseppe Rovani.In September 1872, the latter's monument to Leonardo da Vinci was inaugurated in Piazza della Scala. Everyone knows that Leonardo's statue stands tall in the center. On the four sides of the lower level stand four of his most valiant pupils. The artist heard all kinds of things about his work. Rovani had not yet opened his mouth, and Magni was goading him to speak. Finally, on a certain evening, sitting with four friends at the dinner table of some tavern I no longer know, the artist of the chisel returned to the assault against the artist of the pen so that he would once and for all blurt out. Rovani pleads somewhat, then grabs the liter of wine that towered before them, and places it right in the middle, between the four drinkers, including himself, exclaiming:— Your monument is here: it's a liter in four!The laughter went through the roof. But Pietro Magni did not quite cope with the banter. He remembered it and still regretted it many years later.

Click on the image to [{{filepath:Monumento_a_Leonardo_da_Vinci_a_Milano.svg}} open the SVG file] and have an interactive three-dimensional view.

The revised design, as it appeared in 1864

Category:Monuments and memorials in Milan


Monument to Leonardo da Vinci

Prompt: Explain the Nickname about the Criticism of this artwork, Monument to Leonardo da Vinci.

The monument's nickname "un litro in quattro" ('one liter in four'), popular in the late 19th century, was due to the resemblance of the monument's five statues to a wine bottle with four glasses around it. Several sources of the time attribute the creation of this nickname to Giuseppe Rovani.In September 1872, the latter's monument to Leonardo da Vinci was inaugurated in Piazza della Scala. Everyone knows that Leonardo's statue stands tall in the center. On the four sides of the lower level stand four of his most valiant pupils. The artist heard all kinds of things about his work. Rovani had not yet opened his mouth, and Magni was goading him to speak. Finally, on a certain evening, sitting with four friends at the dinner table of some tavern I no longer know, the artist of the chisel returned to the assault against the artist of the pen so that he would once and for all blurt out. Rovani pleads somewhat, then grabs the liter of wine that towered before them, and places it right in the middle, between the four drinkers, including himself, exclaiming:— Your monument is here: it's a liter in four!The laughter went through the roof. But Pietro Magni did not quite cope with the banter. He remembered it and still regretted it many years later.

Click on the image to [{{filepath:Monumento_a_Leonardo_da_Vinci_a_Milano.svg}} open the SVG file] and have an interactive three-dimensional view.

The revised design, as it appeared in 1864

Category:Monuments and memorials in Milan


Monument to Leonardo da Vinci

Prompt: In Monument to Leonardo da Vinci, how is the Nickname of the Criticism explained?

The monument's nickname "un litro in quattro" ('one liter in four'), popular in the late 19th century, was due to the resemblance of the monument's five statues to a wine bottle with four glasses around it. Several sources of the time attribute the creation of this nickname to Giuseppe Rovani.In September 1872, the latter's monument to Leonardo da Vinci was inaugurated in Piazza della Scala. Everyone knows that Leonardo's statue stands tall in the center. On the four sides of the lower level stand four of his most valiant pupils. The artist heard all kinds of things about his work. Rovani had not yet opened his mouth, and Magni was goading him to speak. Finally, on a certain evening, sitting with four friends at the dinner table of some tavern I no longer know, the artist of the chisel returned to the assault against the artist of the pen so that he would once and for all blurt out. Rovani pleads somewhat, then grabs the liter of wine that towered before them, and places it right in the middle, between the four drinkers, including himself, exclaiming:— Your monument is here: it's a liter in four!The laughter went through the roof. But Pietro Magni did not quite cope with the banter. He remembered it and still regretted it many years later.

Click on the image to [{{filepath:Monumento_a_Leonardo_da_Vinci_a_Milano.svg}} open the SVG file] and have an interactive three-dimensional view.

The revised design, as it appeared in 1864

Category:Monuments and memorials in Milan


Monument to Leonardo da Vinci

Prompt: Describe the characteristics of the Nickname in Monument to Leonardo da Vinci's Criticism.

The monument's nickname "un litro in quattro" ('one liter in four'), popular in the late 19th century, was due to the resemblance of the monument's five statues to a wine bottle with four glasses around it. Several sources of the time attribute the creation of this nickname to Giuseppe Rovani.In September 1872, the latter's monument to Leonardo da Vinci was inaugurated in Piazza della Scala. Everyone knows that Leonardo's statue stands tall in the center. On the four sides of the lower level stand four of his most valiant pupils. The artist heard all kinds of things about his work. Rovani had not yet opened his mouth, and Magni was goading him to speak. Finally, on a certain evening, sitting with four friends at the dinner table of some tavern I no longer know, the artist of the chisel returned to the assault against the artist of the pen so that he would once and for all blurt out. Rovani pleads somewhat, then grabs the liter of wine that towered before them, and places it right in the middle, between the four drinkers, including himself, exclaiming:— Your monument is here: it's a liter in four!The laughter went through the roof. But Pietro Magni did not quite cope with the banter. He remembered it and still regretted it many years later.

Click on the image to [{{filepath:Monumento_a_Leonardo_da_Vinci_a_Milano.svg}} open the SVG file] and have an interactive three-dimensional view.

The revised design, as it appeared in 1864

Category:Monuments and memorials in Milan


Monument to Leonardo da Vinci

Prompt: Focus on Monument to Leonardo da Vinci and explain the Interventions.

On May 18, 1919, on the 400th anniversary of Leonardo's death, a bronze crown decorated with Vincian knots was added to the foot of the plinth.

Click on the image to [{{filepath:Monumento_a_Leonardo_da_Vinci_a_Milano.svg}} open the SVG file] and have an interactive three-dimensional view.

The revised design, as it appeared in 1864

Category:Monuments and memorials in Milan


Monument to Leonardo da Vinci

Prompt: Explain the Interventions of this artwork, Monument to Leonardo da Vinci.

On May 18, 1919, on the 400th anniversary of Leonardo's death, a bronze crown decorated with Vincian knots was added to the foot of the plinth.

Click on the image to [{{filepath:Monumento_a_Leonardo_da_Vinci_a_Milano.svg}} open the SVG file] and have an interactive three-dimensional view.

The revised design, as it appeared in 1864

Category:Monuments and memorials in Milan


Monument to Leonardo da Vinci

Prompt: How does Monument to Leonardo da Vinci explain its Interventions?

On May 18, 1919, on the 400th anniversary of Leonardo's death, a bronze crown decorated with Vincian knots was added to the foot of the plinth.

Click on the image to [{{filepath:Monumento_a_Leonardo_da_Vinci_a_Milano.svg}} open the SVG file] and have an interactive three-dimensional view.

The revised design, as it appeared in 1864

Category:Monuments and memorials in Milan


Monument to Leonardo da Vinci

Prompt: In Monument to Leonardo da Vinci, how is the Interventions discussed?

On May 18, 1919, on the 400th anniversary of Leonardo's death, a bronze crown decorated with Vincian knots was added to the foot of the plinth.

Click on the image to [{{filepath:Monumento_a_Leonardo_da_Vinci_a_Milano.svg}} open the SVG file] and have an interactive three-dimensional view.

The revised design, as it appeared in 1864

Category:Monuments and memorials in Milan


Monument to Leonardo da Vinci

Prompt: In the context of Monument to Leonardo da Vinci, explain the Wrapped monument and the Interventions.

In November 1970, as part of the demonstrations to celebrate the 10th anniversary of the Nouveau Réalisme movement, Christo and Jeanne-Claude were commissioned by the city of Milan to create a performance. On November 24, the monument to Victor Emmanuel II was wrapped with tarps and tied with red rope; however, due to protests, it was decided to remove the covering the next day. On the same days, the monument to Leonardo da Vinci was also wrapped; on the night of November 28, some young people (apparently neo-fascists) set fire to the tarpaulin, which was removed by firefighters responding to the scene.

Click on the image to [{{filepath:Monumento_a_Leonardo_da_Vinci_a_Milano.svg}} open the SVG file] and have an interactive three-dimensional view.

The revised design, as it appeared in 1864

Category:Monuments and memorials in Milan


Monument to Leonardo da Vinci

Prompt: Explain the Wrapped monument about the Interventions of this artwork, Monument to Leonardo da Vinci.

In November 1970, as part of the demonstrations to celebrate the 10th anniversary of the Nouveau Réalisme movement, Christo and Jeanne-Claude were commissioned by the city of Milan to create a performance. On November 24, the monument to Victor Emmanuel II was wrapped with tarps and tied with red rope; however, due to protests, it was decided to remove the covering the next day. On the same days, the monument to Leonardo da Vinci was also wrapped; on the night of November 28, some young people (apparently neo-fascists) set fire to the tarpaulin, which was removed by firefighters responding to the scene.

Click on the image to [{{filepath:Monumento_a_Leonardo_da_Vinci_a_Milano.svg}} open the SVG file] and have an interactive three-dimensional view.

The revised design, as it appeared in 1864

Category:Monuments and memorials in Milan


Monument to Leonardo da Vinci

Prompt: In Monument to Leonardo da Vinci, how is the Wrapped monument of the Interventions explained?

In November 1970, as part of the demonstrations to celebrate the 10th anniversary of the Nouveau Réalisme movement, Christo and Jeanne-Claude were commissioned by the city of Milan to create a performance. On November 24, the monument to Victor Emmanuel II was wrapped with tarps and tied with red rope; however, due to protests, it was decided to remove the covering the next day. On the same days, the monument to Leonardo da Vinci was also wrapped; on the night of November 28, some young people (apparently neo-fascists) set fire to the tarpaulin, which was removed by firefighters responding to the scene.

Click on the image to [{{filepath:Monumento_a_Leonardo_da_Vinci_a_Milano.svg}} open the SVG file] and have an interactive three-dimensional view.

The revised design, as it appeared in 1864

Category:Monuments and memorials in Milan


Monument to Leonardo da Vinci

Prompt: Describe the characteristics of the Wrapped monument in Monument to Leonardo da Vinci's Interventions.

In November 1970, as part of the demonstrations to celebrate the 10th anniversary of the Nouveau Réalisme movement, Christo and Jeanne-Claude were commissioned by the city of Milan to create a performance. On November 24, the monument to Victor Emmanuel II was wrapped with tarps and tied with red rope; however, due to protests, it was decided to remove the covering the next day. On the same days, the monument to Leonardo da Vinci was also wrapped; on the night of November 28, some young people (apparently neo-fascists) set fire to the tarpaulin, which was removed by firefighters responding to the scene.

Click on the image to [{{filepath:Monumento_a_Leonardo_da_Vinci_a_Milano.svg}} open the SVG file] and have an interactive three-dimensional view.

The revised design, as it appeared in 1864

Category:Monuments and memorials in Milan


Portrait of Emile Zola

Prompt: Focus on Portrait of Emile Zola and explain the abstract.

Portrait of Émile Zola is a painting of Émile Zola by Édouard Manet. Manet submitted the portrait to the 1868 Salon.At this time Zola was known for his art criticism, and perhaps particularly as the writer of the novel Thérèse Raquin.  This told the story of an adulterous affair between Thérèse, the wife of a clerk in a railway company, and a would-be painter named Laurent, whose work, rather like that of Zola's friend Paul Cézanne, is denigrated by the critics. In the eleventh chapter the milieu of Manet's Le Déjeuner sur l’herbe is evoked, in the murder scene, where Camille, the husband, goes out for the day with his wife and her lover to Saint-Ouen.On the wall is a reproduction of Manet's Olympia, a controversial painting at the 1865 Salon but which Zola considered Manet's best work. "Behind it is an engraving from Velazquez's Bacchus indicating the taste for Spanish art shared by the painter and the writer. A Japanese print of a wrestler by Utagawa Kuniaki II completes the décor."  A Japanese screen on the left of the picture recalls the role that the Far East played in revolutionizing ideas on perspective and colour in European painting.

Category:Cultural depictions of Émile Zola


Portrait of Emile Zola

Prompt: Explain the abstract of this artwork, Portrait of Emile Zola.

Portrait of Émile Zola is a painting of Émile Zola by Édouard Manet. Manet submitted the portrait to the 1868 Salon.At this time Zola was known for his art criticism, and perhaps particularly as the writer of the novel Thérèse Raquin.  This told the story of an adulterous affair between Thérèse, the wife of a clerk in a railway company, and a would-be painter named Laurent, whose work, rather like that of Zola's friend Paul Cézanne, is denigrated by the critics. In the eleventh chapter the milieu of Manet's Le Déjeuner sur l’herbe is evoked, in the murder scene, where Camille, the husband, goes out for the day with his wife and her lover to Saint-Ouen.On the wall is a reproduction of Manet's Olympia, a controversial painting at the 1865 Salon but which Zola considered Manet's best work. "Behind it is an engraving from Velazquez's Bacchus indicating the taste for Spanish art shared by the painter and the writer. A Japanese print of a wrestler by Utagawa Kuniaki II completes the décor."  A Japanese screen on the left of the picture recalls the role that the Far East played in revolutionizing ideas on perspective and colour in European painting.

Category:Cultural depictions of Émile Zola


Portrait of Emile Zola

Prompt: How does Portrait of Emile Zola explain its abstract?

Portrait of Émile Zola is a painting of Émile Zola by Édouard Manet. Manet submitted the portrait to the 1868 Salon.At this time Zola was known for his art criticism, and perhaps particularly as the writer of the novel Thérèse Raquin.  This told the story of an adulterous affair between Thérèse, the wife of a clerk in a railway company, and a would-be painter named Laurent, whose work, rather like that of Zola's friend Paul Cézanne, is denigrated by the critics. In the eleventh chapter the milieu of Manet's Le Déjeuner sur l’herbe is evoked, in the murder scene, where Camille, the husband, goes out for the day with his wife and her lover to Saint-Ouen.On the wall is a reproduction of Manet's Olympia, a controversial painting at the 1865 Salon but which Zola considered Manet's best work. "Behind it is an engraving from Velazquez's Bacchus indicating the taste for Spanish art shared by the painter and the writer. A Japanese print of a wrestler by Utagawa Kuniaki II completes the décor."  A Japanese screen on the left of the picture recalls the role that the Far East played in revolutionizing ideas on perspective and colour in European painting.

Category:Cultural depictions of Émile Zola


Portrait of Emile Zola

Prompt: In Portrait of Emile Zola, how is the abstract discussed?

Portrait of Émile Zola is a painting of Émile Zola by Édouard Manet. Manet submitted the portrait to the 1868 Salon.At this time Zola was known for his art criticism, and perhaps particularly as the writer of the novel Thérèse Raquin.  This told the story of an adulterous affair between Thérèse, the wife of a clerk in a railway company, and a would-be painter named Laurent, whose work, rather like that of Zola's friend Paul Cézanne, is denigrated by the critics. In the eleventh chapter the milieu of Manet's Le Déjeuner sur l’herbe is evoked, in the murder scene, where Camille, the husband, goes out for the day with his wife and her lover to Saint-Ouen.On the wall is a reproduction of Manet's Olympia, a controversial painting at the 1865 Salon but which Zola considered Manet's best work. "Behind it is an engraving from Velazquez's Bacchus indicating the taste for Spanish art shared by the painter and the writer. A Japanese print of a wrestler by Utagawa Kuniaki II completes the décor."  A Japanese screen on the left of the picture recalls the role that the Far East played in revolutionizing ideas on perspective and colour in European painting.

Category:Cultural depictions of Émile Zola


Canyon (Rauschenberg)

Prompt: Focus on Canyon (Rauschenberg) and explain the abstract.

Canyon is a 1959 artwork by American artist Robert Rauschenberg. The piece is one of his most celebrated and best known works, and is one of his Combines. Rauschenberg coined the phrase Combine in 1954 to describe his artworks that incorporate elements of both sculpture and painting. Canyon includes a taxidermied golden eagle and a pillow, along with other sculptural elements mounted on a painted and collaged canvas.Canyon was subject to an ownership controversy after the death of its owner, Ileana Sonnabend. This was due to the work’s inclusion of an endangered species: the taxidermied golden eagle. According to U.S. law, Canyon could never be sold because of the 1940 Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act and the 1918 Migratory Bird Treaty Act. The prohibition of its sale ultimately resulted in the work’s donation to the Museum of Modern Art in 2012.

File:Robert Rauschenberg's 'Canyon', 1959.jpg

Category:Paintings in the Museum of Modern Art (New York City)


Canyon (Rauschenberg)

Prompt: Explain the abstract of this artwork, Canyon (Rauschenberg).

Canyon is a 1959 artwork by American artist Robert Rauschenberg. The piece is one of his most celebrated and best known works, and is one of his Combines. Rauschenberg coined the phrase Combine in 1954 to describe his artworks that incorporate elements of both sculpture and painting. Canyon includes a taxidermied golden eagle and a pillow, along with other sculptural elements mounted on a painted and collaged canvas.Canyon was subject to an ownership controversy after the death of its owner, Ileana Sonnabend. This was due to the work’s inclusion of an endangered species: the taxidermied golden eagle. According to U.S. law, Canyon could never be sold because of the 1940 Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act and the 1918 Migratory Bird Treaty Act. The prohibition of its sale ultimately resulted in the work’s donation to the Museum of Modern Art in 2012.

File:Robert Rauschenberg's 'Canyon', 1959.jpg

Category:Paintings in the Museum of Modern Art (New York City)


Canyon (Rauschenberg)

Prompt: How does Canyon (Rauschenberg) explain its abstract?

Canyon is a 1959 artwork by American artist Robert Rauschenberg. The piece is one of his most celebrated and best known works, and is one of his Combines. Rauschenberg coined the phrase Combine in 1954 to describe his artworks that incorporate elements of both sculpture and painting. Canyon includes a taxidermied golden eagle and a pillow, along with other sculptural elements mounted on a painted and collaged canvas.Canyon was subject to an ownership controversy after the death of its owner, Ileana Sonnabend. This was due to the work’s inclusion of an endangered species: the taxidermied golden eagle. According to U.S. law, Canyon could never be sold because of the 1940 Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act and the 1918 Migratory Bird Treaty Act. The prohibition of its sale ultimately resulted in the work’s donation to the Museum of Modern Art in 2012.

File:Robert Rauschenberg's 'Canyon', 1959.jpg

Category:Paintings in the Museum of Modern Art (New York City)


Canyon (Rauschenberg)

Prompt: In Canyon (Rauschenberg), how is the abstract discussed?

Canyon is a 1959 artwork by American artist Robert Rauschenberg. The piece is one of his most celebrated and best known works, and is one of his Combines. Rauschenberg coined the phrase Combine in 1954 to describe his artworks that incorporate elements of both sculpture and painting. Canyon includes a taxidermied golden eagle and a pillow, along with other sculptural elements mounted on a painted and collaged canvas.Canyon was subject to an ownership controversy after the death of its owner, Ileana Sonnabend. This was due to the work’s inclusion of an endangered species: the taxidermied golden eagle. According to U.S. law, Canyon could never be sold because of the 1940 Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act and the 1918 Migratory Bird Treaty Act. The prohibition of its sale ultimately resulted in the work’s donation to the Museum of Modern Art in 2012.

File:Robert Rauschenberg's 'Canyon', 1959.jpg

Category:Paintings in the Museum of Modern Art (New York City)


Canyon (Rauschenberg)

Prompt: Focus on Canyon (Rauschenberg) and explain the Materials.

Between 1954 and 1965, Rauschenberg created Combine paintings which often involved affixing sculptural elements to more typical painted canvases. Some Combines are wall-mounted while others are free-standing.  In Canyon, elements such as photographic images, fragments of clothing, and newspaper clippings are affixed to the surface either by paint, with string, or by other means. Other examples of such paintings are Reservoir (1961) and Monogram (1955–59).Canyon features a taxidermied golden eagle, a pillow attached with string, a paint tube, and various textiles. The eagle was given to Rauschenberg by Sari Dienes, which she presumed formerly belonged to her neighbor who was a Rough Rider. Dienes found the golden eagle on the street among her recently deceased neighbor's discarded belongings.

File:Robert Rauschenberg's 'Canyon', 1959.jpg

Category:Paintings in the Museum of Modern Art (New York City)


Canyon (Rauschenberg)

Prompt: Explain the Materials of this artwork, Canyon (Rauschenberg).

Between 1954 and 1965, Rauschenberg created Combine paintings which often involved affixing sculptural elements to more typical painted canvases. Some Combines are wall-mounted while others are free-standing.  In Canyon, elements such as photographic images, fragments of clothing, and newspaper clippings are affixed to the surface either by paint, with string, or by other means. Other examples of such paintings are Reservoir (1961) and Monogram (1955–59).Canyon features a taxidermied golden eagle, a pillow attached with string, a paint tube, and various textiles. The eagle was given to Rauschenberg by Sari Dienes, which she presumed formerly belonged to her neighbor who was a Rough Rider. Dienes found the golden eagle on the street among her recently deceased neighbor's discarded belongings.

File:Robert Rauschenberg's 'Canyon', 1959.jpg

Category:Paintings in the Museum of Modern Art (New York City)


Canyon (Rauschenberg)

Prompt: How does Canyon (Rauschenberg) explain its Materials?

Between 1954 and 1965, Rauschenberg created Combine paintings which often involved affixing sculptural elements to more typical painted canvases. Some Combines are wall-mounted while others are free-standing.  In Canyon, elements such as photographic images, fragments of clothing, and newspaper clippings are affixed to the surface either by paint, with string, or by other means. Other examples of such paintings are Reservoir (1961) and Monogram (1955–59).Canyon features a taxidermied golden eagle, a pillow attached with string, a paint tube, and various textiles. The eagle was given to Rauschenberg by Sari Dienes, which she presumed formerly belonged to her neighbor who was a Rough Rider. Dienes found the golden eagle on the street among her recently deceased neighbor's discarded belongings.

File:Robert Rauschenberg's 'Canyon', 1959.jpg

Category:Paintings in the Museum of Modern Art (New York City)


Canyon (Rauschenberg)

Prompt: In Canyon (Rauschenberg), how is the Materials discussed?

Between 1954 and 1965, Rauschenberg created Combine paintings which often involved affixing sculptural elements to more typical painted canvases. Some Combines are wall-mounted while others are free-standing.  In Canyon, elements such as photographic images, fragments of clothing, and newspaper clippings are affixed to the surface either by paint, with string, or by other means. Other examples of such paintings are Reservoir (1961) and Monogram (1955–59).Canyon features a taxidermied golden eagle, a pillow attached with string, a paint tube, and various textiles. The eagle was given to Rauschenberg by Sari Dienes, which she presumed formerly belonged to her neighbor who was a Rough Rider. Dienes found the golden eagle on the street among her recently deceased neighbor's discarded belongings.

File:Robert Rauschenberg's 'Canyon', 1959.jpg

Category:Paintings in the Museum of Modern Art (New York City)


Canyon (Rauschenberg)

Prompt: Focus on Canyon (Rauschenberg) and explain the Ownership history.

The painting was originally owned by Ileana Sonnabend, a gallerist and collector, until her death. She was a friend and dealer of Rauschenberg, and considered Canyon to be one of her favorite works by the artist. Sonnabend's heirs had little choice but to donate the piece after the IRS established the piece's value at $65 million and charged the Sonnabends $29.2 million in taxes to keep it. However, due to the golden eagle attached to the canvas, the sale of the painting would have been a felony; as such, the estate's appraisers placed a value of $0 on the painting. Due to these complications, the heirs decided to donate the work to MoMA.Before entering MoMA’s collection, Canyon was displayed intermittently at The Metropolitan Museum of Art, due to an earlier conflict between Sonnabend and the United States Fish and Wildlife Service over the piece. This clash led Sonnabend to display the work publicly in order to keep it in her possession. Although MoMA ultimately received the work, the Met attempted to persuade Sonnabend's family to donate the piece to their institution.Canyon has been part of MoMA's permanent collection since 2012. After the work was accessioned, an exhibition celebrating both it and Sonnabend, entitled Ileana Sonnabend: Ambassador for the New, was held at MoMA.

File:Robert Rauschenberg's 'Canyon', 1959.jpg

Category:Paintings in the Museum of Modern Art (New York City)


Canyon (Rauschenberg)

Prompt: Explain the Ownership history of this artwork, Canyon (Rauschenberg).

The painting was originally owned by Ileana Sonnabend, a gallerist and collector, until her death. She was a friend and dealer of Rauschenberg, and considered Canyon to be one of her favorite works by the artist. Sonnabend's heirs had little choice but to donate the piece after the IRS established the piece's value at $65 million and charged the Sonnabends $29.2 million in taxes to keep it. However, due to the golden eagle attached to the canvas, the sale of the painting would have been a felony; as such, the estate's appraisers placed a value of $0 on the painting. Due to these complications, the heirs decided to donate the work to MoMA.Before entering MoMA’s collection, Canyon was displayed intermittently at The Metropolitan Museum of Art, due to an earlier conflict between Sonnabend and the United States Fish and Wildlife Service over the piece. This clash led Sonnabend to display the work publicly in order to keep it in her possession. Although MoMA ultimately received the work, the Met attempted to persuade Sonnabend's family to donate the piece to their institution.Canyon has been part of MoMA's permanent collection since 2012. After the work was accessioned, an exhibition celebrating both it and Sonnabend, entitled Ileana Sonnabend: Ambassador for the New, was held at MoMA.

File:Robert Rauschenberg's 'Canyon', 1959.jpg

Category:Paintings in the Museum of Modern Art (New York City)


Canyon (Rauschenberg)

Prompt: How does Canyon (Rauschenberg) explain its Ownership history?

The painting was originally owned by Ileana Sonnabend, a gallerist and collector, until her death. She was a friend and dealer of Rauschenberg, and considered Canyon to be one of her favorite works by the artist. Sonnabend's heirs had little choice but to donate the piece after the IRS established the piece's value at $65 million and charged the Sonnabends $29.2 million in taxes to keep it. However, due to the golden eagle attached to the canvas, the sale of the painting would have been a felony; as such, the estate's appraisers placed a value of $0 on the painting. Due to these complications, the heirs decided to donate the work to MoMA.Before entering MoMA’s collection, Canyon was displayed intermittently at The Metropolitan Museum of Art, due to an earlier conflict between Sonnabend and the United States Fish and Wildlife Service over the piece. This clash led Sonnabend to display the work publicly in order to keep it in her possession. Although MoMA ultimately received the work, the Met attempted to persuade Sonnabend's family to donate the piece to their institution.Canyon has been part of MoMA's permanent collection since 2012. After the work was accessioned, an exhibition celebrating both it and Sonnabend, entitled Ileana Sonnabend: Ambassador for the New, was held at MoMA.

File:Robert Rauschenberg's 'Canyon', 1959.jpg

Category:Paintings in the Museum of Modern Art (New York City)


Canyon (Rauschenberg)

Prompt: In Canyon (Rauschenberg), how is the Ownership history discussed?

The painting was originally owned by Ileana Sonnabend, a gallerist and collector, until her death. She was a friend and dealer of Rauschenberg, and considered Canyon to be one of her favorite works by the artist. Sonnabend's heirs had little choice but to donate the piece after the IRS established the piece's value at $65 million and charged the Sonnabends $29.2 million in taxes to keep it. However, due to the golden eagle attached to the canvas, the sale of the painting would have been a felony; as such, the estate's appraisers placed a value of $0 on the painting. Due to these complications, the heirs decided to donate the work to MoMA.Before entering MoMA’s collection, Canyon was displayed intermittently at The Metropolitan Museum of Art, due to an earlier conflict between Sonnabend and the United States Fish and Wildlife Service over the piece. This clash led Sonnabend to display the work publicly in order to keep it in her possession. Although MoMA ultimately received the work, the Met attempted to persuade Sonnabend's family to donate the piece to their institution.Canyon has been part of MoMA's permanent collection since 2012. After the work was accessioned, an exhibition celebrating both it and Sonnabend, entitled Ileana Sonnabend: Ambassador for the New, was held at MoMA.

File:Robert Rauschenberg's 'Canyon', 1959.jpg

Category:Paintings in the Museum of Modern Art (New York City)


Canyon (Rauschenberg)

Prompt: Focus on Canyon (Rauschenberg) and explain the Analysis.

Canyon, one of Rauschenberg's best known Combines, has been the subject of art historical debate revolving around the validity of reading Rauschenberg's work iconographically. The historian Kenneth Bendiner famously proposed Canyon as a playful recreation of a 1635 Rembrandt painting depicting a scene from Greek mythology, The Rape of Ganymede. He interpreted the suspended pillow in the Combine as Ganymede's buttocks and the stuffed golden eagle as the form assumed by Ganymede's abductor, the Greek god Zeus. Other art historians, such as Branden Joseph, have argued that searching for iconography in Rauschenberg's Combines is useless because meaning can be made to exist anywhere.More recent interpretations of Canyon reconsider the work in postmodern terms. The art historian Yve-Alain Bois points out that Rauschenberg’s art's "lack of center" is a statement in itself, and the infinite permutations of meaning that can result highlight the subjectivity of art reception that postmodernism explores. Bois also considers the search for iconographic meaning in Rauschenberg's work misguided because it is too limiting.

File:Robert Rauschenberg's 'Canyon', 1959.jpg

Category:Paintings in the Museum of Modern Art (New York City)


Canyon (Rauschenberg)

Prompt: Explain the Analysis of this artwork, Canyon (Rauschenberg).

Canyon, one of Rauschenberg's best known Combines, has been the subject of art historical debate revolving around the validity of reading Rauschenberg's work iconographically. The historian Kenneth Bendiner famously proposed Canyon as a playful recreation of a 1635 Rembrandt painting depicting a scene from Greek mythology, The Rape of Ganymede. He interpreted the suspended pillow in the Combine as Ganymede's buttocks and the stuffed golden eagle as the form assumed by Ganymede's abductor, the Greek god Zeus. Other art historians, such as Branden Joseph, have argued that searching for iconography in Rauschenberg's Combines is useless because meaning can be made to exist anywhere.More recent interpretations of Canyon reconsider the work in postmodern terms. The art historian Yve-Alain Bois points out that Rauschenberg’s art's "lack of center" is a statement in itself, and the infinite permutations of meaning that can result highlight the subjectivity of art reception that postmodernism explores. Bois also considers the search for iconographic meaning in Rauschenberg's work misguided because it is too limiting.

File:Robert Rauschenberg's 'Canyon', 1959.jpg

Category:Paintings in the Museum of Modern Art (New York City)


Canyon (Rauschenberg)

Prompt: How does Canyon (Rauschenberg) explain its Analysis?

Canyon, one of Rauschenberg's best known Combines, has been the subject of art historical debate revolving around the validity of reading Rauschenberg's work iconographically. The historian Kenneth Bendiner famously proposed Canyon as a playful recreation of a 1635 Rembrandt painting depicting a scene from Greek mythology, The Rape of Ganymede. He interpreted the suspended pillow in the Combine as Ganymede's buttocks and the stuffed golden eagle as the form assumed by Ganymede's abductor, the Greek god Zeus. Other art historians, such as Branden Joseph, have argued that searching for iconography in Rauschenberg's Combines is useless because meaning can be made to exist anywhere.More recent interpretations of Canyon reconsider the work in postmodern terms. The art historian Yve-Alain Bois points out that Rauschenberg’s art's "lack of center" is a statement in itself, and the infinite permutations of meaning that can result highlight the subjectivity of art reception that postmodernism explores. Bois also considers the search for iconographic meaning in Rauschenberg's work misguided because it is too limiting.

File:Robert Rauschenberg's 'Canyon', 1959.jpg

Category:Paintings in the Museum of Modern Art (New York City)


Canyon (Rauschenberg)

Prompt: In Canyon (Rauschenberg), how is the Analysis discussed?

Canyon, one of Rauschenberg's best known Combines, has been the subject of art historical debate revolving around the validity of reading Rauschenberg's work iconographically. The historian Kenneth Bendiner famously proposed Canyon as a playful recreation of a 1635 Rembrandt painting depicting a scene from Greek mythology, The Rape of Ganymede. He interpreted the suspended pillow in the Combine as Ganymede's buttocks and the stuffed golden eagle as the form assumed by Ganymede's abductor, the Greek god Zeus. Other art historians, such as Branden Joseph, have argued that searching for iconography in Rauschenberg's Combines is useless because meaning can be made to exist anywhere.More recent interpretations of Canyon reconsider the work in postmodern terms. The art historian Yve-Alain Bois points out that Rauschenberg’s art's "lack of center" is a statement in itself, and the infinite permutations of meaning that can result highlight the subjectivity of art reception that postmodernism explores. Bois also considers the search for iconographic meaning in Rauschenberg's work misguided because it is too limiting.

File:Robert Rauschenberg's 'Canyon', 1959.jpg

Category:Paintings in the Museum of Modern Art (New York City)


Canyon (Rauschenberg)

Prompt: Focus on Canyon (Rauschenberg) and explain the In popular culture.

The painting is featured in Eugene Lim's 2017 novel Dear Cyborgs.

File:Robert Rauschenberg's 'Canyon', 1959.jpg

Category:Paintings in the Museum of Modern Art (New York City)


Canyon (Rauschenberg)

Prompt: Explain the In popular culture of this artwork, Canyon (Rauschenberg).

The painting is featured in Eugene Lim's 2017 novel Dear Cyborgs.

File:Robert Rauschenberg's 'Canyon', 1959.jpg

Category:Paintings in the Museum of Modern Art (New York City)


Canyon (Rauschenberg)

Prompt: How does Canyon (Rauschenberg) explain its In popular culture?

The painting is featured in Eugene Lim's 2017 novel Dear Cyborgs.

File:Robert Rauschenberg's 'Canyon', 1959.jpg

Category:Paintings in the Museum of Modern Art (New York City)


Canyon (Rauschenberg)

Prompt: In Canyon (Rauschenberg), how is the In popular culture discussed?

The painting is featured in Eugene Lim's 2017 novel Dear Cyborgs.

File:Robert Rauschenberg's 'Canyon', 1959.jpg

Category:Paintings in the Museum of Modern Art (New York City)


The Death of Procris

Prompt: Focus on The Death of Procris and explain the abstract.

The Death of Procris, A Satyr mourning over a Nymph or simply A Mythological Subject are names given to an unsigned, undated panel painting in the National Gallery in London, United Kingdom, securely attributed to Piero di Cosimo (who never signed his works).  Its date is uncertain, and its subject has been a matter of dispute. The name The Death of Procris (Italian: Morte di Procri) has been used since the 19th century, and is supposed to have been inspired by Ovid's tale of the death of Procris at the hands of her husband Cephalus, in Metamorphoses VII. The National Gallery has rejected this title since at least Cecil Gould's catalogue of 1951, since when it has preferred to describe the subject as "A Mythological Subject" or "A Satyr mourning over a Nymph".Despite the uncertainty surrounding the subject matter, the painting, which shows a satyr mourning over the body of a young woman, has been one of the most popular works by Piero di Cosimo. Erwin Panofsky was mesmerized by the "strange lure emanating from the picture", and other commentators have admired its "hazy atmosphere of a waking dream".

Category:Paintings in the National Gallery, London

File:Piero di cosimo, morte di procri 03.jpg


The Death of Procris

Prompt: Explain the abstract of this artwork, The Death of Procris.

The Death of Procris, A Satyr mourning over a Nymph or simply A Mythological Subject are names given to an unsigned, undated panel painting in the National Gallery in London, United Kingdom, securely attributed to Piero di Cosimo (who never signed his works).  Its date is uncertain, and its subject has been a matter of dispute. The name The Death of Procris (Italian: Morte di Procri) has been used since the 19th century, and is supposed to have been inspired by Ovid's tale of the death of Procris at the hands of her husband Cephalus, in Metamorphoses VII. The National Gallery has rejected this title since at least Cecil Gould's catalogue of 1951, since when it has preferred to describe the subject as "A Mythological Subject" or "A Satyr mourning over a Nymph".Despite the uncertainty surrounding the subject matter, the painting, which shows a satyr mourning over the body of a young woman, has been one of the most popular works by Piero di Cosimo. Erwin Panofsky was mesmerized by the "strange lure emanating from the picture", and other commentators have admired its "hazy atmosphere of a waking dream".

Category:Paintings in the National Gallery, London

File:Piero di cosimo, morte di procri 03.jpg


The Death of Procris

Prompt: How does The Death of Procris explain its abstract?

The Death of Procris, A Satyr mourning over a Nymph or simply A Mythological Subject are names given to an unsigned, undated panel painting in the National Gallery in London, United Kingdom, securely attributed to Piero di Cosimo (who never signed his works).  Its date is uncertain, and its subject has been a matter of dispute. The name The Death of Procris (Italian: Morte di Procri) has been used since the 19th century, and is supposed to have been inspired by Ovid's tale of the death of Procris at the hands of her husband Cephalus, in Metamorphoses VII. The National Gallery has rejected this title since at least Cecil Gould's catalogue of 1951, since when it has preferred to describe the subject as "A Mythological Subject" or "A Satyr mourning over a Nymph".Despite the uncertainty surrounding the subject matter, the painting, which shows a satyr mourning over the body of a young woman, has been one of the most popular works by Piero di Cosimo. Erwin Panofsky was mesmerized by the "strange lure emanating from the picture", and other commentators have admired its "hazy atmosphere of a waking dream".

Category:Paintings in the National Gallery, London

File:Piero di cosimo, morte di procri 03.jpg


The Death of Procris

Prompt: In The Death of Procris, how is the abstract discussed?

The Death of Procris, A Satyr mourning over a Nymph or simply A Mythological Subject are names given to an unsigned, undated panel painting in the National Gallery in London, United Kingdom, securely attributed to Piero di Cosimo (who never signed his works).  Its date is uncertain, and its subject has been a matter of dispute. The name The Death of Procris (Italian: Morte di Procri) has been used since the 19th century, and is supposed to have been inspired by Ovid's tale of the death of Procris at the hands of her husband Cephalus, in Metamorphoses VII. The National Gallery has rejected this title since at least Cecil Gould's catalogue of 1951, since when it has preferred to describe the subject as "A Mythological Subject" or "A Satyr mourning over a Nymph".Despite the uncertainty surrounding the subject matter, the painting, which shows a satyr mourning over the body of a young woman, has been one of the most popular works by Piero di Cosimo. Erwin Panofsky was mesmerized by the "strange lure emanating from the picture", and other commentators have admired its "hazy atmosphere of a waking dream".

Category:Paintings in the National Gallery, London

File:Piero di cosimo, morte di procri 03.jpg


The Death of Procris

Prompt: Focus on The Death of Procris and explain the A lesson for the newlyweds.

Piero's interest in the story of Procris might have been occasioned by one of the first Italian plays based on a mythological subject, Niccolò da Correggio's Cefalo, which had its premiere at a wedding feast in the Castello Estense (21 January 1487) and was printed in Venice in 1507. The story is supposed to have been adapted from Plautus rather than Ovid's Metamorphoses and, in contrast to earlier treatments of the story, it ends happily. If so, the painting should be read as a warning to the newlyweds against the dangers of jealousy which brought about the death of Procris.The association with the theme of marriage is reinforced by the painting's unusual dimensions which suggest it was intended for the front of a cassone, or bridal chest. Gould suggests that although it has often been described as a cassone front, as most Florentine paintings of similar dimensions are, it is possible that it served a different purpose, and may have been designed to be set in wainscoting. Fermor also finds it plausible that the painting hung in the marital chamber.The upper part of the painting bears the artist's fingerprints. On the back of the panel are a card and a seal with the stemma of the Guicciardini (which may have been a later addition). There is also a drawing interpreted as the frame of a pilaster.

Category:Paintings in the National Gallery, London

File:Piero di cosimo, morte di procri 03.jpg


The Death of Procris

Prompt: Explain the A lesson for the newlyweds of this artwork, The Death of Procris.

Piero's interest in the story of Procris might have been occasioned by one of the first Italian plays based on a mythological subject, Niccolò da Correggio's Cefalo, which had its premiere at a wedding feast in the Castello Estense (21 January 1487) and was printed in Venice in 1507. The story is supposed to have been adapted from Plautus rather than Ovid's Metamorphoses and, in contrast to earlier treatments of the story, it ends happily. If so, the painting should be read as a warning to the newlyweds against the dangers of jealousy which brought about the death of Procris.The association with the theme of marriage is reinforced by the painting's unusual dimensions which suggest it was intended for the front of a cassone, or bridal chest. Gould suggests that although it has often been described as a cassone front, as most Florentine paintings of similar dimensions are, it is possible that it served a different purpose, and may have been designed to be set in wainscoting. Fermor also finds it plausible that the painting hung in the marital chamber.The upper part of the painting bears the artist's fingerprints. On the back of the panel are a card and a seal with the stemma of the Guicciardini (which may have been a later addition). There is also a drawing interpreted as the frame of a pilaster.

Category:Paintings in the National Gallery, London

File:Piero di cosimo, morte di procri 03.jpg


The Death of Procris

Prompt: How does The Death of Procris explain its A lesson for the newlyweds?

Piero's interest in the story of Procris might have been occasioned by one of the first Italian plays based on a mythological subject, Niccolò da Correggio's Cefalo, which had its premiere at a wedding feast in the Castello Estense (21 January 1487) and was printed in Venice in 1507. The story is supposed to have been adapted from Plautus rather than Ovid's Metamorphoses and, in contrast to earlier treatments of the story, it ends happily. If so, the painting should be read as a warning to the newlyweds against the dangers of jealousy which brought about the death of Procris.The association with the theme of marriage is reinforced by the painting's unusual dimensions which suggest it was intended for the front of a cassone, or bridal chest. Gould suggests that although it has often been described as a cassone front, as most Florentine paintings of similar dimensions are, it is possible that it served a different purpose, and may have been designed to be set in wainscoting. Fermor also finds it plausible that the painting hung in the marital chamber.The upper part of the painting bears the artist's fingerprints. On the back of the panel are a card and a seal with the stemma of the Guicciardini (which may have been a later addition). There is also a drawing interpreted as the frame of a pilaster.

Category:Paintings in the National Gallery, London

File:Piero di cosimo, morte di procri 03.jpg


The Death of Procris

Prompt: In The Death of Procris, how is the A lesson for the newlyweds discussed?

Piero's interest in the story of Procris might have been occasioned by one of the first Italian plays based on a mythological subject, Niccolò da Correggio's Cefalo, which had its premiere at a wedding feast in the Castello Estense (21 January 1487) and was printed in Venice in 1507. The story is supposed to have been adapted from Plautus rather than Ovid's Metamorphoses and, in contrast to earlier treatments of the story, it ends happily. If so, the painting should be read as a warning to the newlyweds against the dangers of jealousy which brought about the death of Procris.The association with the theme of marriage is reinforced by the painting's unusual dimensions which suggest it was intended for the front of a cassone, or bridal chest. Gould suggests that although it has often been described as a cassone front, as most Florentine paintings of similar dimensions are, it is possible that it served a different purpose, and may have been designed to be set in wainscoting. Fermor also finds it plausible that the painting hung in the marital chamber.The upper part of the painting bears the artist's fingerprints. On the back of the panel are a card and a seal with the stemma of the Guicciardini (which may have been a later addition). There is also a drawing interpreted as the frame of a pilaster.

Category:Paintings in the National Gallery, London

File:Piero di cosimo, morte di procri 03.jpg


The Death of Procris

Prompt: Focus on The Death of Procris and explain the Alchemical symbolism.

Considering the alchemist background of Cosimo Rosselli (the painter's teacher and father-in-law), it has been suggested that the painting "can be explained in terms of the pictorial language of alchemy". According to this conceit, the dog (whose form is visually echoed by three other dogs in the background) represents none other than Hermes Trismegistos and a tree shown growing over Procris's breast symbolises the arbor philosophica. The red-and-gold veil of the victim is seen as symbolic of the "red-hot" philosopher's stone, and the entire composition allegedly represents the alchemist's longed-for victory over death.

Category:Paintings in the National Gallery, London

File:Piero di cosimo, morte di procri 03.jpg


The Death of Procris

Prompt: Explain the Alchemical symbolism of this artwork, The Death of Procris.

Considering the alchemist background of Cosimo Rosselli (the painter's teacher and father-in-law), it has been suggested that the painting "can be explained in terms of the pictorial language of alchemy". According to this conceit, the dog (whose form is visually echoed by three other dogs in the background) represents none other than Hermes Trismegistos and a tree shown growing over Procris's breast symbolises the arbor philosophica. The red-and-gold veil of the victim is seen as symbolic of the "red-hot" philosopher's stone, and the entire composition allegedly represents the alchemist's longed-for victory over death.

Category:Paintings in the National Gallery, London

File:Piero di cosimo, morte di procri 03.jpg


The Death of Procris

Prompt: How does The Death of Procris explain its Alchemical symbolism?

Considering the alchemist background of Cosimo Rosselli (the painter's teacher and father-in-law), it has been suggested that the painting "can be explained in terms of the pictorial language of alchemy". According to this conceit, the dog (whose form is visually echoed by three other dogs in the background) represents none other than Hermes Trismegistos and a tree shown growing over Procris's breast symbolises the arbor philosophica. The red-and-gold veil of the victim is seen as symbolic of the "red-hot" philosopher's stone, and the entire composition allegedly represents the alchemist's longed-for victory over death.

Category:Paintings in the National Gallery, London

File:Piero di cosimo, morte di procri 03.jpg


The Death of Procris

Prompt: In The Death of Procris, how is the Alchemical symbolism discussed?

Considering the alchemist background of Cosimo Rosselli (the painter's teacher and father-in-law), it has been suggested that the painting "can be explained in terms of the pictorial language of alchemy". According to this conceit, the dog (whose form is visually echoed by three other dogs in the background) represents none other than Hermes Trismegistos and a tree shown growing over Procris's breast symbolises the arbor philosophica. The red-and-gold veil of the victim is seen as symbolic of the "red-hot" philosopher's stone, and the entire composition allegedly represents the alchemist's longed-for victory over death.

Category:Paintings in the National Gallery, London

File:Piero di cosimo, morte di procri 03.jpg


The Death of Procris

Prompt: Focus on The Death of Procris and explain the Inconsistencies.

The subject matter lends itself to various levels of interpretation, prompting Dennis Geronimus to comment on some "mounting inconsistencies" of the painting with the Procris myth, such as the absence of her husband, the deadly spear and the unusual location of her wounds. Most conspicuously, the woman is mourned by a faun rather than her husband. The creature is absent from Ovid's story but is featured in Correggio's play where it acts "as the fatal meddler". Another controversial figure is the dog looking at the scene. It is tempting to interpret it as Laelaps, the transparent symbol of Procris's fidelity to her jealous husband. By Ovid's account, Laelaps and the Teumessian fox had been turned into stone earlier in the story, so the identity of the dog remains problematic. The river in the distance may be one of the three rivers of the Underworld.

Category:Paintings in the National Gallery, London

File:Piero di cosimo, morte di procri 03.jpg


The Death of Procris

Prompt: Explain the Inconsistencies of this artwork, The Death of Procris.

The subject matter lends itself to various levels of interpretation, prompting Dennis Geronimus to comment on some "mounting inconsistencies" of the painting with the Procris myth, such as the absence of her husband, the deadly spear and the unusual location of her wounds. Most conspicuously, the woman is mourned by a faun rather than her husband. The creature is absent from Ovid's story but is featured in Correggio's play where it acts "as the fatal meddler". Another controversial figure is the dog looking at the scene. It is tempting to interpret it as Laelaps, the transparent symbol of Procris's fidelity to her jealous husband. By Ovid's account, Laelaps and the Teumessian fox had been turned into stone earlier in the story, so the identity of the dog remains problematic. The river in the distance may be one of the three rivers of the Underworld.

Category:Paintings in the National Gallery, London

File:Piero di cosimo, morte di procri 03.jpg


The Death of Procris

Prompt: How does The Death of Procris explain its Inconsistencies?

The subject matter lends itself to various levels of interpretation, prompting Dennis Geronimus to comment on some "mounting inconsistencies" of the painting with the Procris myth, such as the absence of her husband, the deadly spear and the unusual location of her wounds. Most conspicuously, the woman is mourned by a faun rather than her husband. The creature is absent from Ovid's story but is featured in Correggio's play where it acts "as the fatal meddler". Another controversial figure is the dog looking at the scene. It is tempting to interpret it as Laelaps, the transparent symbol of Procris's fidelity to her jealous husband. By Ovid's account, Laelaps and the Teumessian fox had been turned into stone earlier in the story, so the identity of the dog remains problematic. The river in the distance may be one of the three rivers of the Underworld.

Category:Paintings in the National Gallery, London

File:Piero di cosimo, morte di procri 03.jpg