Treaty of Paris (painting)

Prompt: Focus on Treaty of Paris (painting) and explain the abstract.

American Commissioners of the Preliminary Peace Agreement with Great Britain, also known as the Treaty of Paris, is an unfinished 1783 painting by Benjamin West depicting the United States delegation that negotiated the 1783 Treaty of Paris, which formally ended the American Revolutionary War. Peace negotiations began in Paris on June 25, 1783, and the eventual signing of the treaty took place on September 3, 1783 at the Hotel York at 56 rue Jacob. The green drapery in the painting's background and the distant landscape with a classical colonnaded building emphasize the scene's formality.John Jay, John Adams, Benjamin Franklin, Henry Laurens, and William Temple Franklin (presented from left to right) are depicted early during the negotiation process (Laurens and the younger Franklin were not present at the treaty's signing). Benjamin Franklin was the only U.S. delegate who did not pose in person; West drew his likeness from an engraving.Meant to be depicted on the right, the British delegation comprising representative Richard Oswald and his secretary, Caleb Whitefoord, declined to pose. Britain had no desire to commemorate its defeat, and Oswald was reportedly ugly and blind in one eye and consequently reluctant to be depicted. The conspicuous absence of the British commissioners evokes the "tentative nature of the peace" and the "deep geopolitical antagonisms" that persisted after the Revolution. West never completed his painting. According to John Quincy Adams, West intended to present the painting as a gift to Congress.The painting, a gift of Henry Francis du Pont, is in the permanent collection of the Winterthur Museum, Garden and Library, du Pont's former home in Winterthur, Delaware. Du Pont had purchased the work from the J. P. Morgan collection in 1948. The painting was displayed at the Metropolitan Museum of Art in 2016 as part of an exhibition on unfinished paintings.In 1983, to celebrate the bicentennial of the Treaty of Paris, the United States Postal Service issued a commemorative stamp inspired by the painting. However, many details were changed: Laurens and William Franklin are removed, Jay now hunches over the table to Franklin's left, and the right side of the painting—unfinished in West's original—is filled in with the back of British signatory David Hartley. Historian Stanley Weintraub called the stamp "a travesty of history and a mischievous misuse of West's canvas."

Category:cultural depictions of John Adams

Category:Collection of the Winterthur Museum, Gallery and Library

Category:cultural depictions of Benjamin Franklin

Category:paintings about the American Revolution


Treaty of Paris (painting)

Prompt: Explain the abstract of this artwork, Treaty of Paris (painting).

American Commissioners of the Preliminary Peace Agreement with Great Britain, also known as the Treaty of Paris, is an unfinished 1783 painting by Benjamin West depicting the United States delegation that negotiated the 1783 Treaty of Paris, which formally ended the American Revolutionary War. Peace negotiations began in Paris on June 25, 1783, and the eventual signing of the treaty took place on September 3, 1783 at the Hotel York at 56 rue Jacob. The green drapery in the painting's background and the distant landscape with a classical colonnaded building emphasize the scene's formality.John Jay, John Adams, Benjamin Franklin, Henry Laurens, and William Temple Franklin (presented from left to right) are depicted early during the negotiation process (Laurens and the younger Franklin were not present at the treaty's signing). Benjamin Franklin was the only U.S. delegate who did not pose in person; West drew his likeness from an engraving.Meant to be depicted on the right, the British delegation comprising representative Richard Oswald and his secretary, Caleb Whitefoord, declined to pose. Britain had no desire to commemorate its defeat, and Oswald was reportedly ugly and blind in one eye and consequently reluctant to be depicted. The conspicuous absence of the British commissioners evokes the "tentative nature of the peace" and the "deep geopolitical antagonisms" that persisted after the Revolution. West never completed his painting. According to John Quincy Adams, West intended to present the painting as a gift to Congress.The painting, a gift of Henry Francis du Pont, is in the permanent collection of the Winterthur Museum, Garden and Library, du Pont's former home in Winterthur, Delaware. Du Pont had purchased the work from the J. P. Morgan collection in 1948. The painting was displayed at the Metropolitan Museum of Art in 2016 as part of an exhibition on unfinished paintings.In 1983, to celebrate the bicentennial of the Treaty of Paris, the United States Postal Service issued a commemorative stamp inspired by the painting. However, many details were changed: Laurens and William Franklin are removed, Jay now hunches over the table to Franklin's left, and the right side of the painting—unfinished in West's original—is filled in with the back of British signatory David Hartley. Historian Stanley Weintraub called the stamp "a travesty of history and a mischievous misuse of West's canvas."

Category:cultural depictions of John Adams

Category:Collection of the Winterthur Museum, Gallery and Library

Category:cultural depictions of Benjamin Franklin

Category:paintings about the American Revolution


Treaty of Paris (painting)

Prompt: How does Treaty of Paris (painting) explain its abstract?

American Commissioners of the Preliminary Peace Agreement with Great Britain, also known as the Treaty of Paris, is an unfinished 1783 painting by Benjamin West depicting the United States delegation that negotiated the 1783 Treaty of Paris, which formally ended the American Revolutionary War. Peace negotiations began in Paris on June 25, 1783, and the eventual signing of the treaty took place on September 3, 1783 at the Hotel York at 56 rue Jacob. The green drapery in the painting's background and the distant landscape with a classical colonnaded building emphasize the scene's formality.John Jay, John Adams, Benjamin Franklin, Henry Laurens, and William Temple Franklin (presented from left to right) are depicted early during the negotiation process (Laurens and the younger Franklin were not present at the treaty's signing). Benjamin Franklin was the only U.S. delegate who did not pose in person; West drew his likeness from an engraving.Meant to be depicted on the right, the British delegation comprising representative Richard Oswald and his secretary, Caleb Whitefoord, declined to pose. Britain had no desire to commemorate its defeat, and Oswald was reportedly ugly and blind in one eye and consequently reluctant to be depicted. The conspicuous absence of the British commissioners evokes the "tentative nature of the peace" and the "deep geopolitical antagonisms" that persisted after the Revolution. West never completed his painting. According to John Quincy Adams, West intended to present the painting as a gift to Congress.The painting, a gift of Henry Francis du Pont, is in the permanent collection of the Winterthur Museum, Garden and Library, du Pont's former home in Winterthur, Delaware. Du Pont had purchased the work from the J. P. Morgan collection in 1948. The painting was displayed at the Metropolitan Museum of Art in 2016 as part of an exhibition on unfinished paintings.In 1983, to celebrate the bicentennial of the Treaty of Paris, the United States Postal Service issued a commemorative stamp inspired by the painting. However, many details were changed: Laurens and William Franklin are removed, Jay now hunches over the table to Franklin's left, and the right side of the painting—unfinished in West's original—is filled in with the back of British signatory David Hartley. Historian Stanley Weintraub called the stamp "a travesty of history and a mischievous misuse of West's canvas."

Category:cultural depictions of John Adams

Category:Collection of the Winterthur Museum, Gallery and Library

Category:cultural depictions of Benjamin Franklin

Category:paintings about the American Revolution


Treaty of Paris (painting)

Prompt: In Treaty of Paris (painting), how is the abstract discussed?

American Commissioners of the Preliminary Peace Agreement with Great Britain, also known as the Treaty of Paris, is an unfinished 1783 painting by Benjamin West depicting the United States delegation that negotiated the 1783 Treaty of Paris, which formally ended the American Revolutionary War. Peace negotiations began in Paris on June 25, 1783, and the eventual signing of the treaty took place on September 3, 1783 at the Hotel York at 56 rue Jacob. The green drapery in the painting's background and the distant landscape with a classical colonnaded building emphasize the scene's formality.John Jay, John Adams, Benjamin Franklin, Henry Laurens, and William Temple Franklin (presented from left to right) are depicted early during the negotiation process (Laurens and the younger Franklin were not present at the treaty's signing). Benjamin Franklin was the only U.S. delegate who did not pose in person; West drew his likeness from an engraving.Meant to be depicted on the right, the British delegation comprising representative Richard Oswald and his secretary, Caleb Whitefoord, declined to pose. Britain had no desire to commemorate its defeat, and Oswald was reportedly ugly and blind in one eye and consequently reluctant to be depicted. The conspicuous absence of the British commissioners evokes the "tentative nature of the peace" and the "deep geopolitical antagonisms" that persisted after the Revolution. West never completed his painting. According to John Quincy Adams, West intended to present the painting as a gift to Congress.The painting, a gift of Henry Francis du Pont, is in the permanent collection of the Winterthur Museum, Garden and Library, du Pont's former home in Winterthur, Delaware. Du Pont had purchased the work from the J. P. Morgan collection in 1948. The painting was displayed at the Metropolitan Museum of Art in 2016 as part of an exhibition on unfinished paintings.In 1983, to celebrate the bicentennial of the Treaty of Paris, the United States Postal Service issued a commemorative stamp inspired by the painting. However, many details were changed: Laurens and William Franklin are removed, Jay now hunches over the table to Franklin's left, and the right side of the painting—unfinished in West's original—is filled in with the back of British signatory David Hartley. Historian Stanley Weintraub called the stamp "a travesty of history and a mischievous misuse of West's canvas."

Category:cultural depictions of John Adams

Category:Collection of the Winterthur Museum, Gallery and Library

Category:cultural depictions of Benjamin Franklin

Category:paintings about the American Revolution


Prompt: Focus on Beethoven with the Manuscript of the Missa Solemnis and explain the abstract.

Beethoven with the Manuscript of the Missa Solemnis is a portrait of Ludwig van Beethoven by Joseph Karl Stieler, completed in 1820. It shows Beethoven holding a manuscript of his Missa solemnis. The painting is held by the Beethoven-Haus in Germany. Variations on the portrait were produced by, among others, Josef Kriehuber and Andy Warhol.

List of sculptures of Ludwig van Beethoven

Category:Cultural depictions of Ludwig van Beethoven


Prompt: Explain the abstract of this artwork, Beethoven with the Manuscript of the Missa Solemnis.

Beethoven with the Manuscript of the Missa Solemnis is a portrait of Ludwig van Beethoven by Joseph Karl Stieler, completed in 1820. It shows Beethoven holding a manuscript of his Missa solemnis. The painting is held by the Beethoven-Haus in Germany. Variations on the portrait were produced by, among others, Josef Kriehuber and Andy Warhol.

List of sculptures of Ludwig van Beethoven

Category:Cultural depictions of Ludwig van Beethoven


Prompt: How does Beethoven with the Manuscript of the Missa Solemnis explain its abstract?

Beethoven with the Manuscript of the Missa Solemnis is a portrait of Ludwig van Beethoven by Joseph Karl Stieler, completed in 1820. It shows Beethoven holding a manuscript of his Missa solemnis. The painting is held by the Beethoven-Haus in Germany. Variations on the portrait were produced by, among others, Josef Kriehuber and Andy Warhol.

List of sculptures of Ludwig van Beethoven

Category:Cultural depictions of Ludwig van Beethoven


Prompt: In Beethoven with the Manuscript of the Missa Solemnis, how is the abstract discussed?

Beethoven with the Manuscript of the Missa Solemnis is a portrait of Ludwig van Beethoven by Joseph Karl Stieler, completed in 1820. It shows Beethoven holding a manuscript of his Missa solemnis. The painting is held by the Beethoven-Haus in Germany. Variations on the portrait were produced by, among others, Josef Kriehuber and Andy Warhol.

List of sculptures of Ludwig van Beethoven

Category:Cultural depictions of Ludwig van Beethoven


Prompt: Focus on Beethoven with the Manuscript of the Missa Solemnis and explain the Description.

The portrait is in oil on canvas and shows Beethoven in a deep blue frock coat with a large white collar and red scarf. His grey hair is "unruly, essentially uncombable". He holds the manuscript of his Missa solemnis and appears to be writing. In the background is a grape arbour. The portrait is 72.0 by 58.5 centimetres (28.3 by 23.0 in).Alexander Wheelock Thayer wrote that the painting was "sketchy" and never fully finished. Anton Schindler felt that the portrait accurately portrayed Beethoven's "characteristic expression", but the lowered head was inconsistent with Beethoven's usual posture. Schindler also asserted that illness caused a marked change in Beethoven's appearance in this portrait as compared to earlier ones.According to John Clubbe, Stieler's design was "even more dramatic" than the previous portraits by Mähler, using the same portrait of Beethoven's grandfather for inspiration and highlighting "the composer's revolutionary sympathies". Alessandra Comini stated that the portrait included "all the elements dear to future mythmakers", including "genius inspired by inner voices in the presence of nature, with leonine hair writhing wildly in symbolic parallel to the seething turbulence of creativity".

List of sculptures of Ludwig van Beethoven

Category:Cultural depictions of Ludwig van Beethoven


Prompt: Explain the Description of this artwork, Beethoven with the Manuscript of the Missa Solemnis.

The portrait is in oil on canvas and shows Beethoven in a deep blue frock coat with a large white collar and red scarf. His grey hair is "unruly, essentially uncombable". He holds the manuscript of his Missa solemnis and appears to be writing. In the background is a grape arbour. The portrait is 72.0 by 58.5 centimetres (28.3 by 23.0 in).Alexander Wheelock Thayer wrote that the painting was "sketchy" and never fully finished. Anton Schindler felt that the portrait accurately portrayed Beethoven's "characteristic expression", but the lowered head was inconsistent with Beethoven's usual posture. Schindler also asserted that illness caused a marked change in Beethoven's appearance in this portrait as compared to earlier ones.According to John Clubbe, Stieler's design was "even more dramatic" than the previous portraits by Mähler, using the same portrait of Beethoven's grandfather for inspiration and highlighting "the composer's revolutionary sympathies". Alessandra Comini stated that the portrait included "all the elements dear to future mythmakers", including "genius inspired by inner voices in the presence of nature, with leonine hair writhing wildly in symbolic parallel to the seething turbulence of creativity".

List of sculptures of Ludwig van Beethoven

Category:Cultural depictions of Ludwig van Beethoven


Prompt: How does Beethoven with the Manuscript of the Missa Solemnis explain its Description?

The portrait is in oil on canvas and shows Beethoven in a deep blue frock coat with a large white collar and red scarf. His grey hair is "unruly, essentially uncombable". He holds the manuscript of his Missa solemnis and appears to be writing. In the background is a grape arbour. The portrait is 72.0 by 58.5 centimetres (28.3 by 23.0 in).Alexander Wheelock Thayer wrote that the painting was "sketchy" and never fully finished. Anton Schindler felt that the portrait accurately portrayed Beethoven's "characteristic expression", but the lowered head was inconsistent with Beethoven's usual posture. Schindler also asserted that illness caused a marked change in Beethoven's appearance in this portrait as compared to earlier ones.According to John Clubbe, Stieler's design was "even more dramatic" than the previous portraits by Mähler, using the same portrait of Beethoven's grandfather for inspiration and highlighting "the composer's revolutionary sympathies". Alessandra Comini stated that the portrait included "all the elements dear to future mythmakers", including "genius inspired by inner voices in the presence of nature, with leonine hair writhing wildly in symbolic parallel to the seething turbulence of creativity".

List of sculptures of Ludwig van Beethoven

Category:Cultural depictions of Ludwig van Beethoven


Prompt: In Beethoven with the Manuscript of the Missa Solemnis, how is the Description discussed?

The portrait is in oil on canvas and shows Beethoven in a deep blue frock coat with a large white collar and red scarf. His grey hair is "unruly, essentially uncombable". He holds the manuscript of his Missa solemnis and appears to be writing. In the background is a grape arbour. The portrait is 72.0 by 58.5 centimetres (28.3 by 23.0 in).Alexander Wheelock Thayer wrote that the painting was "sketchy" and never fully finished. Anton Schindler felt that the portrait accurately portrayed Beethoven's "characteristic expression", but the lowered head was inconsistent with Beethoven's usual posture. Schindler also asserted that illness caused a marked change in Beethoven's appearance in this portrait as compared to earlier ones.According to John Clubbe, Stieler's design was "even more dramatic" than the previous portraits by Mähler, using the same portrait of Beethoven's grandfather for inspiration and highlighting "the composer's revolutionary sympathies". Alessandra Comini stated that the portrait included "all the elements dear to future mythmakers", including "genius inspired by inner voices in the presence of nature, with leonine hair writhing wildly in symbolic parallel to the seething turbulence of creativity".

List of sculptures of Ludwig van Beethoven

Category:Cultural depictions of Ludwig van Beethoven


Prompt: Focus on Beethoven with the Manuscript of the Missa Solemnis and explain the Creation.

The painting was started in 1819 and completed in April 1820. It was commissioned by Franz and Antonie Brentano, who were, according to Beethoven, his "best friends in the world". Stieler, who was noted for his portraiture, was in Vienna to paint Emperor Franz at the time he met Beethoven. Beethoven saw having his portrait made as a form of "penance" and allowed only three or four sittings, requiring that Stieler finish painting the body and the portrait's background without him. As a result, according to Alessandra Comini, "Beethoven's arms are not convincingly attached to his shoulders"; later versions of the portrait address this by omitting the arms entirely. Upon completion the portrait was exhibited alongside the Dietrich bust.

List of sculptures of Ludwig van Beethoven

Category:Cultural depictions of Ludwig van Beethoven


Prompt: Explain the Creation of this artwork, Beethoven with the Manuscript of the Missa Solemnis.

The painting was started in 1819 and completed in April 1820. It was commissioned by Franz and Antonie Brentano, who were, according to Beethoven, his "best friends in the world". Stieler, who was noted for his portraiture, was in Vienna to paint Emperor Franz at the time he met Beethoven. Beethoven saw having his portrait made as a form of "penance" and allowed only three or four sittings, requiring that Stieler finish painting the body and the portrait's background without him. As a result, according to Alessandra Comini, "Beethoven's arms are not convincingly attached to his shoulders"; later versions of the portrait address this by omitting the arms entirely. Upon completion the portrait was exhibited alongside the Dietrich bust.

List of sculptures of Ludwig van Beethoven

Category:Cultural depictions of Ludwig van Beethoven


Prompt: How does Beethoven with the Manuscript of the Missa Solemnis explain its Creation?

The painting was started in 1819 and completed in April 1820. It was commissioned by Franz and Antonie Brentano, who were, according to Beethoven, his "best friends in the world". Stieler, who was noted for his portraiture, was in Vienna to paint Emperor Franz at the time he met Beethoven. Beethoven saw having his portrait made as a form of "penance" and allowed only three or four sittings, requiring that Stieler finish painting the body and the portrait's background without him. As a result, according to Alessandra Comini, "Beethoven's arms are not convincingly attached to his shoulders"; later versions of the portrait address this by omitting the arms entirely. Upon completion the portrait was exhibited alongside the Dietrich bust.

List of sculptures of Ludwig van Beethoven

Category:Cultural depictions of Ludwig van Beethoven


Prompt: In Beethoven with the Manuscript of the Missa Solemnis, how is the Creation discussed?

The painting was started in 1819 and completed in April 1820. It was commissioned by Franz and Antonie Brentano, who were, according to Beethoven, his "best friends in the world". Stieler, who was noted for his portraiture, was in Vienna to paint Emperor Franz at the time he met Beethoven. Beethoven saw having his portrait made as a form of "penance" and allowed only three or four sittings, requiring that Stieler finish painting the body and the portrait's background without him. As a result, according to Alessandra Comini, "Beethoven's arms are not convincingly attached to his shoulders"; later versions of the portrait address this by omitting the arms entirely. Upon completion the portrait was exhibited alongside the Dietrich bust.

List of sculptures of Ludwig van Beethoven

Category:Cultural depictions of Ludwig van Beethoven


Prompt: Focus on Beethoven with the Manuscript of the Missa Solemnis and explain the Ownership history.

The portrait's early ownership history is "obscure"; it may have been briefly held by the Brentano family. Thayer stated that it was initially owned by Stieler's family. It was eventually owned by Wilhelm Spohr, brother of composer Louis Spohr. On his death in 1860, it passed to Rosalie, Countess Sauerma, his daughter. From 1909 the painting was owned by Henri Hinrichsen of Leipzig, a music publisher with an extensive art collection. This collection, including the portrait of Beethoven, was plundered by the Nazis; Hinrichsen was killed in the Holocaust. After the end of the Second World War in 1945 Henri's son Walter successfully reclaimed some of Henri's collection and brought the portrait to New York City. In 1981 he had a copy made and sold the original to the Beethoven-Haus.

List of sculptures of Ludwig van Beethoven

Category:Cultural depictions of Ludwig van Beethoven


Prompt: Explain the Ownership history of this artwork, Beethoven with the Manuscript of the Missa Solemnis.

The portrait's early ownership history is "obscure"; it may have been briefly held by the Brentano family. Thayer stated that it was initially owned by Stieler's family. It was eventually owned by Wilhelm Spohr, brother of composer Louis Spohr. On his death in 1860, it passed to Rosalie, Countess Sauerma, his daughter. From 1909 the painting was owned by Henri Hinrichsen of Leipzig, a music publisher with an extensive art collection. This collection, including the portrait of Beethoven, was plundered by the Nazis; Hinrichsen was killed in the Holocaust. After the end of the Second World War in 1945 Henri's son Walter successfully reclaimed some of Henri's collection and brought the portrait to New York City. In 1981 he had a copy made and sold the original to the Beethoven-Haus.

List of sculptures of Ludwig van Beethoven

Category:Cultural depictions of Ludwig van Beethoven


Prompt: How does Beethoven with the Manuscript of the Missa Solemnis explain its Ownership history?

The portrait's early ownership history is "obscure"; it may have been briefly held by the Brentano family. Thayer stated that it was initially owned by Stieler's family. It was eventually owned by Wilhelm Spohr, brother of composer Louis Spohr. On his death in 1860, it passed to Rosalie, Countess Sauerma, his daughter. From 1909 the painting was owned by Henri Hinrichsen of Leipzig, a music publisher with an extensive art collection. This collection, including the portrait of Beethoven, was plundered by the Nazis; Hinrichsen was killed in the Holocaust. After the end of the Second World War in 1945 Henri's son Walter successfully reclaimed some of Henri's collection and brought the portrait to New York City. In 1981 he had a copy made and sold the original to the Beethoven-Haus.

List of sculptures of Ludwig van Beethoven

Category:Cultural depictions of Ludwig van Beethoven


Prompt: In Beethoven with the Manuscript of the Missa Solemnis, how is the Ownership history discussed?

The portrait's early ownership history is "obscure"; it may have been briefly held by the Brentano family. Thayer stated that it was initially owned by Stieler's family. It was eventually owned by Wilhelm Spohr, brother of composer Louis Spohr. On his death in 1860, it passed to Rosalie, Countess Sauerma, his daughter. From 1909 the painting was owned by Henri Hinrichsen of Leipzig, a music publisher with an extensive art collection. This collection, including the portrait of Beethoven, was plundered by the Nazis; Hinrichsen was killed in the Holocaust. After the end of the Second World War in 1945 Henri's son Walter successfully reclaimed some of Henri's collection and brought the portrait to New York City. In 1981 he had a copy made and sold the original to the Beethoven-Haus.

List of sculptures of Ludwig van Beethoven

Category:Cultural depictions of Ludwig van Beethoven


Prompt: Focus on Beethoven with the Manuscript of the Missa Solemnis and explain the Reproductions.

Stieler painted a miniature version of the portrait on ivory. This he gave to Antonie Brentano.Lithographs of the portrait were published by Artaria in 1826; Beethoven distributed copies to his friends. Comini writes that the "extensive lithographic reproduction" of the work resulted in it having "the greatest influence on Beethoven iconography".Variations on the portrait were produced by, among others, Josef Kriehuber (1841) and Andy Warhol (1987).

List of sculptures of Ludwig van Beethoven

Category:Cultural depictions of Ludwig van Beethoven


Prompt: Explain the Reproductions of this artwork, Beethoven with the Manuscript of the Missa Solemnis.

Stieler painted a miniature version of the portrait on ivory. This he gave to Antonie Brentano.Lithographs of the portrait were published by Artaria in 1826; Beethoven distributed copies to his friends. Comini writes that the "extensive lithographic reproduction" of the work resulted in it having "the greatest influence on Beethoven iconography".Variations on the portrait were produced by, among others, Josef Kriehuber (1841) and Andy Warhol (1987).

List of sculptures of Ludwig van Beethoven

Category:Cultural depictions of Ludwig van Beethoven


Prompt: How does Beethoven with the Manuscript of the Missa Solemnis explain its Reproductions?

Stieler painted a miniature version of the portrait on ivory. This he gave to Antonie Brentano.Lithographs of the portrait were published by Artaria in 1826; Beethoven distributed copies to his friends. Comini writes that the "extensive lithographic reproduction" of the work resulted in it having "the greatest influence on Beethoven iconography".Variations on the portrait were produced by, among others, Josef Kriehuber (1841) and Andy Warhol (1987).

List of sculptures of Ludwig van Beethoven

Category:Cultural depictions of Ludwig van Beethoven


Prompt: In Beethoven with the Manuscript of the Missa Solemnis, how is the Reproductions discussed?

Stieler painted a miniature version of the portrait on ivory. This he gave to Antonie Brentano.Lithographs of the portrait were published by Artaria in 1826; Beethoven distributed copies to his friends. Comini writes that the "extensive lithographic reproduction" of the work resulted in it having "the greatest influence on Beethoven iconography".Variations on the portrait were produced by, among others, Josef Kriehuber (1841) and Andy Warhol (1987).

List of sculptures of Ludwig van Beethoven

Category:Cultural depictions of Ludwig van Beethoven


Symphony in White, No. 3

Prompt: Focus on Symphony in White, No. 3 and explain the abstract.

Symphony in White, No. 3, is a painting by James McNeill Whistler. The work shows two women, one sitting on a sofa dressed in white, and the other resting on the floor, with a yellowish dress. The model on the sofa is Joanna Heffernan, the artist's mistress. By calling the painting Symphony in White, No. 3, Whistler intended to emphasize his artistic philosophy of corresponding arts, inspired by the poet Charles Baudelaire. The presence of a fan on the floor shows the influence of Japonisme, which was a popular artistic trend in European art at the time. Whistler was also greatly influenced by his colleague and friend Albert Joseph Moore, and their works show considerable similarities.Though Whistler started on the painting in 1865, he was not ready to exhibit it publicly until 1867, when it went on display at the Royal Academy. His colleagues were impressed by the painting, but not all critics fully understood the connection between the painting and its title. One review in particular questioned the presence of other colours in addition to white, a criticism which prompted Whistler to respond with a scathing and sarcastic letter. Years later, Whistler's former student Walter Sickert criticized the painting as "the low-water mark of the old manner, before the birth of the new."

Category:Paintings by James McNeill Whistler

Category:Paintings in the Barber Institute of Fine Arts

:commons:File:Edgar Degas - Portrait de Mlle Eugénie Fiocre.jpg

Symphony in White, No. 2: The Little White Girl

Symphony in White, No. 1: The White Girl

:commons:File:Moore Albert Joseph A Musician.jpg


Symphony in White, No. 3

Prompt: Explain the abstract of this artwork, Symphony in White, No. 3.

Symphony in White, No. 3, is a painting by James McNeill Whistler. The work shows two women, one sitting on a sofa dressed in white, and the other resting on the floor, with a yellowish dress. The model on the sofa is Joanna Heffernan, the artist's mistress. By calling the painting Symphony in White, No. 3, Whistler intended to emphasize his artistic philosophy of corresponding arts, inspired by the poet Charles Baudelaire. The presence of a fan on the floor shows the influence of Japonisme, which was a popular artistic trend in European art at the time. Whistler was also greatly influenced by his colleague and friend Albert Joseph Moore, and their works show considerable similarities.Though Whistler started on the painting in 1865, he was not ready to exhibit it publicly until 1867, when it went on display at the Royal Academy. His colleagues were impressed by the painting, but not all critics fully understood the connection between the painting and its title. One review in particular questioned the presence of other colours in addition to white, a criticism which prompted Whistler to respond with a scathing and sarcastic letter. Years later, Whistler's former student Walter Sickert criticized the painting as "the low-water mark of the old manner, before the birth of the new."

Category:Paintings by James McNeill Whistler

Category:Paintings in the Barber Institute of Fine Arts

:commons:File:Edgar Degas - Portrait de Mlle Eugénie Fiocre.jpg

Symphony in White, No. 2: The Little White Girl

Symphony in White, No. 1: The White Girl

:commons:File:Moore Albert Joseph A Musician.jpg


Symphony in White, No. 3

Prompt: How does Symphony in White, No. 3 explain its abstract?

Symphony in White, No. 3, is a painting by James McNeill Whistler. The work shows two women, one sitting on a sofa dressed in white, and the other resting on the floor, with a yellowish dress. The model on the sofa is Joanna Heffernan, the artist's mistress. By calling the painting Symphony in White, No. 3, Whistler intended to emphasize his artistic philosophy of corresponding arts, inspired by the poet Charles Baudelaire. The presence of a fan on the floor shows the influence of Japonisme, which was a popular artistic trend in European art at the time. Whistler was also greatly influenced by his colleague and friend Albert Joseph Moore, and their works show considerable similarities.Though Whistler started on the painting in 1865, he was not ready to exhibit it publicly until 1867, when it went on display at the Royal Academy. His colleagues were impressed by the painting, but not all critics fully understood the connection between the painting and its title. One review in particular questioned the presence of other colours in addition to white, a criticism which prompted Whistler to respond with a scathing and sarcastic letter. Years later, Whistler's former student Walter Sickert criticized the painting as "the low-water mark of the old manner, before the birth of the new."

Category:Paintings by James McNeill Whistler

Category:Paintings in the Barber Institute of Fine Arts

:commons:File:Edgar Degas - Portrait de Mlle Eugénie Fiocre.jpg

Symphony in White, No. 2: The Little White Girl

Symphony in White, No. 1: The White Girl

:commons:File:Moore Albert Joseph A Musician.jpg


Symphony in White, No. 3

Prompt: In Symphony in White, No. 3, how is the abstract discussed?

Symphony in White, No. 3, is a painting by James McNeill Whistler. The work shows two women, one sitting on a sofa dressed in white, and the other resting on the floor, with a yellowish dress. The model on the sofa is Joanna Heffernan, the artist's mistress. By calling the painting Symphony in White, No. 3, Whistler intended to emphasize his artistic philosophy of corresponding arts, inspired by the poet Charles Baudelaire. The presence of a fan on the floor shows the influence of Japonisme, which was a popular artistic trend in European art at the time. Whistler was also greatly influenced by his colleague and friend Albert Joseph Moore, and their works show considerable similarities.Though Whistler started on the painting in 1865, he was not ready to exhibit it publicly until 1867, when it went on display at the Royal Academy. His colleagues were impressed by the painting, but not all critics fully understood the connection between the painting and its title. One review in particular questioned the presence of other colours in addition to white, a criticism which prompted Whistler to respond with a scathing and sarcastic letter. Years later, Whistler's former student Walter Sickert criticized the painting as "the low-water mark of the old manner, before the birth of the new."

Category:Paintings by James McNeill Whistler

Category:Paintings in the Barber Institute of Fine Arts

:commons:File:Edgar Degas - Portrait de Mlle Eugénie Fiocre.jpg

Symphony in White, No. 2: The Little White Girl

Symphony in White, No. 1: The White Girl

:commons:File:Moore Albert Joseph A Musician.jpg


Symphony in White, No. 3

Prompt: Focus on Symphony in White, No. 3 and explain the Background.

James McNeill Whistler was born in the United States in 1834, the son of George Washington Whistler, a railway engineer. In 1843, his father relocated the family to Saint Petersburg, Russia, where James received training in painting. After a stay in England, he returned to America to attend the US Military Academy at West Point in 1851. In 1855, he made his way back to Europe, determined to dedicate himself to painting. Here he settled in Paris at first, but in 1859 moved to London, where he would spend most of the remainder of his life. There he met Dante Gabriel Rossetti and other members of the Pre-Raphaelite Brotherhood, who would have a profound influence on Whistler.It was also in London that Whistler met Joanna Heffernan, the model who would become his lover. By 1865, Whistler had already used her as a model for other paintings, among these Symphony in White, No. 1 and Symphony in White, No. 2. Heffernan supposedly had a strong influence over Whistler; his brother-in-law Francis Seymour Haden refused a dinner invitation in the winter of 1863–64 due to her dominant presence in the household. In January 1864, Whistler's mother Anna – later depicted in the painting Arrangement in Grey and Black – arrived to stay with her son in London. As a result, Heffernan had to move out of the apartment, and only visited as a model. Still, Heffernan's presence displeased Whistler's mother, and his relationship with both women became strained.

Category:Paintings by James McNeill Whistler

Category:Paintings in the Barber Institute of Fine Arts

:commons:File:Edgar Degas - Portrait de Mlle Eugénie Fiocre.jpg

Symphony in White, No. 2: The Little White Girl

Symphony in White, No. 1: The White Girl

:commons:File:Moore Albert Joseph A Musician.jpg


Symphony in White, No. 3

Prompt: Explain the Background of this artwork, Symphony in White, No. 3.

James McNeill Whistler was born in the United States in 1834, the son of George Washington Whistler, a railway engineer. In 1843, his father relocated the family to Saint Petersburg, Russia, where James received training in painting. After a stay in England, he returned to America to attend the US Military Academy at West Point in 1851. In 1855, he made his way back to Europe, determined to dedicate himself to painting. Here he settled in Paris at first, but in 1859 moved to London, where he would spend most of the remainder of his life. There he met Dante Gabriel Rossetti and other members of the Pre-Raphaelite Brotherhood, who would have a profound influence on Whistler.It was also in London that Whistler met Joanna Heffernan, the model who would become his lover. By 1865, Whistler had already used her as a model for other paintings, among these Symphony in White, No. 1 and Symphony in White, No. 2. Heffernan supposedly had a strong influence over Whistler; his brother-in-law Francis Seymour Haden refused a dinner invitation in the winter of 1863–64 due to her dominant presence in the household. In January 1864, Whistler's mother Anna – later depicted in the painting Arrangement in Grey and Black – arrived to stay with her son in London. As a result, Heffernan had to move out of the apartment, and only visited as a model. Still, Heffernan's presence displeased Whistler's mother, and his relationship with both women became strained.

Category:Paintings by James McNeill Whistler

Category:Paintings in the Barber Institute of Fine Arts

:commons:File:Edgar Degas - Portrait de Mlle Eugénie Fiocre.jpg

Symphony in White, No. 2: The Little White Girl

Symphony in White, No. 1: The White Girl

:commons:File:Moore Albert Joseph A Musician.jpg


Symphony in White, No. 3

Prompt: How does Symphony in White, No. 3 explain its Background?

James McNeill Whistler was born in the United States in 1834, the son of George Washington Whistler, a railway engineer. In 1843, his father relocated the family to Saint Petersburg, Russia, where James received training in painting. After a stay in England, he returned to America to attend the US Military Academy at West Point in 1851. In 1855, he made his way back to Europe, determined to dedicate himself to painting. Here he settled in Paris at first, but in 1859 moved to London, where he would spend most of the remainder of his life. There he met Dante Gabriel Rossetti and other members of the Pre-Raphaelite Brotherhood, who would have a profound influence on Whistler.It was also in London that Whistler met Joanna Heffernan, the model who would become his lover. By 1865, Whistler had already used her as a model for other paintings, among these Symphony in White, No. 1 and Symphony in White, No. 2. Heffernan supposedly had a strong influence over Whistler; his brother-in-law Francis Seymour Haden refused a dinner invitation in the winter of 1863–64 due to her dominant presence in the household. In January 1864, Whistler's mother Anna – later depicted in the painting Arrangement in Grey and Black – arrived to stay with her son in London. As a result, Heffernan had to move out of the apartment, and only visited as a model. Still, Heffernan's presence displeased Whistler's mother, and his relationship with both women became strained.

Category:Paintings by James McNeill Whistler

Category:Paintings in the Barber Institute of Fine Arts

:commons:File:Edgar Degas - Portrait de Mlle Eugénie Fiocre.jpg

Symphony in White, No. 2: The Little White Girl

Symphony in White, No. 1: The White Girl

:commons:File:Moore Albert Joseph A Musician.jpg


Symphony in White, No. 3

Prompt: In Symphony in White, No. 3, how is the Background discussed?

James McNeill Whistler was born in the United States in 1834, the son of George Washington Whistler, a railway engineer. In 1843, his father relocated the family to Saint Petersburg, Russia, where James received training in painting. After a stay in England, he returned to America to attend the US Military Academy at West Point in 1851. In 1855, he made his way back to Europe, determined to dedicate himself to painting. Here he settled in Paris at first, but in 1859 moved to London, where he would spend most of the remainder of his life. There he met Dante Gabriel Rossetti and other members of the Pre-Raphaelite Brotherhood, who would have a profound influence on Whistler.It was also in London that Whistler met Joanna Heffernan, the model who would become his lover. By 1865, Whistler had already used her as a model for other paintings, among these Symphony in White, No. 1 and Symphony in White, No. 2. Heffernan supposedly had a strong influence over Whistler; his brother-in-law Francis Seymour Haden refused a dinner invitation in the winter of 1863–64 due to her dominant presence in the household. In January 1864, Whistler's mother Anna – later depicted in the painting Arrangement in Grey and Black – arrived to stay with her son in London. As a result, Heffernan had to move out of the apartment, and only visited as a model. Still, Heffernan's presence displeased Whistler's mother, and his relationship with both women became strained.

Category:Paintings by James McNeill Whistler

Category:Paintings in the Barber Institute of Fine Arts

:commons:File:Edgar Degas - Portrait de Mlle Eugénie Fiocre.jpg

Symphony in White, No. 2: The Little White Girl

Symphony in White, No. 1: The White Girl

:commons:File:Moore Albert Joseph A Musician.jpg


Symphony in White, No. 3

Prompt: Focus on Symphony in White, No. 3 and explain the Creation and reception.

Whistler started on Symphony in White, No. 3 perhaps as early as July 1865. It was the last of his paintings for which Heffernan was a model. He used Milly Jones, the wife of an actor friend, as the second model for the painting. By the middle of August, he had a complete sketch ready, and he continued work on the painting into September. Whistler kept reworking it, however, and it was not until 1867 that he considered it finished. He painted over the final "5" in the date, and replaced it with a "7", to mark the changes it had undergone. In March 1867, William Michael Rossetti wrote of seeing the painting in Whistler's studio, and mentioned that it was previously called The Two Little White Girls. It then went on display at the Royal Academy.The work was greatly admired by Whistler's colleagues, including Henri Fantin-Latour, Alfred Stevens, James Tissot and Edgar Degas. For Degas, the painting served as an inspiration for his own portrait of Eugénie Fiocre in the ballet La Source. Some critics, however, were confused by the title. Philip Hamerton, writing for the Saturday Review on 1 June 1867, remarked:In the "Symphony in White No. III." by Mr. Whistler there are many dainty varieties of tint, but it is not precisely a symphony in white. One lady has a yellowish dress and brown hair and a bit of blue ribbon, the other has a red fan, and there are flowers and green leaves. There is a girl in white on a white sofa, but even this girl has reddish hair; and of course there is the flesh colour of the complexions.Whistler was always belligerent in his response to critics. He wrote a letter to the editor that the newspaper would not print, but was later reprinted by Whistler himself in his book The Gentle Art of Making Enemies:How pleasing that such profound prattle should inevitably find its place in print!...Bon Dieu! did this wise person expect white hair and chalked faces ? And does he then, in his astounding consequence, believe that a symphony in F contains no other note, but shall be a continued repetition of F, F, F ? . . . Fool!The painting was originally bought by the wealthy art collector Louis Huth, who later also commissioned Whistler to paint a portrait of his wife. It is in the ownership of the Barber Institute of Fine Arts, in Birmingham, England.

Category:Paintings by James McNeill Whistler

Category:Paintings in the Barber Institute of Fine Arts

:commons:File:Edgar Degas - Portrait de Mlle Eugénie Fiocre.jpg

Symphony in White, No. 2: The Little White Girl

Symphony in White, No. 1: The White Girl

:commons:File:Moore Albert Joseph A Musician.jpg


Symphony in White, No. 3

Prompt: Explain the Creation and reception of this artwork, Symphony in White, No. 3.

Whistler started on Symphony in White, No. 3 perhaps as early as July 1865. It was the last of his paintings for which Heffernan was a model. He used Milly Jones, the wife of an actor friend, as the second model for the painting. By the middle of August, he had a complete sketch ready, and he continued work on the painting into September. Whistler kept reworking it, however, and it was not until 1867 that he considered it finished. He painted over the final "5" in the date, and replaced it with a "7", to mark the changes it had undergone. In March 1867, William Michael Rossetti wrote of seeing the painting in Whistler's studio, and mentioned that it was previously called The Two Little White Girls. It then went on display at the Royal Academy.The work was greatly admired by Whistler's colleagues, including Henri Fantin-Latour, Alfred Stevens, James Tissot and Edgar Degas. For Degas, the painting served as an inspiration for his own portrait of Eugénie Fiocre in the ballet La Source. Some critics, however, were confused by the title. Philip Hamerton, writing for the Saturday Review on 1 June 1867, remarked:In the "Symphony in White No. III." by Mr. Whistler there are many dainty varieties of tint, but it is not precisely a symphony in white. One lady has a yellowish dress and brown hair and a bit of blue ribbon, the other has a red fan, and there are flowers and green leaves. There is a girl in white on a white sofa, but even this girl has reddish hair; and of course there is the flesh colour of the complexions.Whistler was always belligerent in his response to critics. He wrote a letter to the editor that the newspaper would not print, but was later reprinted by Whistler himself in his book The Gentle Art of Making Enemies:How pleasing that such profound prattle should inevitably find its place in print!...Bon Dieu! did this wise person expect white hair and chalked faces ? And does he then, in his astounding consequence, believe that a symphony in F contains no other note, but shall be a continued repetition of F, F, F ? . . . Fool!The painting was originally bought by the wealthy art collector Louis Huth, who later also commissioned Whistler to paint a portrait of his wife. It is in the ownership of the Barber Institute of Fine Arts, in Birmingham, England.

Category:Paintings by James McNeill Whistler

Category:Paintings in the Barber Institute of Fine Arts

:commons:File:Edgar Degas - Portrait de Mlle Eugénie Fiocre.jpg

Symphony in White, No. 2: The Little White Girl

Symphony in White, No. 1: The White Girl

:commons:File:Moore Albert Joseph A Musician.jpg


Symphony in White, No. 3

Prompt: How does Symphony in White, No. 3 explain its Creation and reception?

Whistler started on Symphony in White, No. 3 perhaps as early as July 1865. It was the last of his paintings for which Heffernan was a model. He used Milly Jones, the wife of an actor friend, as the second model for the painting. By the middle of August, he had a complete sketch ready, and he continued work on the painting into September. Whistler kept reworking it, however, and it was not until 1867 that he considered it finished. He painted over the final "5" in the date, and replaced it with a "7", to mark the changes it had undergone. In March 1867, William Michael Rossetti wrote of seeing the painting in Whistler's studio, and mentioned that it was previously called The Two Little White Girls. It then went on display at the Royal Academy.The work was greatly admired by Whistler's colleagues, including Henri Fantin-Latour, Alfred Stevens, James Tissot and Edgar Degas. For Degas, the painting served as an inspiration for his own portrait of Eugénie Fiocre in the ballet La Source. Some critics, however, were confused by the title. Philip Hamerton, writing for the Saturday Review on 1 June 1867, remarked:In the "Symphony in White No. III." by Mr. Whistler there are many dainty varieties of tint, but it is not precisely a symphony in white. One lady has a yellowish dress and brown hair and a bit of blue ribbon, the other has a red fan, and there are flowers and green leaves. There is a girl in white on a white sofa, but even this girl has reddish hair; and of course there is the flesh colour of the complexions.Whistler was always belligerent in his response to critics. He wrote a letter to the editor that the newspaper would not print, but was later reprinted by Whistler himself in his book The Gentle Art of Making Enemies:How pleasing that such profound prattle should inevitably find its place in print!...Bon Dieu! did this wise person expect white hair and chalked faces ? And does he then, in his astounding consequence, believe that a symphony in F contains no other note, but shall be a continued repetition of F, F, F ? . . . Fool!The painting was originally bought by the wealthy art collector Louis Huth, who later also commissioned Whistler to paint a portrait of his wife. It is in the ownership of the Barber Institute of Fine Arts, in Birmingham, England.

Category:Paintings by James McNeill Whistler

Category:Paintings in the Barber Institute of Fine Arts

:commons:File:Edgar Degas - Portrait de Mlle Eugénie Fiocre.jpg

Symphony in White, No. 2: The Little White Girl

Symphony in White, No. 1: The White Girl

:commons:File:Moore Albert Joseph A Musician.jpg


Symphony in White, No. 3

Prompt: In Symphony in White, No. 3, how is the Creation and reception discussed?

Whistler started on Symphony in White, No. 3 perhaps as early as July 1865. It was the last of his paintings for which Heffernan was a model. He used Milly Jones, the wife of an actor friend, as the second model for the painting. By the middle of August, he had a complete sketch ready, and he continued work on the painting into September. Whistler kept reworking it, however, and it was not until 1867 that he considered it finished. He painted over the final "5" in the date, and replaced it with a "7", to mark the changes it had undergone. In March 1867, William Michael Rossetti wrote of seeing the painting in Whistler's studio, and mentioned that it was previously called The Two Little White Girls. It then went on display at the Royal Academy.The work was greatly admired by Whistler's colleagues, including Henri Fantin-Latour, Alfred Stevens, James Tissot and Edgar Degas. For Degas, the painting served as an inspiration for his own portrait of Eugénie Fiocre in the ballet La Source. Some critics, however, were confused by the title. Philip Hamerton, writing for the Saturday Review on 1 June 1867, remarked:In the "Symphony in White No. III." by Mr. Whistler there are many dainty varieties of tint, but it is not precisely a symphony in white. One lady has a yellowish dress and brown hair and a bit of blue ribbon, the other has a red fan, and there are flowers and green leaves. There is a girl in white on a white sofa, but even this girl has reddish hair; and of course there is the flesh colour of the complexions.Whistler was always belligerent in his response to critics. He wrote a letter to the editor that the newspaper would not print, but was later reprinted by Whistler himself in his book The Gentle Art of Making Enemies:How pleasing that such profound prattle should inevitably find its place in print!...Bon Dieu! did this wise person expect white hair and chalked faces ? And does he then, in his astounding consequence, believe that a symphony in F contains no other note, but shall be a continued repetition of F, F, F ? . . . Fool!The painting was originally bought by the wealthy art collector Louis Huth, who later also commissioned Whistler to paint a portrait of his wife. It is in the ownership of the Barber Institute of Fine Arts, in Birmingham, England.

Category:Paintings by James McNeill Whistler

Category:Paintings in the Barber Institute of Fine Arts

:commons:File:Edgar Degas - Portrait de Mlle Eugénie Fiocre.jpg

Symphony in White, No. 2: The Little White Girl

Symphony in White, No. 1: The White Girl

:commons:File:Moore Albert Joseph A Musician.jpg


Symphony in White, No. 3

Prompt: Focus on Symphony in White, No. 3 and explain the Composition and interpretation.

Symphony in White, No. 3 shows Heffernan reclining on a sofa with her head rested on her hand, while Jones is seated on the floor, leaning against the sofa. There is a fan on the floor, and a plant bearing white flowers on the right. The fan is an oriental element, and an expression of the artistic trend known as Japonisme which was then prevalent in European art. At the time, Whistler was greatly influenced by his friend and colleague Albert Joseph Moore. The painting bears close resemblances to Moore's roughly contemporary painting A Musician, though at the time the two were working so closely together that it is hard to ascertain exactly who influenced whom.The painter Walter Sickert – a student of Whistler – later described the painting in unflattering terms. In December 1908, five years after Whistler's death, he wrote in the Fortnightly Review:In 'Symphony in White, No. 3,' we get the culbute. A bad picture, lâchons le mot, badly composed, badly drawn, badly painted, the low-water mark of the old manner, before the birth of the new. Folds of drapery are expressed by ribbons of paint in the direction of the folds themselves, with hard edges to them. Only painters can quite understand the depth of technical infamy confessed in this last description. It means that the drapery is no longer painted, but intended.To Whistler himself, however, the painting was not old-fashioned, but rather an expression of something new and innovative. By naming it Symphony in White, No. 3, Whistler highlighted his emphasis on composition, rather than subject matter. The use of a musical title was also an expression of the theory of corresponding arts, which was an idea developed by the French poet Charles Baudelaire. These tendencies became more and more dominant in Whistler's art over time. His two earlier paintings Symphony in White, No. 1 and Symphony in White, No. 2 had originally been titled The White Girl and The Little White Girl respectively, and later been renamed by the artist. Whistler had originally intended to call this work Two Little White Girls, but the development of his artistic philosophy made him change his mind, and from the time of its first exhibition it has been called by its musical title.

Category:Paintings by James McNeill Whistler

Category:Paintings in the Barber Institute of Fine Arts

:commons:File:Edgar Degas - Portrait de Mlle Eugénie Fiocre.jpg

Symphony in White, No. 2: The Little White Girl

Symphony in White, No. 1: The White Girl

:commons:File:Moore Albert Joseph A Musician.jpg


Symphony in White, No. 3

Prompt: Explain the Composition and interpretation of this artwork, Symphony in White, No. 3.

Symphony in White, No. 3 shows Heffernan reclining on a sofa with her head rested on her hand, while Jones is seated on the floor, leaning against the sofa. There is a fan on the floor, and a plant bearing white flowers on the right. The fan is an oriental element, and an expression of the artistic trend known as Japonisme which was then prevalent in European art. At the time, Whistler was greatly influenced by his friend and colleague Albert Joseph Moore. The painting bears close resemblances to Moore's roughly contemporary painting A Musician, though at the time the two were working so closely together that it is hard to ascertain exactly who influenced whom.The painter Walter Sickert – a student of Whistler – later described the painting in unflattering terms. In December 1908, five years after Whistler's death, he wrote in the Fortnightly Review:In 'Symphony in White, No. 3,' we get the culbute. A bad picture, lâchons le mot, badly composed, badly drawn, badly painted, the low-water mark of the old manner, before the birth of the new. Folds of drapery are expressed by ribbons of paint in the direction of the folds themselves, with hard edges to them. Only painters can quite understand the depth of technical infamy confessed in this last description. It means that the drapery is no longer painted, but intended.To Whistler himself, however, the painting was not old-fashioned, but rather an expression of something new and innovative. By naming it Symphony in White, No. 3, Whistler highlighted his emphasis on composition, rather than subject matter. The use of a musical title was also an expression of the theory of corresponding arts, which was an idea developed by the French poet Charles Baudelaire. These tendencies became more and more dominant in Whistler's art over time. His two earlier paintings Symphony in White, No. 1 and Symphony in White, No. 2 had originally been titled The White Girl and The Little White Girl respectively, and later been renamed by the artist. Whistler had originally intended to call this work Two Little White Girls, but the development of his artistic philosophy made him change his mind, and from the time of its first exhibition it has been called by its musical title.

Category:Paintings by James McNeill Whistler

Category:Paintings in the Barber Institute of Fine Arts

:commons:File:Edgar Degas - Portrait de Mlle Eugénie Fiocre.jpg

Symphony in White, No. 2: The Little White Girl

Symphony in White, No. 1: The White Girl

:commons:File:Moore Albert Joseph A Musician.jpg


Symphony in White, No. 3

Prompt: How does Symphony in White, No. 3 explain its Composition and interpretation?

Symphony in White, No. 3 shows Heffernan reclining on a sofa with her head rested on her hand, while Jones is seated on the floor, leaning against the sofa. There is a fan on the floor, and a plant bearing white flowers on the right. The fan is an oriental element, and an expression of the artistic trend known as Japonisme which was then prevalent in European art. At the time, Whistler was greatly influenced by his friend and colleague Albert Joseph Moore. The painting bears close resemblances to Moore's roughly contemporary painting A Musician, though at the time the two were working so closely together that it is hard to ascertain exactly who influenced whom.The painter Walter Sickert – a student of Whistler – later described the painting in unflattering terms. In December 1908, five years after Whistler's death, he wrote in the Fortnightly Review:In 'Symphony in White, No. 3,' we get the culbute. A bad picture, lâchons le mot, badly composed, badly drawn, badly painted, the low-water mark of the old manner, before the birth of the new. Folds of drapery are expressed by ribbons of paint in the direction of the folds themselves, with hard edges to them. Only painters can quite understand the depth of technical infamy confessed in this last description. It means that the drapery is no longer painted, but intended.To Whistler himself, however, the painting was not old-fashioned, but rather an expression of something new and innovative. By naming it Symphony in White, No. 3, Whistler highlighted his emphasis on composition, rather than subject matter. The use of a musical title was also an expression of the theory of corresponding arts, which was an idea developed by the French poet Charles Baudelaire. These tendencies became more and more dominant in Whistler's art over time. His two earlier paintings Symphony in White, No. 1 and Symphony in White, No. 2 had originally been titled The White Girl and The Little White Girl respectively, and later been renamed by the artist. Whistler had originally intended to call this work Two Little White Girls, but the development of his artistic philosophy made him change his mind, and from the time of its first exhibition it has been called by its musical title.

Category:Paintings by James McNeill Whistler

Category:Paintings in the Barber Institute of Fine Arts

:commons:File:Edgar Degas - Portrait de Mlle Eugénie Fiocre.jpg

Symphony in White, No. 2: The Little White Girl

Symphony in White, No. 1: The White Girl

:commons:File:Moore Albert Joseph A Musician.jpg


Symphony in White, No. 3

Prompt: In Symphony in White, No. 3, how is the Composition and interpretation discussed?

Symphony in White, No. 3 shows Heffernan reclining on a sofa with her head rested on her hand, while Jones is seated on the floor, leaning against the sofa. There is a fan on the floor, and a plant bearing white flowers on the right. The fan is an oriental element, and an expression of the artistic trend known as Japonisme which was then prevalent in European art. At the time, Whistler was greatly influenced by his friend and colleague Albert Joseph Moore. The painting bears close resemblances to Moore's roughly contemporary painting A Musician, though at the time the two were working so closely together that it is hard to ascertain exactly who influenced whom.The painter Walter Sickert – a student of Whistler – later described the painting in unflattering terms. In December 1908, five years after Whistler's death, he wrote in the Fortnightly Review:In 'Symphony in White, No. 3,' we get the culbute. A bad picture, lâchons le mot, badly composed, badly drawn, badly painted, the low-water mark of the old manner, before the birth of the new. Folds of drapery are expressed by ribbons of paint in the direction of the folds themselves, with hard edges to them. Only painters can quite understand the depth of technical infamy confessed in this last description. It means that the drapery is no longer painted, but intended.To Whistler himself, however, the painting was not old-fashioned, but rather an expression of something new and innovative. By naming it Symphony in White, No. 3, Whistler highlighted his emphasis on composition, rather than subject matter. The use of a musical title was also an expression of the theory of corresponding arts, which was an idea developed by the French poet Charles Baudelaire. These tendencies became more and more dominant in Whistler's art over time. His two earlier paintings Symphony in White, No. 1 and Symphony in White, No. 2 had originally been titled The White Girl and The Little White Girl respectively, and later been renamed by the artist. Whistler had originally intended to call this work Two Little White Girls, but the development of his artistic philosophy made him change his mind, and from the time of its first exhibition it has been called by its musical title.

Category:Paintings by James McNeill Whistler

Category:Paintings in the Barber Institute of Fine Arts

:commons:File:Edgar Degas - Portrait de Mlle Eugénie Fiocre.jpg

Symphony in White, No. 2: The Little White Girl

Symphony in White, No. 1: The White Girl

:commons:File:Moore Albert Joseph A Musician.jpg


Pyramid of Skulls

Prompt: Focus on Pyramid of Skulls and explain the abstract.

Pyramid of Skulls is a c. 1901 oil on canvas painting by French Post-Impressionist artist Paul Cézanne. It depicts four human skulls stacked in a pyramidal formation, a subject matter that increasingly preoccupied Cézanne in later life.

File:Cezanne - Stilleben mit drei Totenschädel.jpg

Paul Cézanne. ''Three Skulls'', 1902–1906, graphite and watercolor on paper. [[Art Institute of Chicago


Pyramid of Skulls

Prompt: Explain the abstract of this artwork, Pyramid of Skulls.

Pyramid of Skulls is a c. 1901 oil on canvas painting by French Post-Impressionist artist Paul Cézanne. It depicts four human skulls stacked in a pyramidal formation, a subject matter that increasingly preoccupied Cézanne in later life.

File:Cezanne - Stilleben mit drei Totenschädel.jpg

Paul Cézanne. ''Three Skulls'', 1902–1906, graphite and watercolor on paper. [[Art Institute of Chicago


Pyramid of Skulls

Prompt: How does Pyramid of Skulls explain its abstract?

Pyramid of Skulls is a c. 1901 oil on canvas painting by French Post-Impressionist artist Paul Cézanne. It depicts four human skulls stacked in a pyramidal formation, a subject matter that increasingly preoccupied Cézanne in later life.

File:Cezanne - Stilleben mit drei Totenschädel.jpg

Paul Cézanne. ''Three Skulls'', 1902–1906, graphite and watercolor on paper. [[Art Institute of Chicago


Pyramid of Skulls

Prompt: In Pyramid of Skulls, how is the abstract discussed?

Pyramid of Skulls is a c. 1901 oil on canvas painting by French Post-Impressionist artist Paul Cézanne. It depicts four human skulls stacked in a pyramidal formation, a subject matter that increasingly preoccupied Cézanne in later life.

File:Cezanne - Stilleben mit drei Totenschädel.jpg

Paul Cézanne. ''Three Skulls'', 1902–1906, graphite and watercolor on paper. [[Art Institute of Chicago


Pyramid of Skulls

Prompt: Focus on Pyramid of Skulls and explain the Background.

Working in isolation in the last decade of his life, Cézanne frequently alluded to mortality in his letters: "For me, life has begun to be deathly monotonous"; "As for me, I'm old. I won't have time to express myself"; and "I might as well be dead."  It is possible that the death of his mother on October 25, 1897—she had been a protective and supportive influence—accelerated his meditations on mortality, a subject which had obsessed the artist since the late 1870s, but did not find pictorial form for another twenty years. Cézanne's health started to deteriorate at the same time. Cézanne's preoccupation with death was an ongoing theme that can be identified in a number of still life skull paintings that he produced between 1898 and 1905. These paintings, produced in both oils and watercolour, offer a more subtle representation of the traditional theme of vanitas.

File:Cezanne - Stilleben mit drei Totenschädel.jpg

Paul Cézanne. ''Three Skulls'', 1902–1906, graphite and watercolor on paper. [[Art Institute of Chicago


Pyramid of Skulls

Prompt: Explain the Background of this artwork, Pyramid of Skulls.

Working in isolation in the last decade of his life, Cézanne frequently alluded to mortality in his letters: "For me, life has begun to be deathly monotonous"; "As for me, I'm old. I won't have time to express myself"; and "I might as well be dead."  It is possible that the death of his mother on October 25, 1897—she had been a protective and supportive influence—accelerated his meditations on mortality, a subject which had obsessed the artist since the late 1870s, but did not find pictorial form for another twenty years. Cézanne's health started to deteriorate at the same time. Cézanne's preoccupation with death was an ongoing theme that can be identified in a number of still life skull paintings that he produced between 1898 and 1905. These paintings, produced in both oils and watercolour, offer a more subtle representation of the traditional theme of vanitas.

File:Cezanne - Stilleben mit drei Totenschädel.jpg

Paul Cézanne. ''Three Skulls'', 1902–1906, graphite and watercolor on paper. [[Art Institute of Chicago


Pyramid of Skulls

Prompt: How does Pyramid of Skulls explain its Background?

Working in isolation in the last decade of his life, Cézanne frequently alluded to mortality in his letters: "For me, life has begun to be deathly monotonous"; "As for me, I'm old. I won't have time to express myself"; and "I might as well be dead."  It is possible that the death of his mother on October 25, 1897—she had been a protective and supportive influence—accelerated his meditations on mortality, a subject which had obsessed the artist since the late 1870s, but did not find pictorial form for another twenty years. Cézanne's health started to deteriorate at the same time. Cézanne's preoccupation with death was an ongoing theme that can be identified in a number of still life skull paintings that he produced between 1898 and 1905. These paintings, produced in both oils and watercolour, offer a more subtle representation of the traditional theme of vanitas.

File:Cezanne - Stilleben mit drei Totenschädel.jpg

Paul Cézanne. ''Three Skulls'', 1902–1906, graphite and watercolor on paper. [[Art Institute of Chicago


Pyramid of Skulls

Prompt: In Pyramid of Skulls, how is the Background discussed?

Working in isolation in the last decade of his life, Cézanne frequently alluded to mortality in his letters: "For me, life has begun to be deathly monotonous"; "As for me, I'm old. I won't have time to express myself"; and "I might as well be dead."  It is possible that the death of his mother on October 25, 1897—she had been a protective and supportive influence—accelerated his meditations on mortality, a subject which had obsessed the artist since the late 1870s, but did not find pictorial form for another twenty years. Cézanne's health started to deteriorate at the same time. Cézanne's preoccupation with death was an ongoing theme that can be identified in a number of still life skull paintings that he produced between 1898 and 1905. These paintings, produced in both oils and watercolour, offer a more subtle representation of the traditional theme of vanitas.

File:Cezanne - Stilleben mit drei Totenschädel.jpg

Paul Cézanne. ''Three Skulls'', 1902–1906, graphite and watercolor on paper. [[Art Institute of Chicago


Pyramid of Skulls

Prompt: Focus on Pyramid of Skulls and explain the Description.

Pyramid of Skulls is an oil on canvas painting produced in 1901. The subject matter was depicted in a pale light against a dark background. The composition is notable for the closeness of the skulls to the viewer.Cézanne's interest in the subject may have had roots in thoughts other than the contemplation of death. He could have been drawn to the skulls' volumetric forms, just as he was to those of fruits and vases, and he supposedly exclaimed "How beautiful a skull is to paint!" They also share physical similarities with his self-portrayals: "the skulls confront the viewer straight-on in a manner reminiscent of the artist's portraits." In both sets of works the mass of the cranium is emphasized: in the self-portraits the lower half of his face is obscured by his beard, while the skulls lack lower jaws altogether. In both series attention is focused on the round pate and eye sockets. There would have been further reason for the subject to interest Cézanne: skulls were prominent in the homes of Catholics, and Cézanne was a devout Catholic knowledgeable in ancient Christian texts. Human skulls had also long been common accessories in artists' studios. Indeed, the contents of Cézanne's studio were known to include "three skulls, (and) an ivory Christ on an ebony cross" near one another on the mantelpiece. Joachim Gasquet, a friend of the artist, later recalled: On his last mornings he clarified this idea of death into a heap of bony brainpans to which the eyeholes added a bluish notion. I can still hear him reciting to me, one evening along the Arc River, the quatrain by Verlaine:For in this lethargic worldPerpetually prey to old remorseThe only laughter to still make senseIs that of death's heads.Pyramid of Skulls was painted at Cézanne's studio in Aix, where he worked prior to his move into the new Les Lauves studio in September 1902. A visitor to the studio in July 1902 wrote: "In his bedroom, on a narrow table in the middle, I noticed three human skulls facing one another, three beautiful polished ivories. He spoke of a very good painted study that was somewhere in the attic. I wanted to see it." But Cézanne could not find the key to the garret, and blamed his maid for its misplacement.A watercolor study, Three Skulls, at the Art Institute of Chicago, is similar in composition, though relatively more graceful in handling.

File:Cezanne - Stilleben mit drei Totenschädel.jpg

Paul Cézanne. ''Three Skulls'', 1902–1906, graphite and watercolor on paper. [[Art Institute of Chicago


Pyramid of Skulls

Prompt: Explain the Description of this artwork, Pyramid of Skulls.

Pyramid of Skulls is an oil on canvas painting produced in 1901. The subject matter was depicted in a pale light against a dark background. The composition is notable for the closeness of the skulls to the viewer.Cézanne's interest in the subject may have had roots in thoughts other than the contemplation of death. He could have been drawn to the skulls' volumetric forms, just as he was to those of fruits and vases, and he supposedly exclaimed "How beautiful a skull is to paint!" They also share physical similarities with his self-portrayals: "the skulls confront the viewer straight-on in a manner reminiscent of the artist's portraits." In both sets of works the mass of the cranium is emphasized: in the self-portraits the lower half of his face is obscured by his beard, while the skulls lack lower jaws altogether. In both series attention is focused on the round pate and eye sockets. There would have been further reason for the subject to interest Cézanne: skulls were prominent in the homes of Catholics, and Cézanne was a devout Catholic knowledgeable in ancient Christian texts. Human skulls had also long been common accessories in artists' studios. Indeed, the contents of Cézanne's studio were known to include "three skulls, (and) an ivory Christ on an ebony cross" near one another on the mantelpiece. Joachim Gasquet, a friend of the artist, later recalled: On his last mornings he clarified this idea of death into a heap of bony brainpans to which the eyeholes added a bluish notion. I can still hear him reciting to me, one evening along the Arc River, the quatrain by Verlaine:For in this lethargic worldPerpetually prey to old remorseThe only laughter to still make senseIs that of death's heads.Pyramid of Skulls was painted at Cézanne's studio in Aix, where he worked prior to his move into the new Les Lauves studio in September 1902. A visitor to the studio in July 1902 wrote: "In his bedroom, on a narrow table in the middle, I noticed three human skulls facing one another, three beautiful polished ivories. He spoke of a very good painted study that was somewhere in the attic. I wanted to see it." But Cézanne could not find the key to the garret, and blamed his maid for its misplacement.A watercolor study, Three Skulls, at the Art Institute of Chicago, is similar in composition, though relatively more graceful in handling.

File:Cezanne - Stilleben mit drei Totenschädel.jpg

Paul Cézanne. ''Three Skulls'', 1902–1906, graphite and watercolor on paper. [[Art Institute of Chicago


Pyramid of Skulls

Prompt: How does Pyramid of Skulls explain its Description?

Pyramid of Skulls is an oil on canvas painting produced in 1901. The subject matter was depicted in a pale light against a dark background. The composition is notable for the closeness of the skulls to the viewer.Cézanne's interest in the subject may have had roots in thoughts other than the contemplation of death. He could have been drawn to the skulls' volumetric forms, just as he was to those of fruits and vases, and he supposedly exclaimed "How beautiful a skull is to paint!" They also share physical similarities with his self-portrayals: "the skulls confront the viewer straight-on in a manner reminiscent of the artist's portraits." In both sets of works the mass of the cranium is emphasized: in the self-portraits the lower half of his face is obscured by his beard, while the skulls lack lower jaws altogether. In both series attention is focused on the round pate and eye sockets. There would have been further reason for the subject to interest Cézanne: skulls were prominent in the homes of Catholics, and Cézanne was a devout Catholic knowledgeable in ancient Christian texts. Human skulls had also long been common accessories in artists' studios. Indeed, the contents of Cézanne's studio were known to include "three skulls, (and) an ivory Christ on an ebony cross" near one another on the mantelpiece. Joachim Gasquet, a friend of the artist, later recalled: On his last mornings he clarified this idea of death into a heap of bony brainpans to which the eyeholes added a bluish notion. I can still hear him reciting to me, one evening along the Arc River, the quatrain by Verlaine:For in this lethargic worldPerpetually prey to old remorseThe only laughter to still make senseIs that of death's heads.Pyramid of Skulls was painted at Cézanne's studio in Aix, where he worked prior to his move into the new Les Lauves studio in September 1902. A visitor to the studio in July 1902 wrote: "In his bedroom, on a narrow table in the middle, I noticed three human skulls facing one another, three beautiful polished ivories. He spoke of a very good painted study that was somewhere in the attic. I wanted to see it." But Cézanne could not find the key to the garret, and blamed his maid for its misplacement.A watercolor study, Three Skulls, at the Art Institute of Chicago, is similar in composition, though relatively more graceful in handling.

File:Cezanne - Stilleben mit drei Totenschädel.jpg

Paul Cézanne. ''Three Skulls'', 1902–1906, graphite and watercolor on paper. [[Art Institute of Chicago


Pyramid of Skulls

Prompt: In Pyramid of Skulls, how is the Description discussed?

Pyramid of Skulls is an oil on canvas painting produced in 1901. The subject matter was depicted in a pale light against a dark background. The composition is notable for the closeness of the skulls to the viewer.Cézanne's interest in the subject may have had roots in thoughts other than the contemplation of death. He could have been drawn to the skulls' volumetric forms, just as he was to those of fruits and vases, and he supposedly exclaimed "How beautiful a skull is to paint!" They also share physical similarities with his self-portrayals: "the skulls confront the viewer straight-on in a manner reminiscent of the artist's portraits." In both sets of works the mass of the cranium is emphasized: in the self-portraits the lower half of his face is obscured by his beard, while the skulls lack lower jaws altogether. In both series attention is focused on the round pate and eye sockets. There would have been further reason for the subject to interest Cézanne: skulls were prominent in the homes of Catholics, and Cézanne was a devout Catholic knowledgeable in ancient Christian texts. Human skulls had also long been common accessories in artists' studios. Indeed, the contents of Cézanne's studio were known to include "three skulls, (and) an ivory Christ on an ebony cross" near one another on the mantelpiece. Joachim Gasquet, a friend of the artist, later recalled: On his last mornings he clarified this idea of death into a heap of bony brainpans to which the eyeholes added a bluish notion. I can still hear him reciting to me, one evening along the Arc River, the quatrain by Verlaine:For in this lethargic worldPerpetually prey to old remorseThe only laughter to still make senseIs that of death's heads.Pyramid of Skulls was painted at Cézanne's studio in Aix, where he worked prior to his move into the new Les Lauves studio in September 1902. A visitor to the studio in July 1902 wrote: "In his bedroom, on a narrow table in the middle, I noticed three human skulls facing one another, three beautiful polished ivories. He spoke of a very good painted study that was somewhere in the attic. I wanted to see it." But Cézanne could not find the key to the garret, and blamed his maid for its misplacement.A watercolor study, Three Skulls, at the Art Institute of Chicago, is similar in composition, though relatively more graceful in handling.

File:Cezanne - Stilleben mit drei Totenschädel.jpg

Paul Cézanne. ''Three Skulls'', 1902–1906, graphite and watercolor on paper. [[Art Institute of Chicago


Pyramid of Skulls

Prompt: Focus on Pyramid of Skulls and explain the Significance and legacy.

Art historian Françoise Cachin remarked that, "these bony visages all but assault the viewer, displaying an assertiveness very much at odds with the usual reserve of domestic still-life tableaux." Cézanne's skull studies served as inspiration for 20th-century artists like Pablo Picasso and Andy Warhol.

File:Cezanne - Stilleben mit drei Totenschädel.jpg

Paul Cézanne. ''Three Skulls'', 1902–1906, graphite and watercolor on paper. [[Art Institute of Chicago


Pyramid of Skulls

Prompt: Explain the Significance and legacy of this artwork, Pyramid of Skulls.

Art historian Françoise Cachin remarked that, "these bony visages all but assault the viewer, displaying an assertiveness very much at odds with the usual reserve of domestic still-life tableaux." Cézanne's skull studies served as inspiration for 20th-century artists like Pablo Picasso and Andy Warhol.

File:Cezanne - Stilleben mit drei Totenschädel.jpg

Paul Cézanne. ''Three Skulls'', 1902–1906, graphite and watercolor on paper. [[Art Institute of Chicago


Pyramid of Skulls

Prompt: How does Pyramid of Skulls explain its Significance and legacy?

Art historian Françoise Cachin remarked that, "these bony visages all but assault the viewer, displaying an assertiveness very much at odds with the usual reserve of domestic still-life tableaux." Cézanne's skull studies served as inspiration for 20th-century artists like Pablo Picasso and Andy Warhol.

File:Cezanne - Stilleben mit drei Totenschädel.jpg

Paul Cézanne. ''Three Skulls'', 1902–1906, graphite and watercolor on paper. [[Art Institute of Chicago


Pyramid of Skulls

Prompt: In Pyramid of Skulls, how is the Significance and legacy discussed?

Art historian Françoise Cachin remarked that, "these bony visages all but assault the viewer, displaying an assertiveness very much at odds with the usual reserve of domestic still-life tableaux." Cézanne's skull studies served as inspiration for 20th-century artists like Pablo Picasso and Andy Warhol.

File:Cezanne - Stilleben mit drei Totenschädel.jpg

Paul Cézanne. ''Three Skulls'', 1902–1906, graphite and watercolor on paper. [[Art Institute of Chicago


Buhl Altarpiece

Prompt: Focus on Buhl Altarpiece and explain the abstract.

The Buhl Altarpiece (French: Retable de Buhl) is a late 15th-century, Gothic altarpiece of colossal dimensions now kept in the parish church Église Saint-Jean-Baptiste of Buhl in the Haut-Rhin département of France. It was painted by followers of Martin Schongauer, most probably for the convent of the Dominican sisters of Saint Catherine of Colmar, and moved to its present location in the early 19th century. It is classified as a Monument historique by the French Ministry of Culture (see below, History).The altarpiece depicts five scenes from the Passion of Jesus, four scenes from the Life of the Virgin, and a Last Judgment.

St Martin's Church, Colmar#The Isenmann altarpiece

Category:Paintings of the Passion of Jesus

Category:Monuments historiques of Haut-Rhin


Buhl Altarpiece

Prompt: Explain the abstract of this artwork, Buhl Altarpiece.

The Buhl Altarpiece (French: Retable de Buhl) is a late 15th-century, Gothic altarpiece of colossal dimensions now kept in the parish church Église Saint-Jean-Baptiste of Buhl in the Haut-Rhin département of France. It was painted by followers of Martin Schongauer, most probably for the convent of the Dominican sisters of Saint Catherine of Colmar, and moved to its present location in the early 19th century. It is classified as a Monument historique by the French Ministry of Culture (see below, History).The altarpiece depicts five scenes from the Passion of Jesus, four scenes from the Life of the Virgin, and a Last Judgment.

St Martin's Church, Colmar#The Isenmann altarpiece

Category:Paintings of the Passion of Jesus

Category:Monuments historiques of Haut-Rhin


Buhl Altarpiece

Prompt: How does Buhl Altarpiece explain its abstract?

The Buhl Altarpiece (French: Retable de Buhl) is a late 15th-century, Gothic altarpiece of colossal dimensions now kept in the parish church Église Saint-Jean-Baptiste of Buhl in the Haut-Rhin département of France. It was painted by followers of Martin Schongauer, most probably for the convent of the Dominican sisters of Saint Catherine of Colmar, and moved to its present location in the early 19th century. It is classified as a Monument historique by the French Ministry of Culture (see below, History).The altarpiece depicts five scenes from the Passion of Jesus, four scenes from the Life of the Virgin, and a Last Judgment.

St Martin's Church, Colmar#The Isenmann altarpiece

Category:Paintings of the Passion of Jesus

Category:Monuments historiques of Haut-Rhin


Buhl Altarpiece

Prompt: In Buhl Altarpiece, how is the abstract discussed?

The Buhl Altarpiece (French: Retable de Buhl) is a late 15th-century, Gothic altarpiece of colossal dimensions now kept in the parish church Église Saint-Jean-Baptiste of Buhl in the Haut-Rhin département of France. It was painted by followers of Martin Schongauer, most probably for the convent of the Dominican sisters of Saint Catherine of Colmar, and moved to its present location in the early 19th century. It is classified as a Monument historique by the French Ministry of Culture (see below, History).The altarpiece depicts five scenes from the Passion of Jesus, four scenes from the Life of the Virgin, and a Last Judgment.

St Martin's Church, Colmar#The Isenmann altarpiece

Category:Paintings of the Passion of Jesus

Category:Monuments historiques of Haut-Rhin


Buhl Altarpiece

Prompt: Focus on Buhl Altarpiece and explain the History.

The Couvent Sainte-Catherine de Colmar, the convent of the Dominican sisters of Saint Catherine (French: Catherinettes) of Colmar was established in 1310. The convent's church for which the Buhl altarpiece was originally painted was completed in 1436, replacing a smaller building from 1371. The Gothic building was desecrated in 1792 and partly destroyed in the 19th century. Classified as a Monument historique since 1903, it is now used for different purposes by the municipality.The colourful Buhl altarpiece is the work of a group of followers of Martin Schongauer, who drew their inspiration both from his woodcuts and from his paintings, especially the Altarpiece of the Dominicans, painted in 1480 for the church of the Dominican friars of Colmar and today kept in the Unterlinden Museum of the same town. The Buhl painters closely followed their model's designs, but on a larger scale and in a simpler and technically cruder manner. While it is not documented that the altarpiece was commissioned by the convent of Saint Catherine, the closeness to the designs of Schongauer but also, to a lesser degree, of Caspar Isenmann (the panel depicting the Flagellation of Christ is reminding of the same scene in the altarpiece of St Martin's Church) indicate without a doubt that it has been painted in Colmar; furthermore, both Saint Catherine and Saint Ursula, who figure prominently in the Crucifixion scene, were particularly venerated by the Dominican sisters of Saint Catherine.It has been suggested that Schongauer's pupil Urbain Huter (1471–1501) may have been one of the authors but without any solid evidence.The altarpiece is recorded in Buhl since 1835. The current parish church, a Neo-Romanesque building with a long and imposing nave and a short and narrow choir (in which the altarpiece is displayed) was built in three phases between 1868 and 1899. The altarpiece left Buhl twice, once during World War II, when it was hidden in Périgueux and once from 1966 until 1971, when it was restored in Paris, then displayed in the Unterlinden Museum in Colmar. A local association of the "Friends of the Buhl Altarpiece" (Amis du retable de Buhl) was founded in 1988.The altarpiece is classified as a Monument historique by the French Ministry of Culture on terms that may appear confusing. It is classified as an object (mobilier) since 1978 according to the digital database of the Ministry, or since 1967 according to the Inventaire général du patrimoine culturel (General inventory of the cultural heritage) of the Ministry. It is also classified since 1863 as a part of the building (immeuble) in which it is displayed, regardless of the fact that the church in question has been entirely rebuilt after that date.

St Martin's Church, Colmar#The Isenmann altarpiece

Category:Paintings of the Passion of Jesus

Category:Monuments historiques of Haut-Rhin


Buhl Altarpiece

Prompt: Explain the History of this artwork, Buhl Altarpiece.

The Couvent Sainte-Catherine de Colmar, the convent of the Dominican sisters of Saint Catherine (French: Catherinettes) of Colmar was established in 1310. The convent's church for which the Buhl altarpiece was originally painted was completed in 1436, replacing a smaller building from 1371. The Gothic building was desecrated in 1792 and partly destroyed in the 19th century. Classified as a Monument historique since 1903, it is now used for different purposes by the municipality.The colourful Buhl altarpiece is the work of a group of followers of Martin Schongauer, who drew their inspiration both from his woodcuts and from his paintings, especially the Altarpiece of the Dominicans, painted in 1480 for the church of the Dominican friars of Colmar and today kept in the Unterlinden Museum of the same town. The Buhl painters closely followed their model's designs, but on a larger scale and in a simpler and technically cruder manner. While it is not documented that the altarpiece was commissioned by the convent of Saint Catherine, the closeness to the designs of Schongauer but also, to a lesser degree, of Caspar Isenmann (the panel depicting the Flagellation of Christ is reminding of the same scene in the altarpiece of St Martin's Church) indicate without a doubt that it has been painted in Colmar; furthermore, both Saint Catherine and Saint Ursula, who figure prominently in the Crucifixion scene, were particularly venerated by the Dominican sisters of Saint Catherine.It has been suggested that Schongauer's pupil Urbain Huter (1471–1501) may have been one of the authors but without any solid evidence.The altarpiece is recorded in Buhl since 1835. The current parish church, a Neo-Romanesque building with a long and imposing nave and a short and narrow choir (in which the altarpiece is displayed) was built in three phases between 1868 and 1899. The altarpiece left Buhl twice, once during World War II, when it was hidden in Périgueux and once from 1966 until 1971, when it was restored in Paris, then displayed in the Unterlinden Museum in Colmar. A local association of the "Friends of the Buhl Altarpiece" (Amis du retable de Buhl) was founded in 1988.The altarpiece is classified as a Monument historique by the French Ministry of Culture on terms that may appear confusing. It is classified as an object (mobilier) since 1978 according to the digital database of the Ministry, or since 1967 according to the Inventaire général du patrimoine culturel (General inventory of the cultural heritage) of the Ministry. It is also classified since 1863 as a part of the building (immeuble) in which it is displayed, regardless of the fact that the church in question has been entirely rebuilt after that date.

St Martin's Church, Colmar#The Isenmann altarpiece

Category:Paintings of the Passion of Jesus

Category:Monuments historiques of Haut-Rhin


Buhl Altarpiece

Prompt: How does Buhl Altarpiece explain its History?

The Couvent Sainte-Catherine de Colmar, the convent of the Dominican sisters of Saint Catherine (French: Catherinettes) of Colmar was established in 1310. The convent's church for which the Buhl altarpiece was originally painted was completed in 1436, replacing a smaller building from 1371. The Gothic building was desecrated in 1792 and partly destroyed in the 19th century. Classified as a Monument historique since 1903, it is now used for different purposes by the municipality.The colourful Buhl altarpiece is the work of a group of followers of Martin Schongauer, who drew their inspiration both from his woodcuts and from his paintings, especially the Altarpiece of the Dominicans, painted in 1480 for the church of the Dominican friars of Colmar and today kept in the Unterlinden Museum of the same town. The Buhl painters closely followed their model's designs, but on a larger scale and in a simpler and technically cruder manner. While it is not documented that the altarpiece was commissioned by the convent of Saint Catherine, the closeness to the designs of Schongauer but also, to a lesser degree, of Caspar Isenmann (the panel depicting the Flagellation of Christ is reminding of the same scene in the altarpiece of St Martin's Church) indicate without a doubt that it has been painted in Colmar; furthermore, both Saint Catherine and Saint Ursula, who figure prominently in the Crucifixion scene, were particularly venerated by the Dominican sisters of Saint Catherine.It has been suggested that Schongauer's pupil Urbain Huter (1471–1501) may have been one of the authors but without any solid evidence.The altarpiece is recorded in Buhl since 1835. The current parish church, a Neo-Romanesque building with a long and imposing nave and a short and narrow choir (in which the altarpiece is displayed) was built in three phases between 1868 and 1899. The altarpiece left Buhl twice, once during World War II, when it was hidden in Périgueux and once from 1966 until 1971, when it was restored in Paris, then displayed in the Unterlinden Museum in Colmar. A local association of the "Friends of the Buhl Altarpiece" (Amis du retable de Buhl) was founded in 1988.The altarpiece is classified as a Monument historique by the French Ministry of Culture on terms that may appear confusing. It is classified as an object (mobilier) since 1978 according to the digital database of the Ministry, or since 1967 according to the Inventaire général du patrimoine culturel (General inventory of the cultural heritage) of the Ministry. It is also classified since 1863 as a part of the building (immeuble) in which it is displayed, regardless of the fact that the church in question has been entirely rebuilt after that date.

St Martin's Church, Colmar#The Isenmann altarpiece

Category:Paintings of the Passion of Jesus

Category:Monuments historiques of Haut-Rhin


Buhl Altarpiece

Prompt: In Buhl Altarpiece, how is the History discussed?

The Couvent Sainte-Catherine de Colmar, the convent of the Dominican sisters of Saint Catherine (French: Catherinettes) of Colmar was established in 1310. The convent's church for which the Buhl altarpiece was originally painted was completed in 1436, replacing a smaller building from 1371. The Gothic building was desecrated in 1792 and partly destroyed in the 19th century. Classified as a Monument historique since 1903, it is now used for different purposes by the municipality.The colourful Buhl altarpiece is the work of a group of followers of Martin Schongauer, who drew their inspiration both from his woodcuts and from his paintings, especially the Altarpiece of the Dominicans, painted in 1480 for the church of the Dominican friars of Colmar and today kept in the Unterlinden Museum of the same town. The Buhl painters closely followed their model's designs, but on a larger scale and in a simpler and technically cruder manner. While it is not documented that the altarpiece was commissioned by the convent of Saint Catherine, the closeness to the designs of Schongauer but also, to a lesser degree, of Caspar Isenmann (the panel depicting the Flagellation of Christ is reminding of the same scene in the altarpiece of St Martin's Church) indicate without a doubt that it has been painted in Colmar; furthermore, both Saint Catherine and Saint Ursula, who figure prominently in the Crucifixion scene, were particularly venerated by the Dominican sisters of Saint Catherine.It has been suggested that Schongauer's pupil Urbain Huter (1471–1501) may have been one of the authors but without any solid evidence.The altarpiece is recorded in Buhl since 1835. The current parish church, a Neo-Romanesque building with a long and imposing nave and a short and narrow choir (in which the altarpiece is displayed) was built in three phases between 1868 and 1899. The altarpiece left Buhl twice, once during World War II, when it was hidden in Périgueux and once from 1966 until 1971, when it was restored in Paris, then displayed in the Unterlinden Museum in Colmar. A local association of the "Friends of the Buhl Altarpiece" (Amis du retable de Buhl) was founded in 1988.The altarpiece is classified as a Monument historique by the French Ministry of Culture on terms that may appear confusing. It is classified as an object (mobilier) since 1978 according to the digital database of the Ministry, or since 1967 according to the Inventaire général du patrimoine culturel (General inventory of the cultural heritage) of the Ministry. It is also classified since 1863 as a part of the building (immeuble) in which it is displayed, regardless of the fact that the church in question has been entirely rebuilt after that date.

St Martin's Church, Colmar#The Isenmann altarpiece

Category:Paintings of the Passion of Jesus

Category:Monuments historiques of Haut-Rhin