Prompt: How does Rue Saint-Honoré, dans l'après-midi. Effet de pluie explain its Provenance?

The painting was bought from Pissarro by the German businessman Julius Cassirer in 1897, and it was inherited by his son Fritz Cassirer and then by Fritz's wife Lilly.  She remarried, but in 1939, as a German Jew, she was forced to sell the painting to Jakob Scheidwimmer, an official of the Reichskammer der bildenden Künste, for the low price of 900 ℛℳ to secure an exit visa, shortly before the outbreak of the Second World War.  The painting was sold at an auction in Berlin in 1943 for 95,000 ℛℳ and disappeared from public view.  In 1958, a German court awarded Lilly Cassirer Neubauer compensation of DM 120,000, the fair market value for the work.In 2005, Lilly's grandson Claude Cassirer and other heirs filed a claim to recover the painting.  In January 2011 the Spanish government denied a request by the US ambassador to return the painting, and in 2015 a Spanish court ruled that the painting belonged to the museum.   In April 2019 the United States District Court for the Central District of California ruled that the painting belongs to Fundación Colección Thyssen-Bornemisza, on the basis that the baron and then the museum did not know it was looted art when they bought it.  While that decision was affirmed by the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in 2020, in September 2021, the U.S. Supreme Court accepted certiorari to review the Ninth Circuit's decision.  The case was heard on January 18, 2022 and on April 21, 2022, the Supreme Court, disagreeing with the decision of the Ninth Circuit's decision, vacated the judgement.  Writing for a unanimous court, Justice Elena Kagan ruled that the lower courts had erred in applying federal common law to resolve the threshold choice of law question of whether the law of Spain or the law of California would control.  The high court held that when hearing non-federal claims under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act, a federal court must apply state law to choice-of-law questions, which in this case meant the law of California.  Therefore, the case was remanded to allow the lower courts to apply the law of California governing conflict of laws, to determine whether a California state court would apply its own substantive property law to the ownership of the painting or would defer to the law of Spain.  Following the Supreme Court's decision, the case was remanded to the Ninth Circuit, which tried to certify the choice-of-law question under California law to the Supreme Court of California. In August 2023, the state supreme court declined to hear that question and sent it back to the Ninth Circuit, meaning that the federal court was required to make an Erie guess as to how a California state court would resolve the question. On January 9, 2024, the Ninth Circuit ruled in favor of the foundation — holding that under the law of California (specifically, a 2010 landmark opinion of the Supreme Court of California involving Terrence McCann), ownership of the painting had to be decided under the law of Spain, rather than the law of California.  The critical difference between the two is that the Civil Code of Spain allows for acquisitive prescription of personal property against the true owner, while California does not recognize adverse possession of personal property.This decision was highly controversial in California.  As a result, on September 16, 2024, Governor Gavin Newsom signed a bill which expressly overrides California's governmental interest test for resolving a conflict of laws in the specific context of "art or personal property taken in cases of political persecution" and instead prescribes that California substantive law will always control.  The bill was enacted as an urgency statute with immediate effect.  This new rule was to apply not only to all new cases going forward, but also to all cases still pending on appeal (including the Cassirer case).

Category:Paintings in the Thyssen-Bornemisza Museum


Prompt: In Rue Saint-Honoré, dans l'après-midi. Effet de pluie, how is the Provenance discussed?

The painting was bought from Pissarro by the German businessman Julius Cassirer in 1897, and it was inherited by his son Fritz Cassirer and then by Fritz's wife Lilly.  She remarried, but in 1939, as a German Jew, she was forced to sell the painting to Jakob Scheidwimmer, an official of the Reichskammer der bildenden Künste, for the low price of 900 ℛℳ to secure an exit visa, shortly before the outbreak of the Second World War.  The painting was sold at an auction in Berlin in 1943 for 95,000 ℛℳ and disappeared from public view.  In 1958, a German court awarded Lilly Cassirer Neubauer compensation of DM 120,000, the fair market value for the work.In 2005, Lilly's grandson Claude Cassirer and other heirs filed a claim to recover the painting.  In January 2011 the Spanish government denied a request by the US ambassador to return the painting, and in 2015 a Spanish court ruled that the painting belonged to the museum.   In April 2019 the United States District Court for the Central District of California ruled that the painting belongs to Fundación Colección Thyssen-Bornemisza, on the basis that the baron and then the museum did not know it was looted art when they bought it.  While that decision was affirmed by the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in 2020, in September 2021, the U.S. Supreme Court accepted certiorari to review the Ninth Circuit's decision.  The case was heard on January 18, 2022 and on April 21, 2022, the Supreme Court, disagreeing with the decision of the Ninth Circuit's decision, vacated the judgement.  Writing for a unanimous court, Justice Elena Kagan ruled that the lower courts had erred in applying federal common law to resolve the threshold choice of law question of whether the law of Spain or the law of California would control.  The high court held that when hearing non-federal claims under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act, a federal court must apply state law to choice-of-law questions, which in this case meant the law of California.  Therefore, the case was remanded to allow the lower courts to apply the law of California governing conflict of laws, to determine whether a California state court would apply its own substantive property law to the ownership of the painting or would defer to the law of Spain.  Following the Supreme Court's decision, the case was remanded to the Ninth Circuit, which tried to certify the choice-of-law question under California law to the Supreme Court of California. In August 2023, the state supreme court declined to hear that question and sent it back to the Ninth Circuit, meaning that the federal court was required to make an Erie guess as to how a California state court would resolve the question. On January 9, 2024, the Ninth Circuit ruled in favor of the foundation — holding that under the law of California (specifically, a 2010 landmark opinion of the Supreme Court of California involving Terrence McCann), ownership of the painting had to be decided under the law of Spain, rather than the law of California.  The critical difference between the two is that the Civil Code of Spain allows for acquisitive prescription of personal property against the true owner, while California does not recognize adverse possession of personal property.This decision was highly controversial in California.  As a result, on September 16, 2024, Governor Gavin Newsom signed a bill which expressly overrides California's governmental interest test for resolving a conflict of laws in the specific context of "art or personal property taken in cases of political persecution" and instead prescribes that California substantive law will always control.  The bill was enacted as an urgency statute with immediate effect.  This new rule was to apply not only to all new cases going forward, but also to all cases still pending on appeal (including the Cassirer case).

Category:Paintings in the Thyssen-Bornemisza Museum


Piss (Černý)

Prompt: Focus on Piss (Černý) and explain the abstract.

Piss (Czech: Čůrající postavy) is an outdoor 2004 sculpture and fountain by Czech artist David Černý, installed outside the Franz Kafka Museum in Malá Strana, Prague, Czech Republic.

Category:Fountains in the Czech Republic

Category:Kinetic sculptures in the Czech Republic

Category:Bronze sculptures in the Czech Republic

Category:2004 establishments in the Czech Republic


Piss (Černý)

Prompt: Explain the abstract of this artwork, Piss (Černý).

Piss (Czech: Čůrající postavy) is an outdoor 2004 sculpture and fountain by Czech artist David Černý, installed outside the Franz Kafka Museum in Malá Strana, Prague, Czech Republic.

Category:Fountains in the Czech Republic

Category:Kinetic sculptures in the Czech Republic

Category:Bronze sculptures in the Czech Republic

Category:2004 establishments in the Czech Republic


Piss (Černý)

Prompt: How does Piss (Černý) explain its abstract?

Piss (Czech: Čůrající postavy) is an outdoor 2004 sculpture and fountain by Czech artist David Černý, installed outside the Franz Kafka Museum in Malá Strana, Prague, Czech Republic.

Category:Fountains in the Czech Republic

Category:Kinetic sculptures in the Czech Republic

Category:Bronze sculptures in the Czech Republic

Category:2004 establishments in the Czech Republic


Piss (Černý)

Prompt: In Piss (Černý), how is the abstract discussed?

Piss (Czech: Čůrající postavy) is an outdoor 2004 sculpture and fountain by Czech artist David Černý, installed outside the Franz Kafka Museum in Malá Strana, Prague, Czech Republic.

Category:Fountains in the Czech Republic

Category:Kinetic sculptures in the Czech Republic

Category:Bronze sculptures in the Czech Republic

Category:2004 establishments in the Czech Republic


Piss (Černý)

Prompt: Focus on Piss (Černý) and explain the Description.

The fountain's basin is made of bronze and shaped like the Czech Republic. Standing in the fountain, opposite one another, are mechanical statues of men, standing 210 centimetres (6 ft 11 in) tall with bronze penises, urinating. Visitors to the area can command the men to write messages into the water via SMS.

Category:Fountains in the Czech Republic

Category:Kinetic sculptures in the Czech Republic

Category:Bronze sculptures in the Czech Republic

Category:2004 establishments in the Czech Republic


Piss (Černý)

Prompt: Explain the Description of this artwork, Piss (Černý).

The fountain's basin is made of bronze and shaped like the Czech Republic. Standing in the fountain, opposite one another, are mechanical statues of men, standing 210 centimetres (6 ft 11 in) tall with bronze penises, urinating. Visitors to the area can command the men to write messages into the water via SMS.

Category:Fountains in the Czech Republic

Category:Kinetic sculptures in the Czech Republic

Category:Bronze sculptures in the Czech Republic

Category:2004 establishments in the Czech Republic


Piss (Černý)

Prompt: How does Piss (Černý) explain its Description?

The fountain's basin is made of bronze and shaped like the Czech Republic. Standing in the fountain, opposite one another, are mechanical statues of men, standing 210 centimetres (6 ft 11 in) tall with bronze penises, urinating. Visitors to the area can command the men to write messages into the water via SMS.

Category:Fountains in the Czech Republic

Category:Kinetic sculptures in the Czech Republic

Category:Bronze sculptures in the Czech Republic

Category:2004 establishments in the Czech Republic


Piss (Černý)

Prompt: In Piss (Černý), how is the Description discussed?

The fountain's basin is made of bronze and shaped like the Czech Republic. Standing in the fountain, opposite one another, are mechanical statues of men, standing 210 centimetres (6 ft 11 in) tall with bronze penises, urinating. Visitors to the area can command the men to write messages into the water via SMS.

Category:Fountains in the Czech Republic

Category:Kinetic sculptures in the Czech Republic

Category:Bronze sculptures in the Czech Republic

Category:2004 establishments in the Czech Republic


Piss (Černý)

Prompt: Focus on Piss (Černý) and explain the Reception.

The Prague Post ranked Piss number one in their article, "Top 10 strangest statues in Prague", in which Ada von Kayser described the work as "both controversial and amusing".

Category:Fountains in the Czech Republic

Category:Kinetic sculptures in the Czech Republic

Category:Bronze sculptures in the Czech Republic

Category:2004 establishments in the Czech Republic


Piss (Černý)

Prompt: Explain the Reception of this artwork, Piss (Černý).

The Prague Post ranked Piss number one in their article, "Top 10 strangest statues in Prague", in which Ada von Kayser described the work as "both controversial and amusing".

Category:Fountains in the Czech Republic

Category:Kinetic sculptures in the Czech Republic

Category:Bronze sculptures in the Czech Republic

Category:2004 establishments in the Czech Republic


Piss (Černý)

Prompt: How does Piss (Černý) explain its Reception?

The Prague Post ranked Piss number one in their article, "Top 10 strangest statues in Prague", in which Ada von Kayser described the work as "both controversial and amusing".

Category:Fountains in the Czech Republic

Category:Kinetic sculptures in the Czech Republic

Category:Bronze sculptures in the Czech Republic

Category:2004 establishments in the Czech Republic


Piss (Černý)

Prompt: In Piss (Černý), how is the Reception discussed?

The Prague Post ranked Piss number one in their article, "Top 10 strangest statues in Prague", in which Ada von Kayser described the work as "both controversial and amusing".

Category:Fountains in the Czech Republic

Category:Kinetic sculptures in the Czech Republic

Category:Bronze sculptures in the Czech Republic

Category:2004 establishments in the Czech Republic


The Crossing of the Red Sea (Poussin)

Prompt: Focus on The Crossing of the Red Sea (Poussin) and explain the abstract.

The Crossing of the Red Sea is an oil on canvas painting by Nicolas Poussin, produced between 1633 and 1634. It depicts the crossing of the Red Sea by the Israelites, from chapter 14 of the book of Exodus. It is held at the National Gallery of Victoria, in Melbourne.

Category:Paintings in the National Gallery of Victoria


The Crossing of the Red Sea (Poussin)

Prompt: Explain the abstract of this artwork, The Crossing of the Red Sea (Poussin).

The Crossing of the Red Sea is an oil on canvas painting by Nicolas Poussin, produced between 1633 and 1634. It depicts the crossing of the Red Sea by the Israelites, from chapter 14 of the book of Exodus. It is held at the National Gallery of Victoria, in Melbourne.

Category:Paintings in the National Gallery of Victoria


The Crossing of the Red Sea (Poussin)

Prompt: How does The Crossing of the Red Sea (Poussin) explain its abstract?

The Crossing of the Red Sea is an oil on canvas painting by Nicolas Poussin, produced between 1633 and 1634. It depicts the crossing of the Red Sea by the Israelites, from chapter 14 of the book of Exodus. It is held at the National Gallery of Victoria, in Melbourne.

Category:Paintings in the National Gallery of Victoria


The Crossing of the Red Sea (Poussin)

Prompt: In The Crossing of the Red Sea (Poussin), how is the abstract discussed?

The Crossing of the Red Sea is an oil on canvas painting by Nicolas Poussin, produced between 1633 and 1634. It depicts the crossing of the Red Sea by the Israelites, from chapter 14 of the book of Exodus. It is held at the National Gallery of Victoria, in Melbourne.

Category:Paintings in the National Gallery of Victoria


The Crossing of the Red Sea (Poussin)

Prompt: Focus on The Crossing of the Red Sea (Poussin) and explain the History.

It was made as part of a pair of paintings (the other being The Adoration of the Golden Calf) commissioned by Amadeo dal Pozzo, Marchese di Voghera of Turin, a cousin to Cassiano dal Pozzo, Poussin's main sponsor in Rome. By 1685 the pair had passed to the Chevalier de Lorraine and in 1710 they were bought by Benigne de Ragois de Bretonvillers.In 1741 the pair was bought from Samuel by Sir Jacob Bouverie, whose son William became the first Earl of Radnor. The Earls of Radnor owned the pair from then until 1945, when it was split for the first time and The Adoration of the Golden Calf was sold to the National Gallery in London. The Crossing of the Red Sea was acquired by Kenneth Clark for the National Gallery of Victoria in 1948 using money from the Felton Bequest, a fund originally left to the gallery in 1904 by the industrialist Alfred Felton. In 2011 it underwent a major conservation project.The dating of The Crossing of the Red Sea by Nicholas Poussin was one of scholarly debate, as the time frame in which the work was produced in relation to the other accompanying works was originally speculated. The work was initially believed to have been made within a short time after The Adoration of The Golden Calf, during the period of 1635–1638. Which rightfully placed both works at having been created during the time before Poussin departed from Rome, Italy where the works were commissioned to Paris, France. Without any evidence to contradict the timeframe of the works creation was generally accepted by the broader art historian community for generations. Though over time and in spite of this acceptance, a vocal minority has argued that The Crossing of the Red Sea should be dated as an early work due to the stylistic issues present which were notably absent from Poussins works after The Adoration of The Golden Calf. Officially establishing the works origins as a point of academic contention, though it was not until later evidence arose to suggest otherwise that this claim was brought forth for academic discussion. The dating method used on the works consisted of analyzing sketches and drawings which were believed to be precursors to The Crossing of the Red Sea, due to their stylings and themes. Upon closer inspection some art historians have come to believe that the sketches argued to be the beginnings of The Crossing of the Red Sea, are instead related to an unknown work believed to have been made in 1647–1648. The reasoning behind the debate over the origins of the work is due to a desire for understanding the works relation within the larger biblical collections created by Poussin. Establishing the thematic context and progression throughout Poussins works. This is further exemplified by the artists desire and intentions when meticulously crafting the works. As the two commissioned works prior to their completion were publicly perceived as being connected, leading to deliberate stylistic and design choices to highlight the contrasts between the works when examined together. This discussion ultimately culminated in the current believed origin of the piece dating its creation within 1633–1634.

Category:Paintings in the National Gallery of Victoria


The Crossing of the Red Sea (Poussin)

Prompt: Explain the History of this artwork, The Crossing of the Red Sea (Poussin).

It was made as part of a pair of paintings (the other being The Adoration of the Golden Calf) commissioned by Amadeo dal Pozzo, Marchese di Voghera of Turin, a cousin to Cassiano dal Pozzo, Poussin's main sponsor in Rome. By 1685 the pair had passed to the Chevalier de Lorraine and in 1710 they were bought by Benigne de Ragois de Bretonvillers.In 1741 the pair was bought from Samuel by Sir Jacob Bouverie, whose son William became the first Earl of Radnor. The Earls of Radnor owned the pair from then until 1945, when it was split for the first time and The Adoration of the Golden Calf was sold to the National Gallery in London. The Crossing of the Red Sea was acquired by Kenneth Clark for the National Gallery of Victoria in 1948 using money from the Felton Bequest, a fund originally left to the gallery in 1904 by the industrialist Alfred Felton. In 2011 it underwent a major conservation project.The dating of The Crossing of the Red Sea by Nicholas Poussin was one of scholarly debate, as the time frame in which the work was produced in relation to the other accompanying works was originally speculated. The work was initially believed to have been made within a short time after The Adoration of The Golden Calf, during the period of 1635–1638. Which rightfully placed both works at having been created during the time before Poussin departed from Rome, Italy where the works were commissioned to Paris, France. Without any evidence to contradict the timeframe of the works creation was generally accepted by the broader art historian community for generations. Though over time and in spite of this acceptance, a vocal minority has argued that The Crossing of the Red Sea should be dated as an early work due to the stylistic issues present which were notably absent from Poussins works after The Adoration of The Golden Calf. Officially establishing the works origins as a point of academic contention, though it was not until later evidence arose to suggest otherwise that this claim was brought forth for academic discussion. The dating method used on the works consisted of analyzing sketches and drawings which were believed to be precursors to The Crossing of the Red Sea, due to their stylings and themes. Upon closer inspection some art historians have come to believe that the sketches argued to be the beginnings of The Crossing of the Red Sea, are instead related to an unknown work believed to have been made in 1647–1648. The reasoning behind the debate over the origins of the work is due to a desire for understanding the works relation within the larger biblical collections created by Poussin. Establishing the thematic context and progression throughout Poussins works. This is further exemplified by the artists desire and intentions when meticulously crafting the works. As the two commissioned works prior to their completion were publicly perceived as being connected, leading to deliberate stylistic and design choices to highlight the contrasts between the works when examined together. This discussion ultimately culminated in the current believed origin of the piece dating its creation within 1633–1634.

Category:Paintings in the National Gallery of Victoria


The Crossing of the Red Sea (Poussin)

Prompt: How does The Crossing of the Red Sea (Poussin) explain its History?

It was made as part of a pair of paintings (the other being The Adoration of the Golden Calf) commissioned by Amadeo dal Pozzo, Marchese di Voghera of Turin, a cousin to Cassiano dal Pozzo, Poussin's main sponsor in Rome. By 1685 the pair had passed to the Chevalier de Lorraine and in 1710 they were bought by Benigne de Ragois de Bretonvillers.In 1741 the pair was bought from Samuel by Sir Jacob Bouverie, whose son William became the first Earl of Radnor. The Earls of Radnor owned the pair from then until 1945, when it was split for the first time and The Adoration of the Golden Calf was sold to the National Gallery in London. The Crossing of the Red Sea was acquired by Kenneth Clark for the National Gallery of Victoria in 1948 using money from the Felton Bequest, a fund originally left to the gallery in 1904 by the industrialist Alfred Felton. In 2011 it underwent a major conservation project.The dating of The Crossing of the Red Sea by Nicholas Poussin was one of scholarly debate, as the time frame in which the work was produced in relation to the other accompanying works was originally speculated. The work was initially believed to have been made within a short time after The Adoration of The Golden Calf, during the period of 1635–1638. Which rightfully placed both works at having been created during the time before Poussin departed from Rome, Italy where the works were commissioned to Paris, France. Without any evidence to contradict the timeframe of the works creation was generally accepted by the broader art historian community for generations. Though over time and in spite of this acceptance, a vocal minority has argued that The Crossing of the Red Sea should be dated as an early work due to the stylistic issues present which were notably absent from Poussins works after The Adoration of The Golden Calf. Officially establishing the works origins as a point of academic contention, though it was not until later evidence arose to suggest otherwise that this claim was brought forth for academic discussion. The dating method used on the works consisted of analyzing sketches and drawings which were believed to be precursors to The Crossing of the Red Sea, due to their stylings and themes. Upon closer inspection some art historians have come to believe that the sketches argued to be the beginnings of The Crossing of the Red Sea, are instead related to an unknown work believed to have been made in 1647–1648. The reasoning behind the debate over the origins of the work is due to a desire for understanding the works relation within the larger biblical collections created by Poussin. Establishing the thematic context and progression throughout Poussins works. This is further exemplified by the artists desire and intentions when meticulously crafting the works. As the two commissioned works prior to their completion were publicly perceived as being connected, leading to deliberate stylistic and design choices to highlight the contrasts between the works when examined together. This discussion ultimately culminated in the current believed origin of the piece dating its creation within 1633–1634.

Category:Paintings in the National Gallery of Victoria


The Crossing of the Red Sea (Poussin)

Prompt: In The Crossing of the Red Sea (Poussin), how is the History discussed?

It was made as part of a pair of paintings (the other being The Adoration of the Golden Calf) commissioned by Amadeo dal Pozzo, Marchese di Voghera of Turin, a cousin to Cassiano dal Pozzo, Poussin's main sponsor in Rome. By 1685 the pair had passed to the Chevalier de Lorraine and in 1710 they were bought by Benigne de Ragois de Bretonvillers.In 1741 the pair was bought from Samuel by Sir Jacob Bouverie, whose son William became the first Earl of Radnor. The Earls of Radnor owned the pair from then until 1945, when it was split for the first time and The Adoration of the Golden Calf was sold to the National Gallery in London. The Crossing of the Red Sea was acquired by Kenneth Clark for the National Gallery of Victoria in 1948 using money from the Felton Bequest, a fund originally left to the gallery in 1904 by the industrialist Alfred Felton. In 2011 it underwent a major conservation project.The dating of The Crossing of the Red Sea by Nicholas Poussin was one of scholarly debate, as the time frame in which the work was produced in relation to the other accompanying works was originally speculated. The work was initially believed to have been made within a short time after The Adoration of The Golden Calf, during the period of 1635–1638. Which rightfully placed both works at having been created during the time before Poussin departed from Rome, Italy where the works were commissioned to Paris, France. Without any evidence to contradict the timeframe of the works creation was generally accepted by the broader art historian community for generations. Though over time and in spite of this acceptance, a vocal minority has argued that The Crossing of the Red Sea should be dated as an early work due to the stylistic issues present which were notably absent from Poussins works after The Adoration of The Golden Calf. Officially establishing the works origins as a point of academic contention, though it was not until later evidence arose to suggest otherwise that this claim was brought forth for academic discussion. The dating method used on the works consisted of analyzing sketches and drawings which were believed to be precursors to The Crossing of the Red Sea, due to their stylings and themes. Upon closer inspection some art historians have come to believe that the sketches argued to be the beginnings of The Crossing of the Red Sea, are instead related to an unknown work believed to have been made in 1647–1648. The reasoning behind the debate over the origins of the work is due to a desire for understanding the works relation within the larger biblical collections created by Poussin. Establishing the thematic context and progression throughout Poussins works. This is further exemplified by the artists desire and intentions when meticulously crafting the works. As the two commissioned works prior to their completion were publicly perceived as being connected, leading to deliberate stylistic and design choices to highlight the contrasts between the works when examined together. This discussion ultimately culminated in the current believed origin of the piece dating its creation within 1633–1634.

Category:Paintings in the National Gallery of Victoria


Morning on the Riesengebirge

Prompt: Focus on Morning on the Riesengebirge and explain the abstract.

Morning on the Riesengebirge (German - Morgen im Riesengebirge) is an 1810–1811 painting by the German Romantic artist Caspar David Friedrich of a scene on the Riesengebirge. It was exhibited at the Dresden Academy, where it attracted significant public attention. The painting was then acquired in 1811 by Frederick William III of Prussia for Unter den Linden, his Berlin palace, where it remained until 1837, when it was moved to the New Palace in Potsdam.From 1844 to 1865 it was exhibited in the Schloss Bellevue then later in the castle at Wiesbaden. After 1930, it was moved back to Berlin, where it was displayed in the Stadtschloss. In 1957, it was moved to Schloss Charlottenburg (with inventory number 6911 GK I) as the property of the Prussian State Museums (inventory number NG 10/85).The painting blends a mixture of religious allegory and Friedrich's distinctive approach to landscape painting, which made the work popular in his time.

Category:Paintings by Caspar David Friedrich

Category:Paintings in Schloss Charlottenburg


Morning on the Riesengebirge

Prompt: Explain the abstract of this artwork, Morning on the Riesengebirge.

Morning on the Riesengebirge (German - Morgen im Riesengebirge) is an 1810–1811 painting by the German Romantic artist Caspar David Friedrich of a scene on the Riesengebirge. It was exhibited at the Dresden Academy, where it attracted significant public attention. The painting was then acquired in 1811 by Frederick William III of Prussia for Unter den Linden, his Berlin palace, where it remained until 1837, when it was moved to the New Palace in Potsdam.From 1844 to 1865 it was exhibited in the Schloss Bellevue then later in the castle at Wiesbaden. After 1930, it was moved back to Berlin, where it was displayed in the Stadtschloss. In 1957, it was moved to Schloss Charlottenburg (with inventory number 6911 GK I) as the property of the Prussian State Museums (inventory number NG 10/85).The painting blends a mixture of religious allegory and Friedrich's distinctive approach to landscape painting, which made the work popular in his time.

Category:Paintings by Caspar David Friedrich

Category:Paintings in Schloss Charlottenburg


Morning on the Riesengebirge

Prompt: How does Morning on the Riesengebirge explain its abstract?

Morning on the Riesengebirge (German - Morgen im Riesengebirge) is an 1810–1811 painting by the German Romantic artist Caspar David Friedrich of a scene on the Riesengebirge. It was exhibited at the Dresden Academy, where it attracted significant public attention. The painting was then acquired in 1811 by Frederick William III of Prussia for Unter den Linden, his Berlin palace, where it remained until 1837, when it was moved to the New Palace in Potsdam.From 1844 to 1865 it was exhibited in the Schloss Bellevue then later in the castle at Wiesbaden. After 1930, it was moved back to Berlin, where it was displayed in the Stadtschloss. In 1957, it was moved to Schloss Charlottenburg (with inventory number 6911 GK I) as the property of the Prussian State Museums (inventory number NG 10/85).The painting blends a mixture of religious allegory and Friedrich's distinctive approach to landscape painting, which made the work popular in his time.

Category:Paintings by Caspar David Friedrich

Category:Paintings in Schloss Charlottenburg


Morning on the Riesengebirge

Prompt: In Morning on the Riesengebirge, how is the abstract discussed?

Morning on the Riesengebirge (German - Morgen im Riesengebirge) is an 1810–1811 painting by the German Romantic artist Caspar David Friedrich of a scene on the Riesengebirge. It was exhibited at the Dresden Academy, where it attracted significant public attention. The painting was then acquired in 1811 by Frederick William III of Prussia for Unter den Linden, his Berlin palace, where it remained until 1837, when it was moved to the New Palace in Potsdam.From 1844 to 1865 it was exhibited in the Schloss Bellevue then later in the castle at Wiesbaden. After 1930, it was moved back to Berlin, where it was displayed in the Stadtschloss. In 1957, it was moved to Schloss Charlottenburg (with inventory number 6911 GK I) as the property of the Prussian State Museums (inventory number NG 10/85).The painting blends a mixture of religious allegory and Friedrich's distinctive approach to landscape painting, which made the work popular in his time.

Category:Paintings by Caspar David Friedrich

Category:Paintings in Schloss Charlottenburg


Morning on the Riesengebirge

Prompt: Focus on Morning on the Riesengebirge and explain the Description.

Friedrich was captivated by mountains, which prompted his journey to analyze the Riesengebirge in 1810. He diligently sketched the Riesengebirge mountain range and studied its rock formations. His observations culminated in a painting that depicts the sun rising over the mountains at dawn with a few notable figures and symbols.In the painting, a woman helps a man go up the mountain, and they are advancing towards a man crucified on a cross, presumably Jesus Christ. According to Werner Hoffman, Friedrich uses the differences in elevation to demonstrate how a woman's "role is to lead her partner onwards and upwards."

Category:Paintings by Caspar David Friedrich

Category:Paintings in Schloss Charlottenburg


Morning on the Riesengebirge

Prompt: Explain the Description of this artwork, Morning on the Riesengebirge.

Friedrich was captivated by mountains, which prompted his journey to analyze the Riesengebirge in 1810. He diligently sketched the Riesengebirge mountain range and studied its rock formations. His observations culminated in a painting that depicts the sun rising over the mountains at dawn with a few notable figures and symbols.In the painting, a woman helps a man go up the mountain, and they are advancing towards a man crucified on a cross, presumably Jesus Christ. According to Werner Hoffman, Friedrich uses the differences in elevation to demonstrate how a woman's "role is to lead her partner onwards and upwards."

Category:Paintings by Caspar David Friedrich

Category:Paintings in Schloss Charlottenburg


Morning on the Riesengebirge

Prompt: How does Morning on the Riesengebirge explain its Description?

Friedrich was captivated by mountains, which prompted his journey to analyze the Riesengebirge in 1810. He diligently sketched the Riesengebirge mountain range and studied its rock formations. His observations culminated in a painting that depicts the sun rising over the mountains at dawn with a few notable figures and symbols.In the painting, a woman helps a man go up the mountain, and they are advancing towards a man crucified on a cross, presumably Jesus Christ. According to Werner Hoffman, Friedrich uses the differences in elevation to demonstrate how a woman's "role is to lead her partner onwards and upwards."

Category:Paintings by Caspar David Friedrich

Category:Paintings in Schloss Charlottenburg


Morning on the Riesengebirge

Prompt: In Morning on the Riesengebirge, how is the Description discussed?

Friedrich was captivated by mountains, which prompted his journey to analyze the Riesengebirge in 1810. He diligently sketched the Riesengebirge mountain range and studied its rock formations. His observations culminated in a painting that depicts the sun rising over the mountains at dawn with a few notable figures and symbols.In the painting, a woman helps a man go up the mountain, and they are advancing towards a man crucified on a cross, presumably Jesus Christ. According to Werner Hoffman, Friedrich uses the differences in elevation to demonstrate how a woman's "role is to lead her partner onwards and upwards."

Category:Paintings by Caspar David Friedrich

Category:Paintings in Schloss Charlottenburg


Morning on the Riesengebirge

Prompt: In the context of Morning on the Riesengebirge, explain the Rückenfigur and the Techniques.

Scholars describe the man as a recurring figure in Friedrich's paintings. The man's gaze faces away from the viewer, making him a Rückenfigur, a trope in which the figure's back faces the viewer. The viewer can project themself onto the figure and imagine seeing the landscape for themself. Friedrich frequently used the Rückenfigur to emphasize the subjective experience of landscape. The man not only appears in many Friedrich paintings, but may very well be Friedrich himself, symbolizing his own interpretation of the landscape painting that he created.

Category:Paintings by Caspar David Friedrich

Category:Paintings in Schloss Charlottenburg


Morning on the Riesengebirge

Prompt: Explain the Rückenfigur about the Techniques of this artwork, Morning on the Riesengebirge.

Scholars describe the man as a recurring figure in Friedrich's paintings. The man's gaze faces away from the viewer, making him a Rückenfigur, a trope in which the figure's back faces the viewer. The viewer can project themself onto the figure and imagine seeing the landscape for themself. Friedrich frequently used the Rückenfigur to emphasize the subjective experience of landscape. The man not only appears in many Friedrich paintings, but may very well be Friedrich himself, symbolizing his own interpretation of the landscape painting that he created.

Category:Paintings by Caspar David Friedrich

Category:Paintings in Schloss Charlottenburg


Morning on the Riesengebirge

Prompt: In Morning on the Riesengebirge, how is the Rückenfigur of the Techniques explained?

Scholars describe the man as a recurring figure in Friedrich's paintings. The man's gaze faces away from the viewer, making him a Rückenfigur, a trope in which the figure's back faces the viewer. The viewer can project themself onto the figure and imagine seeing the landscape for themself. Friedrich frequently used the Rückenfigur to emphasize the subjective experience of landscape. The man not only appears in many Friedrich paintings, but may very well be Friedrich himself, symbolizing his own interpretation of the landscape painting that he created.

Category:Paintings by Caspar David Friedrich

Category:Paintings in Schloss Charlottenburg


Morning on the Riesengebirge

Prompt: Describe the characteristics of the Rückenfigur in Morning on the Riesengebirge's Techniques.

Scholars describe the man as a recurring figure in Friedrich's paintings. The man's gaze faces away from the viewer, making him a Rückenfigur, a trope in which the figure's back faces the viewer. The viewer can project themself onto the figure and imagine seeing the landscape for themself. Friedrich frequently used the Rückenfigur to emphasize the subjective experience of landscape. The man not only appears in many Friedrich paintings, but may very well be Friedrich himself, symbolizing his own interpretation of the landscape painting that he created.

Category:Paintings by Caspar David Friedrich

Category:Paintings in Schloss Charlottenburg


Morning on the Riesengebirge

Prompt: In the context of Morning on the Riesengebirge, explain the Blending and the Techniques.

A viewer can observe the horizon where the open sky and the earth's surface meet. According to Werner Hofmann, the elemental subjects of sky and earth have a harmonious relationship within the painting. Hofmann also notes that the sky and mist contrast with the weight of the mountains in the foreground. Charles Sala observes that Friedrich uses mist as a symbol of "a classical allegory of our befogged terrestrial existence and the search for a spiritual light which is just about to break and spread throughout the world." The art historian Nina Amstutz suggests that the blending of different natural phenomena shows that nature is not merely observed, but experienced. Friedrich pursued subjective empiricism, a method which utilized the painter's extensive research and detailed sketches with his imagination of the mountain. By combining objective and subjective elements, Friedrich gave personality to the landscape while portraying it fairly accurately.

Category:Paintings by Caspar David Friedrich

Category:Paintings in Schloss Charlottenburg


Morning on the Riesengebirge

Prompt: Explain the Blending about the Techniques of this artwork, Morning on the Riesengebirge.

A viewer can observe the horizon where the open sky and the earth's surface meet. According to Werner Hofmann, the elemental subjects of sky and earth have a harmonious relationship within the painting. Hofmann also notes that the sky and mist contrast with the weight of the mountains in the foreground. Charles Sala observes that Friedrich uses mist as a symbol of "a classical allegory of our befogged terrestrial existence and the search for a spiritual light which is just about to break and spread throughout the world." The art historian Nina Amstutz suggests that the blending of different natural phenomena shows that nature is not merely observed, but experienced. Friedrich pursued subjective empiricism, a method which utilized the painter's extensive research and detailed sketches with his imagination of the mountain. By combining objective and subjective elements, Friedrich gave personality to the landscape while portraying it fairly accurately.

Category:Paintings by Caspar David Friedrich

Category:Paintings in Schloss Charlottenburg


Morning on the Riesengebirge

Prompt: In Morning on the Riesengebirge, how is the Blending of the Techniques explained?

A viewer can observe the horizon where the open sky and the earth's surface meet. According to Werner Hofmann, the elemental subjects of sky and earth have a harmonious relationship within the painting. Hofmann also notes that the sky and mist contrast with the weight of the mountains in the foreground. Charles Sala observes that Friedrich uses mist as a symbol of "a classical allegory of our befogged terrestrial existence and the search for a spiritual light which is just about to break and spread throughout the world." The art historian Nina Amstutz suggests that the blending of different natural phenomena shows that nature is not merely observed, but experienced. Friedrich pursued subjective empiricism, a method which utilized the painter's extensive research and detailed sketches with his imagination of the mountain. By combining objective and subjective elements, Friedrich gave personality to the landscape while portraying it fairly accurately.

Category:Paintings by Caspar David Friedrich

Category:Paintings in Schloss Charlottenburg


Morning on the Riesengebirge

Prompt: Describe the characteristics of the Blending in Morning on the Riesengebirge's Techniques.

A viewer can observe the horizon where the open sky and the earth's surface meet. According to Werner Hofmann, the elemental subjects of sky and earth have a harmonious relationship within the painting. Hofmann also notes that the sky and mist contrast with the weight of the mountains in the foreground. Charles Sala observes that Friedrich uses mist as a symbol of "a classical allegory of our befogged terrestrial existence and the search for a spiritual light which is just about to break and spread throughout the world." The art historian Nina Amstutz suggests that the blending of different natural phenomena shows that nature is not merely observed, but experienced. Friedrich pursued subjective empiricism, a method which utilized the painter's extensive research and detailed sketches with his imagination of the mountain. By combining objective and subjective elements, Friedrich gave personality to the landscape while portraying it fairly accurately.

Category:Paintings by Caspar David Friedrich

Category:Paintings in Schloss Charlottenburg


Morning on the Riesengebirge

Prompt: In the context of Morning on the Riesengebirge, explain the Spiritual elements and the Techniques.

Scholars have devoted much attention to the religious iconography in the painting. The cross alludes to the Crucifixion of Christ, and Friedrich's other works include this symbol. According to Charles Sala, there is a tension between the "realism of the couple and the allegorical idealization of the landscape." Friedrich doesn't bring the cross to the forefront or magnify its size. Instead, it stands in stark contrast to the sprawling background of nature. Rather than the painting being an overt statement for a Christian cause, Sala argues that it explores the "path of the personal self and that of Christian asceticism," by drawing the comparison between the "couple and the light-filled landscape." Johannes Grave considered the painting to be a reaction to Friedrich Wilhelm Basilius von Ramdohr's criticism of the Tetschen Altarpiece.

Category:Paintings by Caspar David Friedrich

Category:Paintings in Schloss Charlottenburg


Morning on the Riesengebirge

Prompt: Explain the Spiritual elements about the Techniques of this artwork, Morning on the Riesengebirge.

Scholars have devoted much attention to the religious iconography in the painting. The cross alludes to the Crucifixion of Christ, and Friedrich's other works include this symbol. According to Charles Sala, there is a tension between the "realism of the couple and the allegorical idealization of the landscape." Friedrich doesn't bring the cross to the forefront or magnify its size. Instead, it stands in stark contrast to the sprawling background of nature. Rather than the painting being an overt statement for a Christian cause, Sala argues that it explores the "path of the personal self and that of Christian asceticism," by drawing the comparison between the "couple and the light-filled landscape." Johannes Grave considered the painting to be a reaction to Friedrich Wilhelm Basilius von Ramdohr's criticism of the Tetschen Altarpiece.

Category:Paintings by Caspar David Friedrich

Category:Paintings in Schloss Charlottenburg


Morning on the Riesengebirge

Prompt: In Morning on the Riesengebirge, how is the Spiritual elements of the Techniques explained?

Scholars have devoted much attention to the religious iconography in the painting. The cross alludes to the Crucifixion of Christ, and Friedrich's other works include this symbol. According to Charles Sala, there is a tension between the "realism of the couple and the allegorical idealization of the landscape." Friedrich doesn't bring the cross to the forefront or magnify its size. Instead, it stands in stark contrast to the sprawling background of nature. Rather than the painting being an overt statement for a Christian cause, Sala argues that it explores the "path of the personal self and that of Christian asceticism," by drawing the comparison between the "couple and the light-filled landscape." Johannes Grave considered the painting to be a reaction to Friedrich Wilhelm Basilius von Ramdohr's criticism of the Tetschen Altarpiece.

Category:Paintings by Caspar David Friedrich

Category:Paintings in Schloss Charlottenburg


Morning on the Riesengebirge

Prompt: Describe the characteristics of the Spiritual elements in Morning on the Riesengebirge's Techniques.

Scholars have devoted much attention to the religious iconography in the painting. The cross alludes to the Crucifixion of Christ, and Friedrich's other works include this symbol. According to Charles Sala, there is a tension between the "realism of the couple and the allegorical idealization of the landscape." Friedrich doesn't bring the cross to the forefront or magnify its size. Instead, it stands in stark contrast to the sprawling background of nature. Rather than the painting being an overt statement for a Christian cause, Sala argues that it explores the "path of the personal self and that of Christian asceticism," by drawing the comparison between the "couple and the light-filled landscape." Johannes Grave considered the painting to be a reaction to Friedrich Wilhelm Basilius von Ramdohr's criticism of the Tetschen Altarpiece.

Category:Paintings by Caspar David Friedrich

Category:Paintings in Schloss Charlottenburg


Morning on the Riesengebirge

Prompt: Focus on Morning on the Riesengebirge and explain the Reception.

Some critics praised Friedrich's "faithful representation of nature," applauding his ability to portray it pleasantly, accurately, and personified.Others were displeased with the painter's depiction of a woman helping up a man. One critic wrote: "The lady beside the crucifix, holding out her weak hand to a gentleman in this inaccessible place, is another thing I do not altogether care for, because the modern and the personal become insignificant in the midst of the great simplicity of nature."

Category:Paintings by Caspar David Friedrich

Category:Paintings in Schloss Charlottenburg


Morning on the Riesengebirge

Prompt: Explain the Reception of this artwork, Morning on the Riesengebirge.

Some critics praised Friedrich's "faithful representation of nature," applauding his ability to portray it pleasantly, accurately, and personified.Others were displeased with the painter's depiction of a woman helping up a man. One critic wrote: "The lady beside the crucifix, holding out her weak hand to a gentleman in this inaccessible place, is another thing I do not altogether care for, because the modern and the personal become insignificant in the midst of the great simplicity of nature."

Category:Paintings by Caspar David Friedrich

Category:Paintings in Schloss Charlottenburg


Morning on the Riesengebirge

Prompt: How does Morning on the Riesengebirge explain its Reception?

Some critics praised Friedrich's "faithful representation of nature," applauding his ability to portray it pleasantly, accurately, and personified.Others were displeased with the painter's depiction of a woman helping up a man. One critic wrote: "The lady beside the crucifix, holding out her weak hand to a gentleman in this inaccessible place, is another thing I do not altogether care for, because the modern and the personal become insignificant in the midst of the great simplicity of nature."

Category:Paintings by Caspar David Friedrich

Category:Paintings in Schloss Charlottenburg


Morning on the Riesengebirge

Prompt: In Morning on the Riesengebirge, how is the Reception discussed?

Some critics praised Friedrich's "faithful representation of nature," applauding his ability to portray it pleasantly, accurately, and personified.Others were displeased with the painter's depiction of a woman helping up a man. One critic wrote: "The lady beside the crucifix, holding out her weak hand to a gentleman in this inaccessible place, is another thing I do not altogether care for, because the modern and the personal become insignificant in the midst of the great simplicity of nature."

Category:Paintings by Caspar David Friedrich

Category:Paintings in Schloss Charlottenburg


Portrait of an Army Doctor

Prompt: Focus on Portrait of an Army Doctor and explain the abstract.

Portrait of an Army Doctor (in French Portrait d'un médecin militaire) is an oil-on-canvas painting created during 1914–15 by the French artist, theorist and writer Albert Gleizes. Painted at the fortress city of Toul (Lorraine) while Gleizes served in the military during the First World War, the painting's abstract circular rhythms and intersecting aslant planes announce the beginning of the second synthetic phase of Cubism. The work represents Gleizes's commanding officer, Major Mayer-Simon Lambert (1870–1943), the regimental surgeon in charge of the military hospital at Toul. At least eight preparatory sketches, gouaches and watercolors of the work have survived, though Portrait of an Army Doctor is one of Gleizes's only major oil paintings of the period.As other wartime works by Gleizes, Portrait of an Army Doctor represents a break from the first phase of Cubism. These wartime works mark "the beginning of an attempt to preserve specific and individual visual characteristics while experimenting with a radically different compositional treatment in which broad planes, angled from the perimeter, meet circles." (Robbins, 1964) Rather than based on the analysis of volumetric objects, the artist strove toward synthesis; something that originated in unity.Portrait of an Army Doctor—earlier forming part of the collection of art dealer Léonce Rosenberg—was purchased by Solomon R. Guggenheim at an important Gleizes exhibition at René Gimpel Galerie in New York City, December 1936 to January 1937 (no. 8). The work forms part of the Solomon R. Guggenheim Founding Collection. It was gifted to the museum by Solomon Guggenheim in 1937 (the year of the formation of the foundation). The painting is in the permanent collection of the Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum in New York City.

Albert Gleizes, ''Portrait d'un médecin militaire'' reproduced on the cover of the ''Gleizes catalogue raisonné'', Vol. 1, Somogy, 1998, Paris

File:Albert Gleizes, 1915, Study No. 5 for Portrait of an Army Doctor (Étude 5 pour Portrait d'un médecin militaire), Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum.jpg

Toul, Caserne Maréchal Ney, c. 1915, where Gleizes was stationed during his mobilization

File:Fernand Léger, 1916, Soldier with a pipe (Le Soldat à la Pipe), oil on canvas, 130 x 97 cm, Kunstsammlung Nordrhein-Westfalen, Dùsseldorf.jpg

File:Albert Gleizes, 1914-15, Portrait of an Army Doctor (Portrait d'un médecin militaire), structural schematic.jpg

Albert Gleizes, 1915, ''Study No. 5 for Portrait of an Army Doctor'' (''Étude 5 pour Portrait d'un médecin militaire''), graphite on paper, 24.4 x 18.6 cm, [[Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum

Albert Gleizes, 1914-15, ''Portrait de Florent Schmitt'' (''Le Pianiste''), pastel, 36 x 27 cm. This is a study for an oil on canvas titled ''Portrait de Florent Schmitt'', 1914–15, {{convert

Category:Paintings in the Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum

Musée d'Art Moderne de la Ville de Paris

abbr=on}}.<ref>[https://archive.org/stream/albertgleizes1881robb#page/64/mode/2up Daniel Robbins, ''Albert Gleizes, 1881-1953: a retrospective exhibition'', Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum, 1964, ''Portrait de Florent Schmitt'', 1914-15, cat. no. 70]</ref> A similar work dated 1915 is in the Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum, New York.<ref>[http://www.guggenheim.org/new-york/collections/collection-online/artwork/1455 Albert Gleizes, 1915, ''Musician, Florent Schmitt (Un Musicien, Florent Schmitt)'', Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum]</ref>

Femme au miroir (Lady at her Dressing Table)

File:Toul, Caserne Maréchal Ney, c. 1915.jpg

File:Albert Gleizes, 1915, Retour, published in Le Mot, n. 20, 1 July 1915.jpg

Albert Gleizes, ''Portrait of an Army Doctor'', structural schematic overlay showing the [[Golden ratio

File:Albert Gleizes, catalogue raisonné, Vol. 1, Somogy, 1998, Paris.jpg

File:Albert Gleizes, 1914-15, Portrait de Florent Schmitt (Le Pianiste), pastel, 36 x 27 cm.jpg

File:Doctor Mayer Lambert (1870-1943), Professor of Physiology, Faculty of Nancy.jpg

Albert Gleizes, 1915, ''Retour de Bois-le-Prêtre'', wood engraving, 39 x 50 cm, published in ''Le mot'', n. 20, 1 July 1915

File:Jean Metzinger, 1915, Soldat jouant aux échecs (Soldier at a Game of Chess), oil on canvas, 81.3 x 61 cm, Smart Museum of Art.jpg


Portrait of an Army Doctor

Prompt: Explain the abstract of this artwork, Portrait of an Army Doctor.

Portrait of an Army Doctor (in French Portrait d'un médecin militaire) is an oil-on-canvas painting created during 1914–15 by the French artist, theorist and writer Albert Gleizes. Painted at the fortress city of Toul (Lorraine) while Gleizes served in the military during the First World War, the painting's abstract circular rhythms and intersecting aslant planes announce the beginning of the second synthetic phase of Cubism. The work represents Gleizes's commanding officer, Major Mayer-Simon Lambert (1870–1943), the regimental surgeon in charge of the military hospital at Toul. At least eight preparatory sketches, gouaches and watercolors of the work have survived, though Portrait of an Army Doctor is one of Gleizes's only major oil paintings of the period.As other wartime works by Gleizes, Portrait of an Army Doctor represents a break from the first phase of Cubism. These wartime works mark "the beginning of an attempt to preserve specific and individual visual characteristics while experimenting with a radically different compositional treatment in which broad planes, angled from the perimeter, meet circles." (Robbins, 1964) Rather than based on the analysis of volumetric objects, the artist strove toward synthesis; something that originated in unity.Portrait of an Army Doctor—earlier forming part of the collection of art dealer Léonce Rosenberg—was purchased by Solomon R. Guggenheim at an important Gleizes exhibition at René Gimpel Galerie in New York City, December 1936 to January 1937 (no. 8). The work forms part of the Solomon R. Guggenheim Founding Collection. It was gifted to the museum by Solomon Guggenheim in 1937 (the year of the formation of the foundation). The painting is in the permanent collection of the Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum in New York City.

Albert Gleizes, ''Portrait d'un médecin militaire'' reproduced on the cover of the ''Gleizes catalogue raisonné'', Vol. 1, Somogy, 1998, Paris

File:Albert Gleizes, 1915, Study No. 5 for Portrait of an Army Doctor (Étude 5 pour Portrait d'un médecin militaire), Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum.jpg

Toul, Caserne Maréchal Ney, c. 1915, where Gleizes was stationed during his mobilization

File:Fernand Léger, 1916, Soldier with a pipe (Le Soldat à la Pipe), oil on canvas, 130 x 97 cm, Kunstsammlung Nordrhein-Westfalen, Dùsseldorf.jpg

File:Albert Gleizes, 1914-15, Portrait of an Army Doctor (Portrait d'un médecin militaire), structural schematic.jpg

Albert Gleizes, 1915, ''Study No. 5 for Portrait of an Army Doctor'' (''Étude 5 pour Portrait d'un médecin militaire''), graphite on paper, 24.4 x 18.6 cm, [[Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum

Albert Gleizes, 1914-15, ''Portrait de Florent Schmitt'' (''Le Pianiste''), pastel, 36 x 27 cm. This is a study for an oil on canvas titled ''Portrait de Florent Schmitt'', 1914–15, {{convert

Category:Paintings in the Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum

Musée d'Art Moderne de la Ville de Paris

abbr=on}}.<ref>[https://archive.org/stream/albertgleizes1881robb#page/64/mode/2up Daniel Robbins, ''Albert Gleizes, 1881-1953: a retrospective exhibition'', Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum, 1964, ''Portrait de Florent Schmitt'', 1914-15, cat. no. 70]</ref> A similar work dated 1915 is in the Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum, New York.<ref>[http://www.guggenheim.org/new-york/collections/collection-online/artwork/1455 Albert Gleizes, 1915, ''Musician, Florent Schmitt (Un Musicien, Florent Schmitt)'', Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum]</ref>

Femme au miroir (Lady at her Dressing Table)

File:Toul, Caserne Maréchal Ney, c. 1915.jpg

File:Albert Gleizes, 1915, Retour, published in Le Mot, n. 20, 1 July 1915.jpg

Albert Gleizes, ''Portrait of an Army Doctor'', structural schematic overlay showing the [[Golden ratio

File:Albert Gleizes, catalogue raisonné, Vol. 1, Somogy, 1998, Paris.jpg

File:Albert Gleizes, 1914-15, Portrait de Florent Schmitt (Le Pianiste), pastel, 36 x 27 cm.jpg

File:Doctor Mayer Lambert (1870-1943), Professor of Physiology, Faculty of Nancy.jpg

Albert Gleizes, 1915, ''Retour de Bois-le-Prêtre'', wood engraving, 39 x 50 cm, published in ''Le mot'', n. 20, 1 July 1915

File:Jean Metzinger, 1915, Soldat jouant aux échecs (Soldier at a Game of Chess), oil on canvas, 81.3 x 61 cm, Smart Museum of Art.jpg


Portrait of an Army Doctor

Prompt: How does Portrait of an Army Doctor explain its abstract?

Portrait of an Army Doctor (in French Portrait d'un médecin militaire) is an oil-on-canvas painting created during 1914–15 by the French artist, theorist and writer Albert Gleizes. Painted at the fortress city of Toul (Lorraine) while Gleizes served in the military during the First World War, the painting's abstract circular rhythms and intersecting aslant planes announce the beginning of the second synthetic phase of Cubism. The work represents Gleizes's commanding officer, Major Mayer-Simon Lambert (1870–1943), the regimental surgeon in charge of the military hospital at Toul. At least eight preparatory sketches, gouaches and watercolors of the work have survived, though Portrait of an Army Doctor is one of Gleizes's only major oil paintings of the period.As other wartime works by Gleizes, Portrait of an Army Doctor represents a break from the first phase of Cubism. These wartime works mark "the beginning of an attempt to preserve specific and individual visual characteristics while experimenting with a radically different compositional treatment in which broad planes, angled from the perimeter, meet circles." (Robbins, 1964) Rather than based on the analysis of volumetric objects, the artist strove toward synthesis; something that originated in unity.Portrait of an Army Doctor—earlier forming part of the collection of art dealer Léonce Rosenberg—was purchased by Solomon R. Guggenheim at an important Gleizes exhibition at René Gimpel Galerie in New York City, December 1936 to January 1937 (no. 8). The work forms part of the Solomon R. Guggenheim Founding Collection. It was gifted to the museum by Solomon Guggenheim in 1937 (the year of the formation of the foundation). The painting is in the permanent collection of the Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum in New York City.

Albert Gleizes, ''Portrait d'un médecin militaire'' reproduced on the cover of the ''Gleizes catalogue raisonné'', Vol. 1, Somogy, 1998, Paris

File:Albert Gleizes, 1915, Study No. 5 for Portrait of an Army Doctor (Étude 5 pour Portrait d'un médecin militaire), Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum.jpg

Toul, Caserne Maréchal Ney, c. 1915, where Gleizes was stationed during his mobilization

File:Fernand Léger, 1916, Soldier with a pipe (Le Soldat à la Pipe), oil on canvas, 130 x 97 cm, Kunstsammlung Nordrhein-Westfalen, Dùsseldorf.jpg

File:Albert Gleizes, 1914-15, Portrait of an Army Doctor (Portrait d'un médecin militaire), structural schematic.jpg

Albert Gleizes, 1915, ''Study No. 5 for Portrait of an Army Doctor'' (''Étude 5 pour Portrait d'un médecin militaire''), graphite on paper, 24.4 x 18.6 cm, [[Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum

Albert Gleizes, 1914-15, ''Portrait de Florent Schmitt'' (''Le Pianiste''), pastel, 36 x 27 cm. This is a study for an oil on canvas titled ''Portrait de Florent Schmitt'', 1914–15, {{convert

Category:Paintings in the Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum

Musée d'Art Moderne de la Ville de Paris

abbr=on}}.<ref>[https://archive.org/stream/albertgleizes1881robb#page/64/mode/2up Daniel Robbins, ''Albert Gleizes, 1881-1953: a retrospective exhibition'', Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum, 1964, ''Portrait de Florent Schmitt'', 1914-15, cat. no. 70]</ref> A similar work dated 1915 is in the Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum, New York.<ref>[http://www.guggenheim.org/new-york/collections/collection-online/artwork/1455 Albert Gleizes, 1915, ''Musician, Florent Schmitt (Un Musicien, Florent Schmitt)'', Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum]</ref>

Femme au miroir (Lady at her Dressing Table)

File:Toul, Caserne Maréchal Ney, c. 1915.jpg

File:Albert Gleizes, 1915, Retour, published in Le Mot, n. 20, 1 July 1915.jpg

Albert Gleizes, ''Portrait of an Army Doctor'', structural schematic overlay showing the [[Golden ratio

File:Albert Gleizes, catalogue raisonné, Vol. 1, Somogy, 1998, Paris.jpg

File:Albert Gleizes, 1914-15, Portrait de Florent Schmitt (Le Pianiste), pastel, 36 x 27 cm.jpg

File:Doctor Mayer Lambert (1870-1943), Professor of Physiology, Faculty of Nancy.jpg

Albert Gleizes, 1915, ''Retour de Bois-le-Prêtre'', wood engraving, 39 x 50 cm, published in ''Le mot'', n. 20, 1 July 1915

File:Jean Metzinger, 1915, Soldat jouant aux échecs (Soldier at a Game of Chess), oil on canvas, 81.3 x 61 cm, Smart Museum of Art.jpg


Portrait of an Army Doctor

Prompt: In Portrait of an Army Doctor, how is the abstract discussed?

Portrait of an Army Doctor (in French Portrait d'un médecin militaire) is an oil-on-canvas painting created during 1914–15 by the French artist, theorist and writer Albert Gleizes. Painted at the fortress city of Toul (Lorraine) while Gleizes served in the military during the First World War, the painting's abstract circular rhythms and intersecting aslant planes announce the beginning of the second synthetic phase of Cubism. The work represents Gleizes's commanding officer, Major Mayer-Simon Lambert (1870–1943), the regimental surgeon in charge of the military hospital at Toul. At least eight preparatory sketches, gouaches and watercolors of the work have survived, though Portrait of an Army Doctor is one of Gleizes's only major oil paintings of the period.As other wartime works by Gleizes, Portrait of an Army Doctor represents a break from the first phase of Cubism. These wartime works mark "the beginning of an attempt to preserve specific and individual visual characteristics while experimenting with a radically different compositional treatment in which broad planes, angled from the perimeter, meet circles." (Robbins, 1964) Rather than based on the analysis of volumetric objects, the artist strove toward synthesis; something that originated in unity.Portrait of an Army Doctor—earlier forming part of the collection of art dealer Léonce Rosenberg—was purchased by Solomon R. Guggenheim at an important Gleizes exhibition at René Gimpel Galerie in New York City, December 1936 to January 1937 (no. 8). The work forms part of the Solomon R. Guggenheim Founding Collection. It was gifted to the museum by Solomon Guggenheim in 1937 (the year of the formation of the foundation). The painting is in the permanent collection of the Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum in New York City.

Albert Gleizes, ''Portrait d'un médecin militaire'' reproduced on the cover of the ''Gleizes catalogue raisonné'', Vol. 1, Somogy, 1998, Paris

File:Albert Gleizes, 1915, Study No. 5 for Portrait of an Army Doctor (Étude 5 pour Portrait d'un médecin militaire), Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum.jpg

Toul, Caserne Maréchal Ney, c. 1915, where Gleizes was stationed during his mobilization

File:Fernand Léger, 1916, Soldier with a pipe (Le Soldat à la Pipe), oil on canvas, 130 x 97 cm, Kunstsammlung Nordrhein-Westfalen, Dùsseldorf.jpg

File:Albert Gleizes, 1914-15, Portrait of an Army Doctor (Portrait d'un médecin militaire), structural schematic.jpg

Albert Gleizes, 1915, ''Study No. 5 for Portrait of an Army Doctor'' (''Étude 5 pour Portrait d'un médecin militaire''), graphite on paper, 24.4 x 18.6 cm, [[Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum

Albert Gleizes, 1914-15, ''Portrait de Florent Schmitt'' (''Le Pianiste''), pastel, 36 x 27 cm. This is a study for an oil on canvas titled ''Portrait de Florent Schmitt'', 1914–15, {{convert

Category:Paintings in the Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum

Musée d'Art Moderne de la Ville de Paris

abbr=on}}.<ref>[https://archive.org/stream/albertgleizes1881robb#page/64/mode/2up Daniel Robbins, ''Albert Gleizes, 1881-1953: a retrospective exhibition'', Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum, 1964, ''Portrait de Florent Schmitt'', 1914-15, cat. no. 70]</ref> A similar work dated 1915 is in the Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum, New York.<ref>[http://www.guggenheim.org/new-york/collections/collection-online/artwork/1455 Albert Gleizes, 1915, ''Musician, Florent Schmitt (Un Musicien, Florent Schmitt)'', Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum]</ref>

Femme au miroir (Lady at her Dressing Table)

File:Toul, Caserne Maréchal Ney, c. 1915.jpg

File:Albert Gleizes, 1915, Retour, published in Le Mot, n. 20, 1 July 1915.jpg

Albert Gleizes, ''Portrait of an Army Doctor'', structural schematic overlay showing the [[Golden ratio

File:Albert Gleizes, catalogue raisonné, Vol. 1, Somogy, 1998, Paris.jpg

File:Albert Gleizes, 1914-15, Portrait de Florent Schmitt (Le Pianiste), pastel, 36 x 27 cm.jpg

File:Doctor Mayer Lambert (1870-1943), Professor of Physiology, Faculty of Nancy.jpg

Albert Gleizes, 1915, ''Retour de Bois-le-Prêtre'', wood engraving, 39 x 50 cm, published in ''Le mot'', n. 20, 1 July 1915

File:Jean Metzinger, 1915, Soldat jouant aux échecs (Soldier at a Game of Chess), oil on canvas, 81.3 x 61 cm, Smart Museum of Art.jpg


Portrait of an Army Doctor

Prompt: Focus on Portrait of an Army Doctor and explain the Description.

Portrait of an Army Doctor is an oil painting on canvas with dimensions 119.8 cm × 95.1 cm (47.2 in × 37.4 in) inscribed Alb. Gleizes, Toul 1914, lower right. An early photograph of the work shows the inscribed date as 1914–15.Gleizes's works from this period, just as those of the early 1920s, are "characterized by dynamic intersections of vertical, diagonal, horizontal and circular movements", writes art historian Daniel Robbins, "austere in touch but loaded with energetic pattern." Gleizes brings into practice an effect reminiscent of Divisionist theory via the incorporation of colored squares within three sections of the canvas, one of which is composed of alternating pigments of contrasting blues and reds. The use of blue, white and red in the overall composition recall the colors of the French flag. Such a display of patriotism was not uncommon among the Cubists, even leading up to the war. French flags can be seen in the works of Roger de La Fresnaye; Fourteenth of July, 1913–14 (Museum of Fine Arts, Houston, TX), and The Conquest of the Air, 1913 (Museum of Modern Art, New York). The Cubo-Futurist Gino Severini, too, included the French flag in his 1913 painting Train of the Wounded, 1913. While not depicting the flag itself, wartime works by Jean Metzinger dominantly exhibit blues and reds, along with army green, in such works as Soldat jouant aux échecs (Soldier at a Game of Chess), 1914–15, Smart Museum of Art, and Femme au miroir (Lady at her Dressing Table), April 1916.In 1915 Gleizes published an article in Jean Cocteau's patriotic review, Le Mot in which he attacks critics who accuse the new tendencies in art of being unpatriotic. The final issue of Le Mot includes a sketch by Gleizes based on wounded soldiers returning from a battle at Bois le Prêtre.Despite its descriptive title, the subject matter of Portrait of an Army Doctor has practically disappeared. The canvas is no longer analyzed or structured geometrically according to the golden ratio, though the armrest of the chair is treated as the beginning of a Fibonacci spiral. The masses of the composition are arranged in quasi-equilibrium. The center of the sitter face is the superior vertex of a triangular construct that extends toward the outer edges of the canvas.The intersection of the two arcs that compose the shoulders is centered on the vertical axis. The source of light is undetermined, or omnidirectional, just as the vantage point of the artist, in accord with the Cubist principle of 'simultaneity' (or multiple perspective): "a succession of descriptive aspects of the external world... by giving a multiple series of appearances, each one seen in its own perspective", writes Gleizes, "a succession of descriptive states. Waking up, this eye lurched from one point of view to the other, jumped back again, and was again thrown into a state of excitement." Cubism, with its new geometry, its dynamism and multiple view-point perspective, not only represented a departure from Euclid's model, but it achieved, according to Gleizes and Metzinger, a better representation of the real world: one that was mobile and changing in time. For Gleizes, Cubism represented a "normal evolution of an art that was mobile like life itself".Multiple perspective was in itself a protest against painting defined as an art based on space, that is to say, static. An aspiration towards mobility begins to appear and to appeal to the eye. The eye is required to enter into that collaboration which is necessary if it wishes to emerge from the torpor to which it had been reduced at the insistence of the single point perspective of the Renaissance; painting makes a legitimate claim to be regarded as an art of time ... Breaking up the plane into surfaces of different sizes reduced to geometrical forms. Sometimes certain indications of figures appear in this assemblage, obtained with the help of a few lines and several suggestive points. (Gleizes, 1927)While depth perception and perspective have been subdued to a large extent, the primary structural lines appear to recede or converge toward a multitude of vanishing points located at infinity. Though, unlike those of classical perspective, these vanishing points are not placed on a given horizon (a theoretical line that represents the eye level of the observer), nor do they allow the viewer to reconstruct the relative distance of parts or features of an object. Rather, they are placed on various horizons. The viewer is observing a non-linear scene where the picture plane is not parallel to any of the scene's multiple axes, giving the appearance of different forms of calculated perspective.Surfaces appear to overlap creating a sense of occlusion, but the resulting information is insufficient to allow the observer to recreate depth of field. By removing these optical cues, the geometrical method of perspective used to create the illusion of form, space and depth since the Renaissance, the artifice of an illusionistic trickery as Metzinger called it, Gleizes's aim was to arrive at what he perceived as 'truth', the constructive essence of the physical world.So, now that we are in possession of the means (and I firmly believe that we are) we must pitilessly reject the image of the Renaissance that is addressed exclusively to the senses, but, at the same time, we should not fear, should the occasion present itself, an image determined by geometry, by the square, the right angle, because it, in its nature, corresponds to the higher stages. The Renaissance image, I repeat, bears no, or too little, relation to them; the new image will give more meaning and variety to the space. (Gleizes)We are in the age of synthesis. An hour in the life of a man today raises more levels, insights, actions, than a year of that of any other century. That is what I try to say in my art. The rapid sketch of an Impressionist crystallised the fragility of a sensation; it was immobilized in his picture. The painting of today must crystallise a thousand sensations in an aesthetic order. And I see that for that there is no need to reveal other laws, other theorems with definitive forms. A beauty achieved through a mathematical order can only have a relative life; the universal kaleidoscope cannot be fitted into the framework of a system..." (Gleizes, c.1916, letter addressed to Henri-Martin Barzun)From 1914 to the end of Gleizes's New York period—however nonrepresentational—works by the artist continued to be shaped by his personal experience, by the conviction that art was a social function, susceptible to theoretical formulation, and imbued with optimism. Gleizes's nonrepresentational paintings and those with an apparent visual basis existed side by side, differing only, writes Daniel Robbins, in "the degree of abstraction hidden by the uniformity with which they were painted and by the constant effort to tie the plastic realization of the painting to a specific, even unique, experience."

Albert Gleizes, ''Portrait d'un médecin militaire'' reproduced on the cover of the ''Gleizes catalogue raisonné'', Vol. 1, Somogy, 1998, Paris

File:Albert Gleizes, 1915, Study No. 5 for Portrait of an Army Doctor (Étude 5 pour Portrait d'un médecin militaire), Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum.jpg

Toul, Caserne Maréchal Ney, c. 1915, where Gleizes was stationed during his mobilization

File:Fernand Léger, 1916, Soldier with a pipe (Le Soldat à la Pipe), oil on canvas, 130 x 97 cm, Kunstsammlung Nordrhein-Westfalen, Dùsseldorf.jpg

File:Albert Gleizes, 1914-15, Portrait of an Army Doctor (Portrait d'un médecin militaire), structural schematic.jpg

Albert Gleizes, 1915, ''Study No. 5 for Portrait of an Army Doctor'' (''Étude 5 pour Portrait d'un médecin militaire''), graphite on paper, 24.4 x 18.6 cm, [[Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum

Albert Gleizes, 1914-15, ''Portrait de Florent Schmitt'' (''Le Pianiste''), pastel, 36 x 27 cm. This is a study for an oil on canvas titled ''Portrait de Florent Schmitt'', 1914–15, {{convert

Category:Paintings in the Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum

Musée d'Art Moderne de la Ville de Paris

abbr=on}}.<ref>[https://archive.org/stream/albertgleizes1881robb#page/64/mode/2up Daniel Robbins, ''Albert Gleizes, 1881-1953: a retrospective exhibition'', Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum, 1964, ''Portrait de Florent Schmitt'', 1914-15, cat. no. 70]</ref> A similar work dated 1915 is in the Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum, New York.<ref>[http://www.guggenheim.org/new-york/collections/collection-online/artwork/1455 Albert Gleizes, 1915, ''Musician, Florent Schmitt (Un Musicien, Florent Schmitt)'', Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum]</ref>

File:Toul, Caserne Maréchal Ney, c. 1915.jpg

File:Albert Gleizes, 1915, Retour, published in Le Mot, n. 20, 1 July 1915.jpg

Albert Gleizes, ''Portrait of an Army Doctor'', structural schematic overlay showing the [[Golden ratio

File:Albert Gleizes, catalogue raisonné, Vol. 1, Somogy, 1998, Paris.jpg

File:Albert Gleizes, 1914-15, Portrait de Florent Schmitt (Le Pianiste), pastel, 36 x 27 cm.jpg

File:Doctor Mayer Lambert (1870-1943), Professor of Physiology, Faculty of Nancy.jpg

Albert Gleizes, 1915, ''Retour de Bois-le-Prêtre'', wood engraving, 39 x 50 cm, published in ''Le mot'', n. 20, 1 July 1915

File:Jean Metzinger, 1915, Soldat jouant aux échecs (Soldier at a Game of Chess), oil on canvas, 81.3 x 61 cm, Smart Museum of Art.jpg


Portrait of an Army Doctor

Prompt: Explain the Description of this artwork, Portrait of an Army Doctor.

Portrait of an Army Doctor is an oil painting on canvas with dimensions 119.8 cm × 95.1 cm (47.2 in × 37.4 in) inscribed Alb. Gleizes, Toul 1914, lower right. An early photograph of the work shows the inscribed date as 1914–15.Gleizes's works from this period, just as those of the early 1920s, are "characterized by dynamic intersections of vertical, diagonal, horizontal and circular movements", writes art historian Daniel Robbins, "austere in touch but loaded with energetic pattern." Gleizes brings into practice an effect reminiscent of Divisionist theory via the incorporation of colored squares within three sections of the canvas, one of which is composed of alternating pigments of contrasting blues and reds. The use of blue, white and red in the overall composition recall the colors of the French flag. Such a display of patriotism was not uncommon among the Cubists, even leading up to the war. French flags can be seen in the works of Roger de La Fresnaye; Fourteenth of July, 1913–14 (Museum of Fine Arts, Houston, TX), and The Conquest of the Air, 1913 (Museum of Modern Art, New York). The Cubo-Futurist Gino Severini, too, included the French flag in his 1913 painting Train of the Wounded, 1913. While not depicting the flag itself, wartime works by Jean Metzinger dominantly exhibit blues and reds, along with army green, in such works as Soldat jouant aux échecs (Soldier at a Game of Chess), 1914–15, Smart Museum of Art, and Femme au miroir (Lady at her Dressing Table), April 1916.In 1915 Gleizes published an article in Jean Cocteau's patriotic review, Le Mot in which he attacks critics who accuse the new tendencies in art of being unpatriotic. The final issue of Le Mot includes a sketch by Gleizes based on wounded soldiers returning from a battle at Bois le Prêtre.Despite its descriptive title, the subject matter of Portrait of an Army Doctor has practically disappeared. The canvas is no longer analyzed or structured geometrically according to the golden ratio, though the armrest of the chair is treated as the beginning of a Fibonacci spiral. The masses of the composition are arranged in quasi-equilibrium. The center of the sitter face is the superior vertex of a triangular construct that extends toward the outer edges of the canvas.The intersection of the two arcs that compose the shoulders is centered on the vertical axis. The source of light is undetermined, or omnidirectional, just as the vantage point of the artist, in accord with the Cubist principle of 'simultaneity' (or multiple perspective): "a succession of descriptive aspects of the external world... by giving a multiple series of appearances, each one seen in its own perspective", writes Gleizes, "a succession of descriptive states. Waking up, this eye lurched from one point of view to the other, jumped back again, and was again thrown into a state of excitement." Cubism, with its new geometry, its dynamism and multiple view-point perspective, not only represented a departure from Euclid's model, but it achieved, according to Gleizes and Metzinger, a better representation of the real world: one that was mobile and changing in time. For Gleizes, Cubism represented a "normal evolution of an art that was mobile like life itself".Multiple perspective was in itself a protest against painting defined as an art based on space, that is to say, static. An aspiration towards mobility begins to appear and to appeal to the eye. The eye is required to enter into that collaboration which is necessary if it wishes to emerge from the torpor to which it had been reduced at the insistence of the single point perspective of the Renaissance; painting makes a legitimate claim to be regarded as an art of time ... Breaking up the plane into surfaces of different sizes reduced to geometrical forms. Sometimes certain indications of figures appear in this assemblage, obtained with the help of a few lines and several suggestive points. (Gleizes, 1927)While depth perception and perspective have been subdued to a large extent, the primary structural lines appear to recede or converge toward a multitude of vanishing points located at infinity. Though, unlike those of classical perspective, these vanishing points are not placed on a given horizon (a theoretical line that represents the eye level of the observer), nor do they allow the viewer to reconstruct the relative distance of parts or features of an object. Rather, they are placed on various horizons. The viewer is observing a non-linear scene where the picture plane is not parallel to any of the scene's multiple axes, giving the appearance of different forms of calculated perspective.Surfaces appear to overlap creating a sense of occlusion, but the resulting information is insufficient to allow the observer to recreate depth of field. By removing these optical cues, the geometrical method of perspective used to create the illusion of form, space and depth since the Renaissance, the artifice of an illusionistic trickery as Metzinger called it, Gleizes's aim was to arrive at what he perceived as 'truth', the constructive essence of the physical world.So, now that we are in possession of the means (and I firmly believe that we are) we must pitilessly reject the image of the Renaissance that is addressed exclusively to the senses, but, at the same time, we should not fear, should the occasion present itself, an image determined by geometry, by the square, the right angle, because it, in its nature, corresponds to the higher stages. The Renaissance image, I repeat, bears no, or too little, relation to them; the new image will give more meaning and variety to the space. (Gleizes)We are in the age of synthesis. An hour in the life of a man today raises more levels, insights, actions, than a year of that of any other century. That is what I try to say in my art. The rapid sketch of an Impressionist crystallised the fragility of a sensation; it was immobilized in his picture. The painting of today must crystallise a thousand sensations in an aesthetic order. And I see that for that there is no need to reveal other laws, other theorems with definitive forms. A beauty achieved through a mathematical order can only have a relative life; the universal kaleidoscope cannot be fitted into the framework of a system..." (Gleizes, c.1916, letter addressed to Henri-Martin Barzun)From 1914 to the end of Gleizes's New York period—however nonrepresentational—works by the artist continued to be shaped by his personal experience, by the conviction that art was a social function, susceptible to theoretical formulation, and imbued with optimism. Gleizes's nonrepresentational paintings and those with an apparent visual basis existed side by side, differing only, writes Daniel Robbins, in "the degree of abstraction hidden by the uniformity with which they were painted and by the constant effort to tie the plastic realization of the painting to a specific, even unique, experience."

Albert Gleizes, ''Portrait d'un médecin militaire'' reproduced on the cover of the ''Gleizes catalogue raisonné'', Vol. 1, Somogy, 1998, Paris

File:Albert Gleizes, 1915, Study No. 5 for Portrait of an Army Doctor (Étude 5 pour Portrait d'un médecin militaire), Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum.jpg

Toul, Caserne Maréchal Ney, c. 1915, where Gleizes was stationed during his mobilization

File:Fernand Léger, 1916, Soldier with a pipe (Le Soldat à la Pipe), oil on canvas, 130 x 97 cm, Kunstsammlung Nordrhein-Westfalen, Dùsseldorf.jpg

File:Albert Gleizes, 1914-15, Portrait of an Army Doctor (Portrait d'un médecin militaire), structural schematic.jpg

Albert Gleizes, 1915, ''Study No. 5 for Portrait of an Army Doctor'' (''Étude 5 pour Portrait d'un médecin militaire''), graphite on paper, 24.4 x 18.6 cm, [[Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum

Albert Gleizes, 1914-15, ''Portrait de Florent Schmitt'' (''Le Pianiste''), pastel, 36 x 27 cm. This is a study for an oil on canvas titled ''Portrait de Florent Schmitt'', 1914–15, {{convert

Category:Paintings in the Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum

Musée d'Art Moderne de la Ville de Paris

abbr=on}}.<ref>[https://archive.org/stream/albertgleizes1881robb#page/64/mode/2up Daniel Robbins, ''Albert Gleizes, 1881-1953: a retrospective exhibition'', Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum, 1964, ''Portrait de Florent Schmitt'', 1914-15, cat. no. 70]</ref> A similar work dated 1915 is in the Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum, New York.<ref>[http://www.guggenheim.org/new-york/collections/collection-online/artwork/1455 Albert Gleizes, 1915, ''Musician, Florent Schmitt (Un Musicien, Florent Schmitt)'', Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum]</ref>

File:Toul, Caserne Maréchal Ney, c. 1915.jpg

File:Albert Gleizes, 1915, Retour, published in Le Mot, n. 20, 1 July 1915.jpg

Albert Gleizes, ''Portrait of an Army Doctor'', structural schematic overlay showing the [[Golden ratio

File:Albert Gleizes, catalogue raisonné, Vol. 1, Somogy, 1998, Paris.jpg

File:Albert Gleizes, 1914-15, Portrait de Florent Schmitt (Le Pianiste), pastel, 36 x 27 cm.jpg

File:Doctor Mayer Lambert (1870-1943), Professor of Physiology, Faculty of Nancy.jpg

Albert Gleizes, 1915, ''Retour de Bois-le-Prêtre'', wood engraving, 39 x 50 cm, published in ''Le mot'', n. 20, 1 July 1915

File:Jean Metzinger, 1915, Soldat jouant aux échecs (Soldier at a Game of Chess), oil on canvas, 81.3 x 61 cm, Smart Museum of Art.jpg


Portrait of an Army Doctor

Prompt: How does Portrait of an Army Doctor explain its Description?

Portrait of an Army Doctor is an oil painting on canvas with dimensions 119.8 cm × 95.1 cm (47.2 in × 37.4 in) inscribed Alb. Gleizes, Toul 1914, lower right. An early photograph of the work shows the inscribed date as 1914–15.Gleizes's works from this period, just as those of the early 1920s, are "characterized by dynamic intersections of vertical, diagonal, horizontal and circular movements", writes art historian Daniel Robbins, "austere in touch but loaded with energetic pattern." Gleizes brings into practice an effect reminiscent of Divisionist theory via the incorporation of colored squares within three sections of the canvas, one of which is composed of alternating pigments of contrasting blues and reds. The use of blue, white and red in the overall composition recall the colors of the French flag. Such a display of patriotism was not uncommon among the Cubists, even leading up to the war. French flags can be seen in the works of Roger de La Fresnaye; Fourteenth of July, 1913–14 (Museum of Fine Arts, Houston, TX), and The Conquest of the Air, 1913 (Museum of Modern Art, New York). The Cubo-Futurist Gino Severini, too, included the French flag in his 1913 painting Train of the Wounded, 1913. While not depicting the flag itself, wartime works by Jean Metzinger dominantly exhibit blues and reds, along with army green, in such works as Soldat jouant aux échecs (Soldier at a Game of Chess), 1914–15, Smart Museum of Art, and Femme au miroir (Lady at her Dressing Table), April 1916.In 1915 Gleizes published an article in Jean Cocteau's patriotic review, Le Mot in which he attacks critics who accuse the new tendencies in art of being unpatriotic. The final issue of Le Mot includes a sketch by Gleizes based on wounded soldiers returning from a battle at Bois le Prêtre.Despite its descriptive title, the subject matter of Portrait of an Army Doctor has practically disappeared. The canvas is no longer analyzed or structured geometrically according to the golden ratio, though the armrest of the chair is treated as the beginning of a Fibonacci spiral. The masses of the composition are arranged in quasi-equilibrium. The center of the sitter face is the superior vertex of a triangular construct that extends toward the outer edges of the canvas.The intersection of the two arcs that compose the shoulders is centered on the vertical axis. The source of light is undetermined, or omnidirectional, just as the vantage point of the artist, in accord with the Cubist principle of 'simultaneity' (or multiple perspective): "a succession of descriptive aspects of the external world... by giving a multiple series of appearances, each one seen in its own perspective", writes Gleizes, "a succession of descriptive states. Waking up, this eye lurched from one point of view to the other, jumped back again, and was again thrown into a state of excitement." Cubism, with its new geometry, its dynamism and multiple view-point perspective, not only represented a departure from Euclid's model, but it achieved, according to Gleizes and Metzinger, a better representation of the real world: one that was mobile and changing in time. For Gleizes, Cubism represented a "normal evolution of an art that was mobile like life itself".Multiple perspective was in itself a protest against painting defined as an art based on space, that is to say, static. An aspiration towards mobility begins to appear and to appeal to the eye. The eye is required to enter into that collaboration which is necessary if it wishes to emerge from the torpor to which it had been reduced at the insistence of the single point perspective of the Renaissance; painting makes a legitimate claim to be regarded as an art of time ... Breaking up the plane into surfaces of different sizes reduced to geometrical forms. Sometimes certain indications of figures appear in this assemblage, obtained with the help of a few lines and several suggestive points. (Gleizes, 1927)While depth perception and perspective have been subdued to a large extent, the primary structural lines appear to recede or converge toward a multitude of vanishing points located at infinity. Though, unlike those of classical perspective, these vanishing points are not placed on a given horizon (a theoretical line that represents the eye level of the observer), nor do they allow the viewer to reconstruct the relative distance of parts or features of an object. Rather, they are placed on various horizons. The viewer is observing a non-linear scene where the picture plane is not parallel to any of the scene's multiple axes, giving the appearance of different forms of calculated perspective.Surfaces appear to overlap creating a sense of occlusion, but the resulting information is insufficient to allow the observer to recreate depth of field. By removing these optical cues, the geometrical method of perspective used to create the illusion of form, space and depth since the Renaissance, the artifice of an illusionistic trickery as Metzinger called it, Gleizes's aim was to arrive at what he perceived as 'truth', the constructive essence of the physical world.So, now that we are in possession of the means (and I firmly believe that we are) we must pitilessly reject the image of the Renaissance that is addressed exclusively to the senses, but, at the same time, we should not fear, should the occasion present itself, an image determined by geometry, by the square, the right angle, because it, in its nature, corresponds to the higher stages. The Renaissance image, I repeat, bears no, or too little, relation to them; the new image will give more meaning and variety to the space. (Gleizes)We are in the age of synthesis. An hour in the life of a man today raises more levels, insights, actions, than a year of that of any other century. That is what I try to say in my art. The rapid sketch of an Impressionist crystallised the fragility of a sensation; it was immobilized in his picture. The painting of today must crystallise a thousand sensations in an aesthetic order. And I see that for that there is no need to reveal other laws, other theorems with definitive forms. A beauty achieved through a mathematical order can only have a relative life; the universal kaleidoscope cannot be fitted into the framework of a system..." (Gleizes, c.1916, letter addressed to Henri-Martin Barzun)From 1914 to the end of Gleizes's New York period—however nonrepresentational—works by the artist continued to be shaped by his personal experience, by the conviction that art was a social function, susceptible to theoretical formulation, and imbued with optimism. Gleizes's nonrepresentational paintings and those with an apparent visual basis existed side by side, differing only, writes Daniel Robbins, in "the degree of abstraction hidden by the uniformity with which they were painted and by the constant effort to tie the plastic realization of the painting to a specific, even unique, experience."

Albert Gleizes, ''Portrait d'un médecin militaire'' reproduced on the cover of the ''Gleizes catalogue raisonné'', Vol. 1, Somogy, 1998, Paris

File:Albert Gleizes, 1915, Study No. 5 for Portrait of an Army Doctor (Étude 5 pour Portrait d'un médecin militaire), Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum.jpg

Toul, Caserne Maréchal Ney, c. 1915, where Gleizes was stationed during his mobilization

File:Fernand Léger, 1916, Soldier with a pipe (Le Soldat à la Pipe), oil on canvas, 130 x 97 cm, Kunstsammlung Nordrhein-Westfalen, Dùsseldorf.jpg

File:Albert Gleizes, 1914-15, Portrait of an Army Doctor (Portrait d'un médecin militaire), structural schematic.jpg

Albert Gleizes, 1915, ''Study No. 5 for Portrait of an Army Doctor'' (''Étude 5 pour Portrait d'un médecin militaire''), graphite on paper, 24.4 x 18.6 cm, [[Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum

Albert Gleizes, 1914-15, ''Portrait de Florent Schmitt'' (''Le Pianiste''), pastel, 36 x 27 cm. This is a study for an oil on canvas titled ''Portrait de Florent Schmitt'', 1914–15, {{convert

Category:Paintings in the Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum

Musée d'Art Moderne de la Ville de Paris

abbr=on}}.<ref>[https://archive.org/stream/albertgleizes1881robb#page/64/mode/2up Daniel Robbins, ''Albert Gleizes, 1881-1953: a retrospective exhibition'', Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum, 1964, ''Portrait de Florent Schmitt'', 1914-15, cat. no. 70]</ref> A similar work dated 1915 is in the Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum, New York.<ref>[http://www.guggenheim.org/new-york/collections/collection-online/artwork/1455 Albert Gleizes, 1915, ''Musician, Florent Schmitt (Un Musicien, Florent Schmitt)'', Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum]</ref>

File:Toul, Caserne Maréchal Ney, c. 1915.jpg

File:Albert Gleizes, 1915, Retour, published in Le Mot, n. 20, 1 July 1915.jpg

Albert Gleizes, ''Portrait of an Army Doctor'', structural schematic overlay showing the [[Golden ratio

File:Albert Gleizes, catalogue raisonné, Vol. 1, Somogy, 1998, Paris.jpg

File:Albert Gleizes, 1914-15, Portrait de Florent Schmitt (Le Pianiste), pastel, 36 x 27 cm.jpg

File:Doctor Mayer Lambert (1870-1943), Professor of Physiology, Faculty of Nancy.jpg

Albert Gleizes, 1915, ''Retour de Bois-le-Prêtre'', wood engraving, 39 x 50 cm, published in ''Le mot'', n. 20, 1 July 1915

File:Jean Metzinger, 1915, Soldat jouant aux échecs (Soldier at a Game of Chess), oil on canvas, 81.3 x 61 cm, Smart Museum of Art.jpg