Bibliography – for section one

References & Research links as per UCA Harvard Referencing Guide:

This is the list of refernces I made for section one of the course before I was told it should be on each post (not one giant list). I have tried to retrospectively put the right references onto each post but this page remains for reference in case I missed any.

 

Artble. (2016) The Toilet of Venus At: http://www.artble.com/artists/diego_velazquez/paintings/the_toilet_of_venus
(Accessed on 16 February 16)

Bowron, E. P. (2016) ‘Batoni, Pompeo.’ In: Grove Art Online. Oxford Art Online. Oxford University Press At: http://www.oxfordartonline.com/subscriber/article/grove/art/T006862
(Accessed on 17 February 16)

Brown, M. (2008) ‘Solved: mystery of The Ugly Duchess – and the Da Vinci connection’ In: The Guardian [online] At: http://www.theguardian.com/culture/2008/oct/11/art-painting
(Accessed on 17 February 16)

Campbell Hutchison, J & Van der Stock, J. (2016) ‘Metsys.’ In: Grove Art Online. Oxford Art Online. Oxford University Press At: http://www.oxfordartonline.com/subscriber/article/grove/art/T057484pg1#T057485
(Accessed on 17 February 16)

Canal Educatif à la Demande (CED). (2013) ArtSleuth 6: HOLBEIN – The Ambassadors (final version) – National Gallery London [user-generated content online] Creat. http://www.canal-educatif.com 5 Oct 2013 At: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8MR-sKVRPdg
(Accessed on 5 February 16)

Deutsche Börse. (2013) Deutsche Börse Photography Prize [Exhibition]. London: Photographers Gallery.

Deutsche Börse. (2014) Deutsche Börse Photography Prize [Exhibition]. London: Photographers Gallery.

D’Alleva. (2010) How to Write Art History. (2nd Ed), London, Laurence King Publishing
Ellison, K. (2015) Meet Geeohsnap, the artist using Snapchat as his canvas At: http://www.goexplore.net/internet-heroes/geeohsnap-turns-snapchats-into-art/
(Accessed on 23 December 15)

Fernández, A. A. (2001) ‘The First Owner of the Rokeby Venus’ In: The Burlington Magazine, Vol. 143, Number 1175, February, 2001, p91-94

Foister. (2003) ‘Dürer’s Nuremberg Legacy: The case of the National Gallery portrait of Dürer’s father’’ In British Museum Occasional Paper 130 (PDF 301k), Conference ‘Albrecht Dürer and his Legacy’, British Museum, London, 21 March 2003. p1-8

Hartman, H. (2015) ‘RIBA Stirling Prize 2015: Which is the greenest of them all?’ In: Architects Journal 05.10.15 [online] At: http://www.architectsjournal.co.uk/buildings/riba-stirling-prize-2015-which-is-the-greenest-of-them-all/8690289.fullarticle
(Accessed on 21 December 15)

Hattenstone, S. (2011) ‘Cindy Sherman: Me, myself and I’ In: The Guardian [online] At: http://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2011/jan/15/cindy-sherman-interview
(Accessed on 25 January 16)

Honour, H & Fleming, J. (2009) A World History of Art. (7th Ed), London, Laurence King Publishing
Hudson, M. (2015) ‘Goya: The Portraits at the National Gallery is the show of the decade’ In: The Telegraph [online] At: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/art/what-to-see/goyas-portraits-national-gallery-review/
(Accessed on 24 December 15)

Jones, J. (2003) ‘Costanza Caetani, Fra Bartolommeo (c1480-90)’ In: The Guardian [online] At: http://www.theguardian.com/culture/2003/dec/20/art
(Accessed on 14 January 16)

Jones, J. (2015a) ‘Why are there no great British nativity scenes?’ In: The Guardian [online] At: http://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/jonathanjonesblog/2015/dec/22/why-are-there-no-great-british-nativity-scenes
(Accessed on 24 December 15)

Jones, J. (2015b) ‘Shia LaBeouf, Quentin Blake and a grenade in the Turner prize – the week in art’ In: The Guardian [online] At: http://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2015/dec/11/shia-labeouf-quentin-blake-grenade-turner-prize-assemble-week-in-art
(Accessed on 24 December 15)

Jones, J. (2015c) ‘Why are there no great British nativity scenes?’ In: The Guardian [online] At: http://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/jonathanjonesblog/2015/dec/22/why-are-there-no-great-british-nativity-scenes
(Accessed on 24 December 15)

Mall Galleries. (2015) Top Ten Portrait Painters 2015 At: http://www.mallgalleries.org.uk/about-us/blog/top-ten-portrait-painters-2015
(Accessed on 23 December 15)

Mattison, Courtney. (2014) Our Changing Seas III At: http://courtneymattison.com/ourchangingseas-iii/
(Accessed on 21 December 15)

McCouat, P. (2014) ‘From The Rokeby Venus To Fascism – Pt 1: Why Did Suffragettes Attack Artworks?’ In: Journal Of Art In Society [online] At: http://www.artinsociety.com/from-the-rokeby-venus-to-fascism-pt-1-why-did-suffragettes-attack-artworks.html
(Accessed on 15 February 16)

Mediateca di Palazzo Medici Riccardi. (2009) ‘Adoration of the Magi’, by Sandro Botticelli At: http://www.palazzo-medici.it/mediateca/en/schede.php?id_scheda=318
(Accessed on 14 January 16)

MoMA. (2012) Interactives – Cindy Sherman At: http://www.moma.org/interactives/exhibitions/2012/cindysherman/
(Accessed on 25 January 16)

Museo Del Prado. (2016) Self-portrait, DURERO, ALBERTO At: https://www.museodelprado.es/en/the-collection/art-work/-self-portrait/8417d190-eb9d-4c52-9c89-dcdcd0109b5b
(Accessed on 24 January 16)

Musée d’Orsay. (2006) Edouard Manet, Olympia At: http://www.musee-orsay.fr/en/collections/works-in-focus/search/commentaire_id/olympia-7087.html
(Accessed on 17 February 16)

Nasjonalmuseet. (2016) Edvard Munch in the National Museum, Self-Portrait with Cigarette, 1895 At: http://www.nasjonalmuseet.no/en/collections_and_research/our_collections/edvard_munch_in_the_national_museum/Self-Portrait+with+Cigarette%2C+1895.b7C_wljWXL.ips
(Accessed on 17 January 16)

National Gallery. (2010) The Painter’s Father At: http://www.nationalgallery.org.uk/paintings/research/the-painters-father
(Accessed on 16 January 16)

National Gallery. (2016a) Costanza Caetani At: http://www.nationalgallery.org.uk/paintings/style-of-domenico-ghirlandaio-costanza-caetani
(Accessed on 14 January 16)

National Gallery. (2016b) After Albrecht Dürer, The Painter’s Father At: http://www.nationalgallery.org.uk/paintings/after-albrecht-durer-the-painters-father
(Accessed on 14 January 16)

National Gallery. (2016c) Rembrandt, Self Portrait at the Age of 34 At: http://www.nationalgallery.org.uk/paintings/rembrandt-self-portrait-at-the-age-of-34
(Accessed on 16 January 16)

National Gallery. (2016d) About the building At: http://www.nationalgallery.org.uk/paintings/history/about-the-building/
(Accessed on 1 February 16)

National Gallery. (2016e) ‘The Ambassadors’,1533, Hans Holbein the Younger At: http://www.nationalgallery.org.uk/paintings/hans-holbein-the-younger-the-ambassadors
(Accessed on 4 February 16)

National Gallery. (2016f) Titian – The Tribute Money At: http://www.nationalgallery.org.uk/paintings/titian-the-tribute-money
(Accessed on 10 February 16)

National Gallery. (2016g) El Greco – The Adoration of the Name of Jesus At: http://www.nationalgallery.org.uk/paintings/el-greco-the-adoration-of-the-name-of-jesus
(Accessed on 10 February 16)

National Gallery. (2016h) Giovanni Girolamo Savoldo – ‘Mary Magdalene’ At: http://www.nationalgallery.org.uk/paintings/giovanni-girolamo-savoldo-mary-magdalene
(Accessed on 10 February 16)

National Gallery. (2016i) Quinten Massys – An Old Woman (‘The Ugly Duchess’) At: http://www.nationalgallery.org.uk/paintings/quinten-massys-an-old-woman-the-ugly-duchess
(Accessed on 10 February 16)

National Gallery. (2016j) Anthony van Dyck – Equestrian Portrait of Charles I, about 1637-8, At: http://www.nationalgallery.org.uk/paintings/anthony-van-dyck-equestrian-portrait-of-charles-i
(Accessed on 11 February 16)

National Gallery. (2016k) Studio of Peter Paul Rubens – ‘Portrait of the Archduke Albert’, National Gallery, London At: http://www.nationalgallery.org.uk/paintings/studio-of-peter-paul-rubens-portrait-of-the-archduke-albert
(Accessed on 11 February 16)

National Gallery. (2016l) Studio of Peter Paul Rubens – ‘Portrait of the Infanta Isabella’, National Gallery, London At: http://www.nationalgallery.org.uk/paintings/studio-of-peter-paul-rubens-portrait-of-the-infanta-isabella
(Accessed on 11 February 16)

National Gallery. (2016m) Diego Velázquez – The Toilet of Venus (‘The Rokeby Venus’) At: http://www.nationalgallery.org.uk/paintings/diego-velazquez-the-toilet-of-venus-the-rokeby-venus
(Accessed on 11 February 16)

National Gallery. (2016n) Michelangelo Merisi da Caravaggio – The Supper at Emmaus At: http://www.nationalgallery.org.uk/paintings/michelangelo-merisi-da-caravaggio-the-supper-at-emmaus
(Accessed on 11 February 16)

National Gallery. (2016o) Pompeo Girolamo Batoni – Portrait of Richard Milles At: http://www.nationalgallery.org.uk/paintings/pompeo-girolamo-batoni-portrait-of-richard-milles
(Accessed on 11 February 16)

National Gallery. (2016p) Francisco de Goya – Doña Isabel de Porcel At: http://www.nationalgallery.org.uk/paintings/francisco-de-goya-dona-isabel-de-porcel
(Accessed on 11 February 16)

National Gallery. (2016q) Visions of Paradise: Botticini’s Palmieri Altarpiece At: http://www.nationalgallery.org.uk/whats-on/calendar/visions-of-paradise
(Accessed on 12 February 16)

National Gallery. (2016r) The Grand Tour At: http://www.nationalgallery.org.uk/the-grand-tour
(Accessed on 17 February 16)

National Gallery. (2016s) Pompeo Girolamo Batoni At: http://www.nationalgallery.org.uk/artists/pompeo-girolamo-batoni
(Accessed on 17 February 16)

National Gallery Podcast. (2008) Excerpt from Episode 25 – Massys – An Old Woman (‘The Ugly Duchess’) {audio podcast, online} November 2008 At: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2cBFTfwZvDc
(Accessed on 17 February 16)

National Gallery Podcast. (2009) Excerpt from Episode 33 – Professor Philip Steadman and Louise Govier discuss ‘The Ambassadors’ {audio podcast, online} July 2009 At: http://www.nationalgallery.org.uk/paintings/hans-holbein-the-younger-the-ambassadors
(Accessed on 5 February 16)

National Gallery YouTube. (2010a) Excerpt from ‘Renaissance Faces: Van Eyck to Titian’ – Symbolism in Holbein’s ‘Ambassadors’ [user-generated content online] Creat. National Gallery, London 13 July 2010 At: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ReF2O8rzpb4
(Accessed on 5 February 16)

National Gallery YouTube. (2010b) Excerpt from Making & Meaning: Holbein’s Ambassadors – Holbein’s skull – Part one [user-generated content online] Creat. National Gallery, London 13 July 2010 At: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9KiVNIUMmCc
(Accessed on 5 February 16)

National Gallery YouTube. (2010c) Excerpt from Making & Meaning: Holbein’s Ambassadors – Holbein’s skull – Part two [user-generated content online] Creat. National Gallery, London 13 July 2010 At: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mczs4muSUHc
(Accessed on 5 February 16)

National Gallery YouTube. (2015a) Goya’s ‘Portrait of Doña Isabel de Porcel’: A Question of Attribution | The National Gallery, London [user-generated content online] Creat. National Gallery, London 22 Dec 2015 At: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3dGauNAp5k0
(Accessed on 11 February 16)

National Gallery YouTube. (2015b) Reconstructing the destroyed church of San Pier Maggiore, Florence | The National Gallery, London [user-generated content online] Creat. National Gallery, London 15 Nov 2015 At: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZUXa1nDtOB0
(Accessed on 12 February 16)

National Portrait Gallery. (2016) Sam Taylor-Johnson (Sam Taylor-Wood) (‘Self-portrait in Single-breasted Suit with Hare’) At: http://www.npg.org.uk/collections/search/portrait/mw58423/Sam-Taylor-Johnson-Sam-Taylor-Wood-Self-portrait-in-Single-breasted-Suit-with-Hare
(Accessed on 26 January 16)

Pentilla, A. (2014) The Teapot that Saved the World: Art Activism by Ceramist Richard Notkin At: http://www.tikkun.org/tikkundaily/2014/02/22/the-teapot-that-saved-the-world-art-activism-by-ceramist-richard-notkin/
(Accessed on 21 December 15)

Phaidon. (2014) How Bruce Nauman pushed photography forward At: http://uk.phaidon.com/agenda/art/articles/2014/october/15/how-bruce-nauman-pushed-photography-forward/
(Accessed on 25 January 16)

Pointon. (1997) History of Art: A Students’ Handbook. (4th Ed), London, Routledge.
Polo Museale Fiorentino. (2016) Digital Archives of the Polo Museale Fiorentino At: http://www.uffizi.firenze.it/en/archivi/
(Accessed on 14 January 16)

Prix Pictet. (2012) Power [Exhibition]. London: Saatchi Gallery.

Prix Pictet. (2013) Consumption [Exhibition]. London: V&A.

Pérez Sánchez, A. E. (2016) ‘Velázquez, Diego’ In: Grove Art Online. Oxford Art Online. Oxford University Press At: http://www.oxfordartonline.com/subscriber/article/grove/art/T088463
(Accessed on 16 February 16)

Reeve, J. (2002) ‘Grand Tour.’ In: Grove Art Online. Oxford Art Online. Oxford University Press At: http://www.oxfordartonline.com/subscriber/article/grove/art/T034048
(Accessed on 17 February 16)

Roberts, J J. (2015) Art or theft? Famous artist sells Instagram shots for $100K At: http://fortune.com/2015/05/26/instagram-copyright-art/
(Accessed on 23 December 15)

Silverstein Properties. (2015) One World Trade Center At: http://www.wtc.com/about/buildings/1-world-trade-center
(Accessed on 21 December 15)

Smart, A. (2015) ‘Defining Beauty: the body in ancient Greek art, British Museum, review: ‘a missed opportunity” In: The Telegraph [online] At: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/art/what-to-see/defining-beauty-the-body-in-ancient-greek-art-british-museum-review-a-missed-opportunity/
(Accessed on 24 December 15)

Smarthistory. (2012) Hans Holbein the Younger, The Ambassadors, 1533 [user-generated content online] Creat. Khan Academy 2 April 2012 At: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PQZUIGzinZA
(Accessed on 5 February 16)

Stamberg. (2011) Gauguin’s Nude Tahitians Give The Wrong Impression At: http://www.npr.org/2011/03/15/134537646/gauguins-nude-tahitians-give-the-wrong-impression
(Accessed on 17 February 16)

Stebbins, F. A.. (1962) ‘The Astronomical Instruments in Holbein’s “Ambassadors”‘ In Journal of the Royal Astronomical Society of Canada, Vol. 56, p.45 [online] At: http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu//full/1962JRASC..56…45S/0000045.000.html
(Accessed on 7 February 16)

Tate. (2001) Sarah Lucas, Self Portrait with Fried Eggs 1996 At: http://www.tate.org.uk/art/artworks/lucas-self-portrait-with-fried-eggs-p78447
(Accessed on 26 January 16)

Tate. (2002a) Shopping: A century of art and consumer culture At: http://www.tate.org.uk/whats-on/tate-liverpool/exhibition/shopping-century-art-and-consumer-culture
(Accessed on 21 December 15)

Tate. (2002b) Michael Craig-Martin – An Oak Tree, 1973 At: http://www.tate.org.uk/art/artworks/craig-martin-an-oak-tree-l02262
(Accessed on 23 December 15)

The Anne Boleyn Files. (2010) Holbein’s The Ambassadors: A Renaissance Puzzle? – Part One: Context At: http://www.theanneboleynfiles.com/holbeins-the-ambassadors-a-renaissance-puzzle-part-one-context/6516/
(Accessed on 7 February 16)

The Guardian. (2014) ‘Possible Banksy work near GCHQ tackles government surveillance’ In: The Guardian [online] At: http://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2014/apr/14/possible-banksy-work-gchq-cheltenham-government-surveillance
(Accessed on 21 December 15)

The Times. (1914) ‘National Gallery Outrage. The Rokeby Venus. Suffragist prisoner in court. Extent of the Damage’ In the Times, 11 March 1914 p.9 At: http://www.heretical.com/suffrage/1914tms2.html
(Accessed on 15 February 16)

UCA Harvard Referencing Guide. (2015) At: http://community.ucreative.ac.uk/media/pdf/t/q/UCA_Harvard_referencing_guide.pdf
(Accessed on 17 December 15)

V&A. (2003) Art Deco: Global Inspiration At: http://www.vam.ac.uk/content/articles/a/art-deco-global-inspiration/
(Accessed on 24 December 15)

Van Gogh Museum. (2016) Self-Portrait with Grey Felt Hat At: http://vangoghmuseum.nl/en/collection/s0016V1962
(Accessed on 17 January 16)

Venice Biennale. (2013) Various Titles [Exhibition]. Venice: Various locations

Walker, T. (2014) ‘Tracey Emin: Why are women artists paid less than men?’ In: The Telegraph [online] At: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/celebritynews/10587996/Tracey-Emin-Why-are-women-artists-paid-less-than-men.html
(Accessed on 23 December 15)

White Cube. (2016) Artists – Sam Taylor-Johnson At: http://whitecube.com/artists/sam_taylor-johnson/
(Accessed on 21 January 16)

Whitney Museum of American Art. (2016) Bruce Nauman, Self Portrait as a Fountain, 1966-67, printed 1970 At: http://collection.whitney.org/object/5714
(Accessed on 25 January 16)

Wyld, M. ‘The Restoration History of Holbein’s “The Ambassadors”‘. National Gallery Technical Bulletin Vol 19, pp 4–25.
At: http://www.nationalgallery.org.uk/technical-bulletin/wyld1998
(Accessed on 7 February 16)

Advertisements

Assignment One

I have made the assignment as a pdf document which can be downloaded here: Assignment 1 PDF submission. I did it this way essentially because the course notes lists the requirements in A4 page sizes and in a pdf is easier to tell than a never ending blog post page.

The assignment includes.

  • Two annotations of paintings
  • Three pages of notes (one for each art work)
  • One 500 word analysis
  • References for assignment 1

Reflection

Reflection on the annotations:

I found the annotations the most interesting parts to do. It incorporated both formal and critical analysis (as per my understanding of that from D’Alleva. (2010) How to Write Art History).

In the course notes it requests for hand written pages with sketches on them which I did not do. I did try some sketches (and put them on my blog under a new category of sketchbook), however since my tutor advised that a purely digital submission is possible it seemed neater to do them as I have done them. For the second painting, Rokeby Venus, I did make a smaller image in black and white to draw arrows over, had I done this as a hand writen page with the postcards from the gallery I would have sketched that. Perhaps for future ones sketches will be required?

For each I tried my best to describe them in detail rather than just the really obvious bits. I tried to include the way my eye was lead around the painting for those compositions. I’m on the photography degree pathway so this is my first real go at looking at paintings in this way.

Reflection on the notes pages:

These pages seemed pretty easy to do as its just a summary of notes on what I’ve read during my research, unless I’ve missed something here and done it all wrong? I am eagerly anticipating feedback from my tutor to see if I have the right end of this particular stick.

I tried to use the headings from the course note guidelines in this section for organising the notes. I did not manage to fill each heading for all of the paintings though. I found the heading of ‘style and movements’ particularly tricky to write about because many of the references don’t really explain anything like that. I tried not to use too many direct quotes too.

Reflection on the analysis:

The course notes say

Describe what you see.
Interpret its historical and artistic context.
Evaluate how successful the image is and how it compares with similar images by other artists or other works by the same artist.

I found the 500 word limit quite taxing to keep to (which bodes well for the 2000 word essay in assignment 5). I got in the first two points but not the last in 508 words. I tried to make a beginning, middle and end, where one paragraph flows into the next but still cover a lot of the points I wanted to make. I was quite pleased with the conclusion because it sort of popped out at me while I was writing.

Reflection on fact checking and references:

I tried to use official webpages and scholarly works (and not rely on wikipedia which I’ve seen other students picked up for). Its quick tricky though getting hold of some of the material in a decent timeframe. For example, some library books I’d reserved to help with the assignment research for Holbein came in for collection too late because I’d basically finished my assignment by then. They look really interesting so I’ll probably still give them a skim read, they will also help to double check my facts because at least one of the reference websites I used was not scholarly really at all but I did list its references and on it were some of these books.

I put the references for the assignment actually in the pdf but all the references for the blog so far are in one giant bibliography. I’m now wondering whether this was such a good idea (perhaps I should be doing it on each post)? Perhaps my tutor can advise before I go much further into the course? For books and other materials it makes sense but it seems very laborious to document webpages in this manner since as a blog they can easily be incorporated into the text (and are anyway so the bibliography is extra).

Overall reflection against the Assessment Criteria:

  • Demonstration of subject-based knowledge and understanding – I have tried to research my chosen paintings using the course template such that I get a broad range of knowledge about them and their historical context. It is a bit like falling down the rabbit hole but incredibly interesting.
  • Demonstration of research skills – I went to see the paintings I chose to annotate in person but also evaluated the sources I was looking at in books and on the internet for their scholarly worth. When using youtube for example I tried to look at reputable videos such as those uploaded by the National Gallery.
  • Demonstration of critical and evaluation skills – I tried to engage with the concepts though out part one within each of the exercises. When looking at the assignment images I tried to interpret what I was seeing as well as just describe it.
  • Communication – I think my ideas and points are written clearly. I am not sure of the language though, whether my writing style is too informal for an assignment. I will look forward to finding out from my tutor after this first go.

Visit to the National Gallery – The paintings

I wrote my notes room by room so I’ll write them up that way here too. I was only supposed to be going to see three or four paintings (in detail) but I couldn’t help myself and I did have all day so I ‘stopped by’ a lot more than I looked at ‘critically’.

Room 6

‘The Adoration of the Name of Jesus’, El Greco, 1578

El Greco, 1541 - 1614 The Adoration of the Name of Jesus late 1570s Oil and egg tempera on pine, 55.1 x 33.8 cm Bought, 1955 NG6260 http://www.nationalgallery.org.uk/paintings/NG6260
El Greco, 1541 – 1614
The Adoration of the Name of Jesus
late 1570s
Oil and egg tempera on pine, 55.1 x 33.8 cm
Bought, 1955
NG6260
http://www.nationalgallery.org.uk/paintings/NG6260

While I was going through the online catalogue room by room feature on the National Gallery website, this one caught my eye as one which might be interesting. It doesn’t really use the same colouring or style as most religious painting (which is probably why I found it more interesting, the other can get a little samey on first glance) and I liked the inclusion of clearly modern (at that time) figures within the picture. It’s quite small and indistinct in person though and the gallery lights were quite dim, I was glad I’d picked another in the same room as back up (see the Titian below).

The caption in the gallery reads:

“The Doge of Venice (with his back to us), the Pope (facing us), and King Philip of Spain (in black), kneel amid the heavenly hosts. Above, angels adore the monogram of Christ. The jaws of hell are represented on the right, and in the distance figures are cast into a fiery gulf.” National Gallery, London

 

‘The Tribute Money’ by Titian, about 1560-8 (perhaps begun in the 1540s)

Titian, active about 1506; died 1576 The Tribute Money about 1560-8 (perhaps begun in the 1540s) Oil on canvas, 112.2 x 103.2 cm Bought, 1852 NG224 http://www.nationalgallery.org.uk/paintings/NG224
Titian, active about 1506; died 1576
The Tribute Money
about 1560-8 (perhaps begun in the 1540s)
Oil on canvas, 112.2 x 103.2 cm
Bought, 1852
NG224
http://www.nationalgallery.org.uk/paintings/NG224

This was larger than I’d imagined. Standing in the gallery up close to the painting Christ looks positively boss-eyed which was the first thing I noticed about the painting (surely not Titian’s intent). Almost like he’s looking through the man not at him.

At my eye level the coin that the man is holding up to Christ is very noticeable in the composition, and he’s holding something metal in his other hand which I hadn’t noticed when I viewed the painting online, a purse perhaps? He also has a ring on that hand I hadn’t noticed. Christ’s hands are much paler than the other mans (no rings either), I don’t know why that is though.

The painting was large enough that when standing under it you notice the light reflecting off the surface of the top of the painting, I guess in the time it was painted lighting would have been much more subdued anyway, possibly lower and from candles. The light level in this room is controlled by the sensor in the caption beside the painting.

The surface of the painting is very smooth, you cannot really see any paint texture in it. You can see the painters brushstrokes in the highlights on the cuff and neck of Christ’s clothes though.

“During your gallery visit, take a look at one or two religious paintings. These can be quite hard for the modern viewer to interpret because few of us now have the level of biblical knowledge that contemporary viewers would have had.” (Course Notes p51)

Room 4

A critically looked at painting, already written about here in this blog post:

‘The Ambassadors’, Hans Holbein the Younger

National Gallery Room 4
National Gallery Room 4

Room 9 

‘Mary Magdalene’, by Giovanni Girolamo Savoldo, about 1535-40

Giovanni Girolamo Savoldo, about 1480 - about 1548 Mary Magdalene about 1535-40 Oil on canvas, 89.1 x 82.4 cm Bought, 1878 NG1031 http://www.nationalgallery.org.uk/paintings/NG1031
Giovanni Girolamo Savoldo, about 1480 – about 1548
Mary Magdalene
about 1535-40
Oil on canvas, 89.1 x 82.4 cm
Bought, 1878
NG1031
http://www.nationalgallery.org.uk/paintings/NG1031

This one wasn’t on my list I’d taken with me to check out but I had noticed it when browsing the catalog. This looks like a portrait and not really a religious painting because of the little depiction of Venice in the back ground. However, in the gallery I couldn’t take my eyes off it. She stares out from the picture at you and her cloak is luminous. It looks so real. It’s set off really nicely by the rather gloomy background on the right hand side of the painting. Its a rather odd pose really because she looks like she’s smuggling something under there but I think its just her hand.

“The story is recounted in the New Testament (John 20), and Mary Magdalene is here identified by the pot of ointment with which she anointed Christ’s body, and by the glimpse of her traditional red dress beneath a silver-grey cloak.” National Gallery, London

 

Room 5

Light in the galleries seem highly dependant on the outside light, perhaps because this smaller room didn’t seem to have any of the electric lights on. I came in here to see the ‘Ugly Duchess’, which I’ve written about in this separate blog post.

An Old Woman ('The Ugly Duchess') - Quinten Massys, about 1513, National Gallery, London.
An Old Woman (‘The Ugly Duchess’) – Quinten Massys, about 1513, National Gallery, London.

 

Room 31 – Mond Room

‘Equestrian Portrait of Charles I’, Anthony van Dyck, about 1637-8

National Gallery - 'Equestrian Portrait of Charles I', Anthony van Dyck, about 1637-8
National Gallery – ‘Equestrian Portrait of Charles I’, Anthony van Dyck, about 1637-8

This portrait is the largest I’ve ever seen as noted in my main gallery visit write up.

The texture of the surface is very smooth. I thought the colours look quite muted, wonder if it needs cleaning?

It’s all very grand, but for me the stars of the gallery space were these striking red background royal portraits. They look so realistic. The lace, the embroidery, really really amazing.

Studio of Peter Paul Rubens - 'Portrait of the Archduke Albert' and 'Portrait of the Infanta Isabella', National Gallery, London http://www.nationalgallery.org.uk/paintings/studio-of-peter-paul-rubens-portrait-of-the-archduke-albert http://www.nationalgallery.org.uk/paintings/studio-of-peter-paul-rubens-portrait-of-the-infanta-isabella
Studio of Peter Paul Rubens – ‘Portrait of the Archduke Albert’ and ‘Portrait of the Infanta Isabella’, National Gallery, London
http://www.nationalgallery.org.uk/paintings/studio-of-peter-paul-rubens-portrait-of-the-archduke-albert
http://www.nationalgallery.org.uk/paintings/studio-of-peter-paul-rubens-portrait-of-the-infanta-isabella

You can see the details a lot better in the proper National Gallery online reproductions (here and here) but the red looks much less vibrant in those than in life (probably why they hadn’t made it to my list of paintings to visit).

Room 30

This was one of the grand old rooms with sofas still in it instead of seating. I came to this room to see the famous Rokeby Venus, which I’ve written about in this separate blog post.

 

The Toilet of Venus ('The Rokeby Venus') 1647-51, Diego Velázquez. National Gallery, London.
The Toilet of Venus (‘The Rokeby Venus’)
1647-51, Diego Velázquez. National Gallery, London.

Room 32

‘The Supper at Emmaus’ by Michelangelo Merisi da Caravaggio, 1601.

Michelangelo Merisi da Caravaggio, 1571 - 1610 The Supper at Emmaus 1601 Oil and tempera on canvas, 141 x 196.2 cm Presented by the Hon. George Vernon, 1839 NG172 http://www.nationalgallery.org.uk/paintings/NG172
Michelangelo Merisi da Caravaggio, 1571 – 1610
The Supper at Emmaus
1601
Oil and tempera on canvas, 141 x 196.2 cm
Presented by the Hon. George Vernon, 1839
NG172
http://www.nationalgallery.org.uk/paintings/NG172

The first thing I noticed when looking at this is that the artist has chosen to make Christ look extremely feminine with soft round features. Also, the colours are nicer and the whole painting is a lot brighter than the gloomy online reproduction. I did not see a postcard for this one so could not compare that. Also, its slightly bigger than I imagined.

The man on the right with the wheel on his front has a weird perspective thing going on with his far hand, its looks enormous. The white scarf in his pocket attracts the eye, so I assume it means something significant.

The Supper at Emmaus 1601, Michelangelo Merisi da Caravaggio, nAtional Gallery, London
The Supper at Emmaus
1601, Michelangelo Merisi da Caravaggio, National Gallery, London

Note to self – todo: read the technical bulletin again and write some more.

Room 40 

Already written about in this blog post on the ‘Portrait of Richard Milles’

'Portrait of Richard Milles' probably 1760s, Pompeo Girolamo Batoni, National Gallery, London.
‘Portrait of Richard Milles’
probably 1760s, Pompeo Girolamo Batoni, National Gallery, London.

Room 39

‘Doña Isabel de Porcel’ – Francisco de Goya, before 1805

Francisco de Goya, 1746 - 1828 Doña Isabel de Porcel before 1805 Oil on canvas, 82 x 54.6 cm Bought, 1896 NG1473 http://www.nationalgallery.org.uk/paintings/NG1473
Francisco de Goya, 1746 – 1828
Doña Isabel de Porcel
before 1805
Oil on canvas, 82 x 54.6 cm
Bought, 1896
NG1473
http://www.nationalgallery.org.uk/paintings/NG1473

I added this one to the list to see after seeing this video on youtube. I did very much enjoy seeing this painting despite not being able to see it in the context of the exhibition mentioned (which I missed unfortunately due to having a sick baby to look after in its final week).

The skin tone on the face did look a bit pallid but it is such a beautiful portrait. The surface of the painting isn’t very smooth like many I’d seen this visit. You can see the brushwork of her veil against the light for example.

These were all I wrote notes about (by this time I was a little arted-out for critical looking) however, I took a few more photos of interesting paintings that caught my eye.

Room 24

As mentioned, I went to see the Rembrandt self portrait but opposite him was this gruesome scene (poor Rembrandt, what did he do to deserve to look at that across the way).

Two Followers of Cadmus devoured by a Dragon 1588, Cornelis van Haarlem, National Gallery, London http://www.nationalgallery.org.uk/paintings/cornelis-van-haarlem-two-followers-of-cadmus-devoured-by-a-dragon
Two Followers of Cadmus devoured by a Dragon
1588, Cornelis van Haarlem, National Gallery, London
http://www.nationalgallery.org.uk/paintings/cornelis-van-haarlem-two-followers-of-cadmus-devoured-by-a-dragon

In the same room another great portrait by Rembrandt

'Portrait of Aechje Claesdr', 1634, Rembrandt http://www.nationalgallery.org.uk/paintings/rembrandt-portrait-of-aechje-claesdr.
‘Portrait of Aechje Claesdr’, 1634, Rembrandt
http://www.nationalgallery.org.uk/paintings/rembrandt-portrait-of-aechje-claesdr.

Next door, in a very dark Room 25, was the rather smaller than I had anticipated, ‘A Young Woman standing at a Virginal’ by Johannes Vermeer

Room 25 - a Man looks at 'A Young Woman standing at a Virginal' about 1670-2, Johannes Vermeer http://www.nationalgallery.org.uk/paintings/johannes-vermeer-a-young-woman-standing-at-a-virginal
Room 25 – a Man looks at ‘A Young Woman standing at a Virginal’
about 1670-2, Johannes Vermeer
http://www.nationalgallery.org.uk/paintings/johannes-vermeer-a-young-woman-standing-at-a-virginal
'A Young Woman standing at a Virginal' about 1670-2, Johannes Vermeer, National Gallery London http://www.nationalgallery.org.uk/paintings/johannes-vermeer-a-young-woman-standing-at-a-virginal
‘A Young Woman standing at a Virginal’
about 1670-2, Johannes Vermeer, National Gallery London
http://www.nationalgallery.org.uk/paintings/johannes-vermeer-a-young-woman-standing-at-a-virginal

Sunley Room

This room held a small exhibition which I wrote about in this blog post.

I wanted to get time to visit the Sailsbury wing to see the two I wrote about in my portraits blog post but there just wasn’t. Maybe next time.

 

Reflection on the visit.

Thinking about it now and looking back at my notes I really did try and cram too much into my visit. I expect students who are pushed for time ‘out in the field’ often do this. My personal circumstances are such that I have easy access to London but I’m incredibly short on opportunities to actually go ‘out’ there. When I’m there, I’m working, and when I’m home, I have my baby to look after. My coursework fits nicely into the time that she’s asleep or when I’m commuting I can read but actual opportunities to get to a gallery are ‘by special arrangement’. Thus although I tried to critically look at the paintings, study them, and note what was interesting at the time, or notes and impressions that could only be obtained by actually standing in front of them; the other details of a formal analysis which can be obtained by merely looking at the details of the paintings can easily be obtained by zooming into the pictures on the website.

I did find myself arted-out, by that I mean I’d lost the concentration needed to really look at the works properly after a while. I thought this might happen which is why I tried to prioritise those that I was intending to write about for the assignment near the start of the visit, however it did mean that my trip to the National Portrait Gallery afterwards was a bit of a washout.

I was very pleased that I’d taken the time to create myself a list of paintings to see (despite it being a bit too long), with room numbers an pictures. Also, I thought to take along the Essential Reading How to Write Art History, D’Alleva, with the relevant passages about critical looking marked so that I wouldn’t miss something.

 

Painting Review – An Old Woman (‘The Ugly Duchess’)

An Old Woman (‘The Ugly Duchess’) by Quinten Massys, about 1513

Quinten Massys, 1465/6 - 1530 An Old Woman ('The Ugly Duchess') about 1513 Oil on oak, 62.4 x 45.5 cm Bequeathed by Miss Jenny Louisa Roberta Blaker, 1947 NG5769 http://www.nationalgallery.org.uk/paintings/NG5769
Quinten Massys, 1465/6 – 1530
An Old Woman (‘The Ugly Duchess’)
about 1513
Oil on oak, 62.4 x 45.5 cm
Bequeathed by Miss Jenny Louisa Roberta Blaker, 1947
NG5769
http://www.nationalgallery.org.uk/paintings/NG5769

I thought this painting was just the right size for a portrait. Perhaps this is a painting equivalent to a 5×7 family photo, just nice for a frame. Its a fascinating portrait of a woman with Paget’s disease (a malformation of bone) making her really rather ugly. It’s actually part of a pair but the ‘Portrait of an Old Man‘ is elsewhere (and not quite so ugly).

Many think that this is a satire on older ladies trying to recreate their youth and find love. She is pictured in clothing inappropriate for her age but what we, as modern viewers, wouldn’t see is that her clothes were not fashionable at the time, they were fashionable when she was young! I guess todays equivalent would be an 80 year old in a mini skirt, no one wants to see that!

It is beautifully painted. Whilst standing in front of it I noticed no discernible brush marks. Also, the surface is very smooth even though it looks cracked you cannot see that against the light.

An Old Woman ('The Ugly Duchess') - Quinten Massys, about 1513, National Gallery, London.
An Old Woman (‘The Ugly Duchess’) – Quinten Massys, about 1513, National Gallery, London.

In the post card comparison, the background is the same colour but the face has slightly less pink to it. The downloadable reproduction (above) seems a lot darker.

Postcard comparison of 'An Old Woman ('The Ugly Duchess')' - Quinten Massys, about 1513, National Gallery, London.
Postcard comparison of ‘An Old Woman (‘The Ugly Duchess’)’ – Quinten Massys, about 1513, National Gallery, London.

This painting is also a good lesson for researching in more than one place. For example, the more scholarly Oxford Online resource still suggests that this is inspired by Leonardo and not the other way around!

I don’t know why but she reminds me a little bit of Hugh Laurie (sorry Mr Laurie), I think its the large upper lip.

I really enjoyed watching this short National Gallery podcast:

Painting Review – ‘The Toilet of Venus (‘The Rokeby Venus’)’

‘The Toilet of Venus (‘The Rokeby Venus’)’ by Diego Velázquez, 1647-51

Diego Velázquez, 1599 - 1660 The Toilet of Venus ('The Rokeby Venus') 1647-51 Oil on canvas, 122.5 x 177 cm Presented by The Art Fund, 1906 NG2057 http://www.nationalgallery.org.uk/paintings/NG2057
Diego Velázquez, 1599 – 1660
The Toilet of Venus (‘The Rokeby Venus’)
1647-51
Oil on canvas, 122.5 x 177 cm
Presented by The Art Fund, 1906
NG2057
http://www.nationalgallery.org.uk/paintings/NG2057

This painting is one of the few I saw that was actually behind glass. One of the things I noticed when standing in front of it was that her face is weirdly big, grey and smudgy in the mirror. Perhaps that’s to identify is more as a reflection or perhaps that’s to obscure the identity of the model a little (to save her from the spanish inquisition?). Also, up close, her feet are smudged too (almost like motion blur). I think this is just part of the painterly effect. The brushstrokes are very visible in this painting (unlike the others I viewed) for example in the dark bedclothes. However, Cupids face is so delicately painted that from far away you see a small boys face but from close up the features seem to disappear.

The Toilet of Venus ('The Rokeby Venus') 1647-51, Diego Velázquez. National Gallery, London.
The Toilet of Venus (‘The Rokeby Venus’)
1647-51, Diego Velázquez. National Gallery, London.

The caption beside the painting reads:

“Venus reclined on a bed before the mirror held up by a winged Cupid. The reflection shows her face, suggesting that she is observing the viewer rather than herself. The female nude is very rare in Spanish painting at this date. During the 19th century the painting was at Rokeby Park, hence its subtitle.” (National Gallery, London).

I chose to do my assignment 1 annotation on this painting which includes all of my other notes and observations. What I didn’t notice on my visit, but found out later whilst doing more research into the painting, is that in 1914 the painting was viciously attacked with a meat chopper! I’ve zoomed in on the national gallery website and you can just make out the marks if you know where to look but its amazing that I didn’t see what that was when studying the painting. Given the photos of the damage its an incredible restoration. I’ve learnt my lesson to do my research before seeing the painting in future.

I wrote in my notes that the postcard colours seemed fairly faithful to the painting but in my photo it seems something funny happened with the white balance because the original in the background looks a lot more yellow. I also noted that the highlights on the clothes at the front right and far back seemed more defined.

Postcard comparison of The Toilet of Venus ('The Rokeby Venus') 1647-51, Diego Velázquez. National Gallery, London.
Postcard comparison of The Toilet of Venus (‘The Rokeby Venus’)
1647-51, Diego Velázquez. National Gallery, London.

 

The Female Nude

Page 50 of the course notes give another research task, this time on the female nude.

“In The Nude: A Study in Ideal Form, the art historian Kenneth Clark distinguished between the naked (i.e. unclothed) figure and the nude. He reserved the latter term for an ideal figure, usually derived from classical precedents. When Clark first wrote his book in 1956, he was criticised for hinting that there might be some element of physical attraction in the portrayal of the human body. By 1989, when Gill Saunders published The Nude: A New Perspective in response to Clark, art historians were already more open about the political, social and sexual context for the nude.” p50

The task is to ‘research some of the most famous female nudes such as Titian’s Venus of Urbino, Velásquez’s Rokeby Venus and nudes by Ingres, Manet and Gauguin’, all painted by men. And compare these with the way woman artists portray female nudes. Additionally ‘think about the rare instances where women have created well-known images of male nudes such as Sam Taylor-Wood’s video portrait of the sleeping David Beckham’.

Female nudes by Men:

Venus of Urbino, 1538, by Titian (not shown here because I was uncertain of the copyright to the reproductions of it).

Titian’s Venus is a very sensual, full frontal nude, reclining on a bed and gazing directly and rather coyly back at the viewer. There’s a little dog at the end of the bed which is supposed to represent fidelity There is also a small scene with a young girl rummaging in a chest overseen by an older women going on the in the background but it doesn’t detract from the main subject. As the video below suggests, there isn’t really any  accoutrements suggesting that this nude is actually Venus.

The google cultural institute website pointed me in the direction of this interesting video about it:

 

Rokeby Venus, 1647-51, by Velásquez

I was half way through this task when I visited the National Gallery so I stopped by the Rokeby Venus to see it in person. I’ve written about this painting separately here. For this exercise however, we are presented with another sensual but more decorous nude. With her back to us, she gazes at us from the mirror. In this painting we know it is actually Venus because her son Cupid is accompanying her in the bedchamber. However, Venus is usually depicted as a blonde, here she is brunette.

The Toilet of Venus ('The Rokeby Venus') 1647-51, Diego Velázquez. National Gallery, London.
The Toilet of Venus (‘The Rokeby Venus’)
1647-51, Diego Velázquez. National Gallery, London.

 

‘La Grande Odalisque, 1814, ‘Jean-Auguste-Dominique Ingres

Jean-Auguste-Dominique INGRES (Montauban, 1780 - Paris, 1867) La Grande Odalisque 1814, Louvre, France Photo © RMN/H. Lewandowski http://www.louvre.fr/en/oeuvre-notices/une-odalisque http://www.louvre.fr/en/conditions-use-images
Jean-Auguste-Dominique INGRES (Montauban, 1780 – Paris, 1867)
La Grande Odalisque, 1814, Louvre, France
Oil on Canvas, H. 0.91 m; W. 1.62 m
Photo © RMN/H. Lewandowski
http://www.louvre.fr/en/oeuvre-notices/une-odalisque
http://www.louvre.fr/en/conditions-use-images

The nude in this painting by Ingres is not Venus but an odalisque (a concubine from a harem). This casts a very different context and a sexual connotation on the image from the start. She is set in a luxurious exotic looking bedchamber. As with the Velásquez, she is composed with her back to us but this time she is turning slightly to stare back at us, her expression does not look very inviting though. As with the Titian, the female anatomy has had liberties taken with it to emphasise the sensuality over the realistic. The Velásquez nude has a more natural female anatomy.

I searched on youtube and the same people made a little conversation video in front of this painting too:

 

Olympia, 1863, Edouard Manet, Oil on canvas, H. 130; W. 190 cm, Paris, Musée d’Orsay (not shown here because I was uncertain of the copyright to the reproductions of it).

The painting is again of a full frontal reclining nude such as Titian. Here, she is lying on a rumbled bed, again staring at the viewer but this time she stares with a self assurance and a challenge in her expression. she is most clearly a prostitute which caused a scandal in the Salon where it was first shown.

“…the picture portrays the cold and prosaic reality of a truly contemporary subject. Venus has become a prostitute, challenging the viewer with her calculating look.” (Musée d’Orsay, 2006)

 

Spirit Of The Dead Watching, 1892, by Paul Gauguin
oil on burlap mounted on canvas framed: 45 11/16 x 53 x 5 1/4 inches (116.05 x 134.62 x 13.33 cm)

Picture not uploaded here due to copyright on reproductions but I found this youtube video which is just the picture set to music.

This nude by Gauguin gives a different vibe altogether, I think it is downright creepy! It is a nude Tahitian girl lying in her front on a bed with her legs crossed and like the other reclining nudes she is posed diagonally across the canvas. By the bed is a sinister figure just staring at her. She looks frightened and I would be too. The title rounds off the creep factor. This is just one of the many nudes that Gauguin painted when he was in Tahiti and many were of sensuous beauties frolicking in the sunshine. I found this interesting article on how what he painted was actually a myth from his imagination and the natives were actually more likely to have been wearing Christian missionary gowns at that time.

 

Female nudes by Women:

Marina Abramović

Marina Abramović is a Yugoslavian performance artist. She uses her nude body in her performances. Descriptions of her early work sound dangerous and exhausting, for example this description of Rhythm 0 (1974) where she invites the audience to use 72 items on her body in any way they liked! Here she is talking about that 6hr ordeal. It’s difficult to comprehend this art without seeing a performance of it (actually I don’t think I’d want to). She also reperformed Seven Easy Pieces at the Guggenheim in 2005 (Seven-channel video installation, color, sound, 7 hr). Here is an audio clip of her speaking about that. Another longer piece called Nude with Skeleton (2002/2005/2010) is reperformed continuously in shifts for a total of over 700 hours and is about confronting fears of pain and death. Seemly for Abramović the nakedness in her work is anything but sensual as it was in the paintings by men we looked at above.

Sam Taylor-Wood, That White Rush, 2007

In the 2007 Venice Biennale, Sam Taylor-Wood exhibited in the Ukrainian pavilion a video with a nude girl with decomposing swam lying on top of her (yuck)! The poor girl didn’t have to actually lie there for 4 weeks, it’s a composite of two videos seamlessly edited together but sounds less than sensual to me and I couldn’t really work out what that has to do with being Ukrainian.

Male nudes by Women:

David By Sam Taylor-Wood

I missed a trick when I visited the National Portrait gallery (albeit briefly) by not seeking out this to see for myself (I did catch a few minutes on youtube though), Sam Taylor-Wood’s video portrait of the sleeping David Beckham is an hour of David Beckham asleep. For a man as photographed as David Beckham this is probably the only way he had yet to be viewed by the public. Like the other nudes by women mentioned this is also not really a sexually charged work, although I’m sure that teenage fans of David Beckham were titillated nonetheless.