Now I don't know whether you missed the irony or ignored it! -----Original Message----- From: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> Sent: â24/â11/â2015 21:02 To: "Stuart Walsh" <[email protected]>; "David Van Edwards" <[email protected]> Cc: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [LUTE] Re: Another lute picture?
2 painters and 1 sculptor. RT On 11/24/2015 3:58 PM, Stuart Walsh wrote: Roman Where there any painters in the Sautscheck family? From: [email protected] Sent: â24/â11/â2015 20:25 To: Stuart Walsh; David Van Edwards Cc: [email protected] Subject: [LUTE] Re: Another lute picture? the painting technique looks pretty genuine to me. so do garment fashions. RT On 11/24/2015 2:22 PM, Stuart Walsh wrote: Definitely 17th century? __________________________________________________________________ From: [1][email protected] Sent: 24/11/2015 18:56 To: [2]Stuart Walsh; [3]David Van Edwards Cc: [4][email protected] Subject: [LUTE] Re: Another lute picture? That's my take. A 17th century blond joke. RT On 11/24/2015 1:47 PM, Stuart Walsh wrote: > Somebody with the intention and the skill and knowledge to create a fake 17th century Dutch master would surely have not included all the odd things that David points to. Could the painting be the equivalent of a sort of folly? > > -----Original Message----- > From: "David Van Edwards" [5]<[email protected]> > Sent: tAO24/tAO11/tAO2015 17:22 > To: "WALSH STUART" [6]<[email protected]> > Cc: [7]"[email protected]" [8]<[email protected]> > Subject: [LUTE] Re: Another lute picture? > > Dear Stuart, > > No you're right. I cannot see how it could possibly be genuine. And I > thought I'd been pretty clear in the article, but maybe my lightly > ironic tone doesn't make it across the pond. > > Best wishes, > > David > > > > At 17:08 +0000 24/11/15, WALSH STUART wrote: >> On 24/11/2015 15:36, David Van Edwards wrote: >>> However I think the painting I discussed was simply copying the prop[s] >>> from Eglon van der Neer's works! The physical impossibility of holding >>> such a lute in such a position without grossly disturbing the diapason >>> strings makes me think that the painting has nothing to do with either >>> van der Neer or van der Werff. Plus all the other anachronisms! >> >> Fascinating. >> >> >> David, I read your interpretation as being much more sceptical about >> this painting than the people who have so far contributed to this >> thread. Am I wrong? >> >> >> >> Stuart >> >>> Best wishes, >>> >>> David >>> >>> At 08:38 -0600 24/11/15, AJN wrote: >>> >>> There are paintings of the interiors of artists' studios that >>> show >>> props used in pictures: >>> busts, skulls, ornate chairs, drapes and sometimes (iirc) musical >>> instruments. Such >>> props are even listed in tax inventories, I understand. >>> Art historians have traced some from painting to painting, e.g., >>> an >>> ornate three-leg chair. >>> Instruments might serve, as perhaps is the case in this painting, >>> as symbols of the harmonious nature of love. The over reaction >>> of the >>> sitters in >>> this painting recalls, at least to me, the depictions of various >>> emotions illustrated in old treatises on acting. "Hamming it up" >>> seems >>> to have been part of theatrical performances >>> in the past. So, one might argue, this painting may have been >>> intended >>> as a serious depiction. Ad the angles of the >>> two instruments, as Gary notes, may have been foremost in the >>> artist's >>> plan. >>> On the other hand, musicians would surely demand precision in the >>> depiction of fingerings, holding the instrument, etc., >>> because their professional competency might otherwise be >>> questioned. >>> Interesting discovery, David. I must visit your web page more >>> >>> frequently. Arthur >>> >>> -- >>> >>> The Smokehouse, >>> 6 Whitwell Road, >>> Norwich, NR1 4HB >>> England. >>> >>> Telephone: + 44 (0)1603 629899 >>> Website: [9]http://www.vanedwards.co.uk >>> >>> -- >>> >>> >>> To get on or off this list see list information at >>> [10]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html >>> >> >> --- >> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. >> [11]https://www.avast.com/antivirus > -- References Visible links 1. mailto:[email protected] 2. mailto:[email protected] 3. mailto:[email protected] 4. mailto:[email protected] 5. mailto:[email protected] 6. mailto:[email protected] 7. mailto:[email protected] 8. mailto:[email protected] 9. http://www.vanedwards.co.uk/ 10. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html 11. https://www.avast.com/antivirus Hidden links: 13. mailto:[email protected] 14. mailto:[email protected] --
