Does the inside joke have anything to do with the violist's right hand
disappearing behind the lady's skirts??? She seems slightly enraptured,
he looks amused.
Leonard
On 11/24/15, 8:19 AM, "Gary Boye" wrote:
> Martyn,
> There
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]r.turov...@gmail.com
Sent: 24/11/2015 18:56
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: [1]r.turov...@gmail.com
Sent: 24/11/2015 20:25
To: [2]Stuart
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 + 24/11/15, WALSH STUART wrote:
On 24/11/2015 15:36, David
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"
Are we sure the strings are actually broken? The viol player has the
extra length of string tied up in a nice bundle.
I do this on electric guitar: pull the string trough the tuning capstan
almost all the way, then twist the extra up in a coil. This is very
helpful when it breaks
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
The lute was exactly that - a symbol familial harmony, even in the hands
of whores in Dutch paintings, where is was meant so - sarcastically.
RT
On 11/24/2015 9:38 AM, AJN wrote:
There are paintings of the interiors of artists' studios that show
props used in pictures:
busts,
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
Perhaps somebody ordered this painting just to show, how some of his
social enemies try to look like civilized, just to mock them. Or perhaps
that couple did not pay properly to the painter for his work, and he
decided to revenge. And maybe the couple even did not get the insult?
Just a
Definitely 17th century?
-Original Message-
From: "r.turov...@gmail.com"
Sent: â24/â11/â2015 18:56
To: "Stuart Walsh" ; "David Van Edwards"
Cc: "lute@cs.dartmouth.edu"
Subject: [LUTE] Re:
Dear All,
My Lute of the Month series has dwindled to lute of the Year these
days! It's because I've mainly been writng them for the Lute Society's
newsletter, Lute News, now it has a nice full colour cover.
But here is the latest, as it were more public, example up on the web
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
Interesting picture indeed David ! Thank you for sharing.
Is it the fact that the young lady plays left-handed that fosters
Martyn's ironical approavh to this nice painting ???
I hope not ! ;-)
Best wishes to all,
Jean-Marie
Envoye depuis mon appareil Samsung
Very interesting David.
It may be simply a fashionable couple wanting to be portrayed
performing but in fact unable to play a note! Perhaps the painter who,
as you point out, might be thought to have known better was laughing up
his sleeve...
Or perhaps, and maybe more likely
Dear Gary,
I do agree: this is why I suggested that 'In short, the very act of
posing for the picture was
the statement rather than the playing of music'.
regards,
Martyn
__
From: Gary Boye
Great one! Reminds me of an old joke:
"A saw a blond today in a red convertible, with the license plate that
said "Blonds are not stupid!". The plate was upside down."
RT
On 11/24/2015 5:50 AM, David Van Edwards wrote:
Dear All,
My Lute of the Month series has dwindled to lute of the
Oh. I couldn't see the broken strings. There is allegorical symbolism
of broken strings, and Charlotte told me about
an entire book devoted to the matter. I've often puzzled over the
wonderful engraving of Ochsenkhun from his lute book.
He has such a surprised look on his face:
I think there is a certain goofball element to the pic, like someone
today posing with the back of a guitar facing the viewer.
I don't think the wear marks on the belly of the instrument are out of
line, however. The one by the strings is close to the bridge, as
instructions direct
Also, regarding the wear marks: the contact points on modern lutes are
darker than the rest of the top from accumulated oils and dirt. Those
in the painting are lighter than the surrounding belly. Could the top
have been varnished so that the marks are revealing bare wood?
Chris
Or could be the result of scraping the sounboard wood flush with the
fingerboard after the top has been glued back following a repair work.
It can happen when the top is not clamped properly.
Paolo
Paolo Busato lute-maker
[1]www.busatolutes.com
e-mail:
21 matches
Mail list logo