Both of the lecturer and the writer discuss about whether a painting of an elderly lady belongs to Rembrandt, who is a famous Dutch painter in the 17th century. However, the author and speaker hold the exact opposite idea in the discussion.
First, the speaker claims that the fur collar in the painting is not original, which is not a mistake made by the painter. X- Ray examines pieces of the pigment and finds the truth that it is added on the top of the original painting 100 years after the painting is(was) made. Probably by someone who wants(wanted) to increase the value of the painting by decorating it looks like a formal lady. Therefore, this directly disproves its counterpart in the reading.
Moreover, the professor contends that the supposed area of light and shadow can be explains by the fur collar. Once the collar is removed, the original color could be seen. The dress was painted by simple and light color, which reflects light that illuminates part of the lady's face. That is why the face is not partially shadow in the painting. Accordingly, in the original painting the light and shadow fits well. This is another place where experiences the contradicted theory.
At last, pieces of wood panel were added to the original painting when the collar was painted, declares the lecturer. The wood panel is enlarged at sides and on the top to make it grand and valuable, while, the original painting is finished on a single board as expected by Rembrandt. In fact, the wood of the elderly lady's panel is found to be of the same of kind of wood that used in another painting, self-portrait with a hat, of Rembrandt. Consequently, the last point is rebutted.
In conclusion, the professor clearly identifies the weaknesses in the passage and convincingly shows that the painting is indeed the work by Rembrandt.
包子的综合把握的很好了,听力的内容写的很详细,超出我的预期。
|