![]() |
||||||
|
SHAKSPER 2008: Southampton Portrait Discovered
From: Hardy M. Cook (editor@SHAKSPER.NET) Date: 05/06/08
The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 19.0265 Tuesday, 6 May 2008 [1] From: Nicole Coonradt <nmcoonradt@comcast.net> Date: Monday, 05 May 2008 18:28:31 +0000 Subj: Re: SHK 19.0259 Southampton Portrait Discovered [2] From: Mike Shapiro <lionclaw@lionclaw.com> Date: Tuesday, 06 May 2008 00:35:37 +0000 Subj: Re: SHK 19.0252 Southampton Portrait Discovered [1]----------------------------------------------------------------- From: Nicole Coonradt <nmcoonradt@comcast.net> Date: Monday, 05 May 2008 18:28:31 +0000 Subject: 19.0259 Southampton Portrait Discovered Comment: Re: SHK 19.0259 Southampton Portrait Discovered Apparently her teeth were black? No wonder she's not smiling! Thanks for sharing this, JD. I had just recently asked a friend about this at a different forum and so am happy to pass it on. Best, Nicole [2]----------------------------------------------------------------- From: Mike Shapiro <lionclaw@lionclaw.com> Date: Tuesday, 06 May 2008 00:35:37 +0000 Subject: 19.0252 Southampton Portrait Discovered Comment: Re: SHK 19.0252 Southampton Portrait Discovered Can any other members speculate why a portrait artist would paint over such a work? Were panels expensive during that period? If so, why? Are there any other known instance(s) of portraits of important court members that were painted over? I understand it happened with poor artists who could not afford new canvas but are there other reasons . . . such as it being easier to work over an established physical form? Mike Shapiro _______________________________________________________________ S H A K S P E R: The Global Shakespeare Discussion List Hardy M. Cook, editor@shaksper.net The S H A K S P E R Web Site <http://www.shaksper.net> DISCLAIMER: Although SHAKSPER is a moderated discussion list, the opinions expressed on it are the sole property of the poster, and the editor assumes no responsibility for them.
|
|
|||||