Question from Page 452 of 6th edition
Both the passage and the lecture argue whether the painting ‘Portrait of an elderly woman in a White Bonnet’ was a work of the famous 17th century Dutch painter Rembrandt. The passage doesn’t agree with the same, while on the contrary, the professor in the lecture presents some points on why this painting is indeed the creation of Rembrandt.
First, the passage states an inconsistency in the dressing of the women in the painting, by contrasting between the white linen cap that only servants would wear and luxurious fur collar, which on the other hand no servant could afford. The passage strengthens this argument by emphasizing on the point that Rembrandt was renowned for being attentive to the details of his subject. The professor, however, mentions a finding that the fur collar was not a part of the original painting and was rather added around hundred years later, perhaps in order to increase the value of the work.
Second, the passage states that Rembrandt was a master of painting light and shadow. These elements, however, do not seem to fit together. The face of the subject appears to be illuminated, but the dark fur collar should have absorbed the light rather than to reflect it. The professor refutes this point of the passage by stating that when the dark fur collar was removed, a simple collar of light colored cloth was found underneath, which was part of the original painting and hence resembles with the command which Rembrandt had over painting light and shadow.
Third, the passage mentions that the examination of the back of the painting reveals that it was painted on a panel of glued wooden pieces, while the other paintings attributed to Rembrandt were never found on a panel made from wood pieces glued together. However, the professor brings out the point that on examination, it was found that the wooden panel was enlarged with extra wood pieces glued with the original, in order to increase the price of the painting. She also mentions that the wood was extracted from the same tree, the pieces of which Rembrandt’s paintings were also made upon.
The professor at last, also mentions that the painting was added back to the catalogue of Rembrandt, after being removed in 1930, as stated in the passage.