熱血背包客莊ㄟ

TOEFL【Integrated Writing】TPO03

Rembrandt is the most famous of the seventeenth-century Dutch painters. However, there are doubts whether some paintings attributed to Rembrandt were actually painted by him. One such painting is known as attributed to Rembrandt because of its style, and indeed the representation of the woman’s face is very much like that of portraits known to be by Rembrandt. But there are problems with the painting that suggest it could not be a work by Rembrandt.

First, there is something inconsistent about the way the woman inthe portrait is dressed. She is wearing a white linen cap of a kind that only servants would wear-yet the coat she is wearing has a luxurious fur collar that no servant could afford. Rembrandt, who was known for his attention to the details of his subjects’ clothing, would not have been guilty of such an inconsistency.

Second, Rembrandt was a master of painting light and shadow, but in this painting these elements do not fit together. The face appears to be illuminated by light reflected onto it from below. But below the face is the dark fur collar, which would absorb light rather than reflect it. So the face should appear partially in shadow-which is not how it appears. Rembrandt would never have made such an error.

Finally, examination of the back of the painting reveals that it was painted on a panel made of several pieces of wood glued together. Although Rembrandt often painted on wood panels, no painting known to be by Rembrandt uses a panel glued together in this way from several pieces of wood. For these reasons the painting was removed from the official catalog of Rembrandt’s paintings in the 1930s.

Personal Writing

The passage says that the painting was not made by Rembrandt, judging from the fun collar, light and shadow, and the wood panels. However, the professor argues that the painting was indeed made by Rembrandt.

First, the fur collar. The passage says that the inconsistency between the linen cap of servants and the expensive fur collar contradicted the style of Rembrandt very forcing on details. However, the professor argues that analysis of the pigments found on the collar was added on the top of the original painting after 100 years. This collar, she adds, was to make the woman look like a aristocratic lady, increasing its value.

Second, light and shadow. The passage states that the woman of painting should have a partial shadow face rather than the bright face reflected by light from below and dark collar absorbing light. However, with the collar removed, the professor argues that the original collar was a simple light-colored cloth to illuminate her face, explaining the face without partial shadow. She adds that the light and shadow were realistic, matching what we expect from Rembrandt.

Third, the wood panels. The passage claims that the painting was made by multiple panels glued together, but none of the work of Rembrandt used such glued panels. However, the professor argues that when the collar was removed, the original painting was made by single wood piece instead of many pieces glued together. The trees used for wood panel of the painting, she adds, matches that of another painting by Rembrandt. 

Word: 253

note：

Reading ： painting, X R

argument 1：fur collar  →  linen cap & luxi fur collar / inconstency, R X do

argument 2：light & shadow → X fit / face shadow

argument 3：wood panels → many pieces glued /  X R

Listening ：  indeed, R 

argument 1： FC → added 100 / ++ value  

argument 2：LS → light-colored, X shaodw / real= R

argument 3：WP → single / same tree 

tips in three paragraph

1.  inconsistency of collar and cap → collar was added to increase value 

2.  face should be dark → when collar was removed, it show the truth

3. multiple  VS. single 

Listening script 

Everything you just read about “Portrait of an Elderly Woman in a White Bonnet” is true, and yet after a thorough re-examination of the painting, a panel of experts has recently concluded that it’s indeed a work by Rembrandt. Here is why.

First, the fur collar. X-rays and analysis of the pigments in the paint have shown that the fur collar wasn’t part of the original painting. The fur collar was painted over the top of the original painting about a hundred years after the painting was made. Why? Someone probably wanted to increase the value of the painting by making it look like a formal portrait of an aristocratic lady.

Second, the supposed error with light and shadow. Once the paint of the added fur color was removed, the original could be seen, in the original painting, the woman is wearing a simple collar of light-colored cloth. The light-colored cloth of this collar reflects light that illuminates part of the woman’s face. That’s why the face is not in partial shadow. So in the original painting, light and shadow are very realistic and just what we would expect from Rembrandt.

Finally, the wood panel. It turns out that when the fur collar was added, the wood panel was also enlarged with extra wood pieces glued to the sides and the top to make the painting more grand and more valuable. So the original painting is actually painted on a single piece of wood, as would be expected from a Rembrandt painting. And in fact, researchers have found that the piece of wood in the original form of “Portrait of an Elderly Woman in a White Bonnet” is from the very same tree as the wood panel used for another painting by Rembrandt, his “Self-portrait with a Hat”.