微信公众号 
图码生活

每天发布有五花八门的文章,各种有趣的知识等,期待您的订阅与参与
搜索结果最多仅显示 10 条随机数据
结果缓存两分钟
如需更多更快搜索结果请访问小程序
美国纽约大都会艺术博物馆展品查阅
美国纽约大都会艺术博物馆展品查阅
美国大都会艺术博物馆中的24万件展品,图片展示以及中文和英文双语介绍(中文翻译仅供参考)
读取中
读取中
读取中
品名(中)Posillipo石窟入口
品名(英)Entrance to the Grotto of Posillipo
入馆年号1940年,40.91.17
策展部门绘画和印刷品Drawings and Prints
创作者Hubert Robert【1733 至 1808】【法国人】
创作年份公元 1745 - 公元 1808
创作地区
分类图画(Drawings)
尺寸18 1/4 x 13 英寸 (46.4 x 33 厘米)
介绍(中)波西利波石窟位于从那不勒斯到波佐利的路线上,是十八世纪意大利游客的热门目的地。休伯特·罗伯特于1760年与圣农修道院院长(1727-1791)一起访问了该遗址。如今,他在那里所做的研究只有一幅私人收藏的水彩(伦敦,佳士得,1985年12月12日,第324号拍品)和Clément Pierre Marillier和Emmanuel J.N.de Ghendt为Saint Non‘sVoyage pittoresque或对那不勒斯和西西里岛的描述所做的蚀刻(1781年,第一卷,第82页,第37号)


然而,大都会博物馆的床单的归属引发了一些问题。这幅画是用棕色墨水在红色粉笔的台面上冲洗而成的(将潮湿的纸压在红色粉笔画上形成的印象,导致背面的图像更苍白)。最初的红色粉笔画,也就是从中取出的反屋顶,现在还没有找到。构图在尺寸、技术和细节上的差异使人们无法将大都会博物馆的绘画视为圣农书中蚀刻的模型。仔细观察大都会博物馆的绘画,这些笔触与罗伯特的技巧几乎没有相似之处,罗伯特倾向于用细线描绘树叶。在这里,小圆点的积累以及免费的洗涤似乎更像是模仿让·奥诺雷·弗拉戈纳尔(1732-1806)的方式


因为大都会博物馆绘画中描绘的景象与现实中的场景相符,所以在我们看来,底层反屋顶的丢失原件一定是休伯特·罗伯特的手在丢失原件后制作的反屋顶后的复制品。这一假设得到了罗伯特1760年在意大利乡村绘制的几种观点的支持,这些观点具有相似的技术和维度。在一个平行的例子中,罗伯特对帕埃斯图姆神庙的几次反驳,包括在法国贝桑松市图书馆举行的一次反驳(见Sarah Catala,Les Hubert Robert de Besançon,2013,第17号),都是由法国工程师皮埃尔·约瑟夫·安托万(1730-1814)复制的


在蓝色底座上的卡通图案中可以找到最后一个元素,支持这张纸来源于一张基于罗伯特作品的复制品的论点。cartouche的设计和笔迹与Robert在Besançon绘画后在红粉笔台面上看到的图案和笔迹非常一致(参考文献:根据第451、25、43和46卷;美术博物馆:根据第2983卷)。但在这些情况下,休伯特·罗伯特的名字总是显示在卡通图案内的铭文中,而不是大都会博物馆图纸底座卡通图案中的铭文,后者只标识视图的位置。Besançon反屋顶来自罗伯特的朋友、建筑师Pierre Adrien Pâris(1745-1809)的收藏,大多数是由他的同时代人François Renaud安装的。虽然大都会博物馆画作的作者未知,其十八世纪的出处也没有记录,但这些观察结果为未来的研究提供了诱人的可能性


介绍(英)Located on the route from Naples to Pozzuoli, the Grotto of Posillipo was a popular destination for travelers to Italy in the eighteenth century. Hubert Robert visited the site in 1760, on a trip he took with the abbé de Saint-Non (1727-1791). The studies he made there are today documented only by a watercolor held in a private collection (London, Christie’s, December 12, 1985, lot 324) and an etching by Clément-Pierre Marillier and Emmanuel J. N. de Ghendt for Saint-Non’s Voyage pittoresque ou description des royaumes de Naples et de Sicile (1781, tome I, p. 82, no 37).


The attribution of the Met’s sheet, however, raises some questions. The drawing was made by applying brown ink and wash over a red chalk counterproof (an impression made by pressing damp paper against a red chalk drawing, resulting in a paler image in reverse). The original red chalk drawing, from which the counterproof was taken, has not been located. Differences in size, technique and details of the composition argue against seeing the Met’s drawing as the model for the etching in Saint-Non’s book. Looking closely at the Met’s drawing, the wash brushstrokes bear little resemblance to the technique of Robert, who tended to describe foliage with thin lines of ink. Here, the accumulation of small dots as well as the free application of wash seems rather to imitate the manner of Jean-Honoré Fragonard (1732-1806).


Because the view depicted in the Met’s drawing corresponds to how the scene appears in reality, the lost original for the underlying counterproof must have been, in our opinion, a copy after a counterproof made after a lost original by Hubert Robert’s hand. This hypothesis is supported by the fact that several views drawn by Robert in the Italian countryside in 1760 are of a similar technique and dimensions. In a parallel example, several of Robert’s counterproofs of views of the Temple of Paestum, including one held in the Bibliothèque municipale of Besançon in France (see Sarah Catala, Les Hubert Robert de Besançon, 2013, no. 17), were copied by a French engineer, Pierre-Joseph Antoine (1730-1814).


One final element supporting the argument that this sheet derives from a copy based on a counterproof of a composition by Robert can be found in the cartouche on the blue mount. The design and handwriting of the cartouche correspond closely to those seen on mounts of the red chalk counterproofs after Robert drawings in Besançon (bibliothèque : acc. nos vol. 451, 25, 43 and 46 ; musée des beaux-arts : acc. no D. 2983). But in those cases, Hubert Robert’s name is always indicated in the inscription within the cartouche, as opposed to the inscription in the cartouche on the mount of the Met’s sheet, which only identifies the location of the view. The Besançon counterproofs come from the collection of Robert’s friend, the architect Pierre-Adrien Pâris (1745-1809), and the majority were mounted by his contemporary, François Renaud. While the authorship of the Met’s drawing is unknown and its eighteenth-century provenance undocumented, these observations offer enticing possibilities for future research.


Sarah Catala and Perrin Stein (December 2016)
  大都会艺术博物馆,英文 Metropolitan Museum of Art,是美国最大的艺术博物馆,世界著名博物馆,位于美国纽约第五大道的82号大街。
  大都会博物馆回顾了人类自身的文明史的发展,与中国北京的故宫、英国伦敦的大英博物馆、法国巴黎的卢浮宫、俄罗斯圣彼得堡的艾尔米塔什博物馆并称为世界五大博物馆。