| |
afterRubens.org > The debate so far > Discussion board |
 |
 |
|
| Discussion Board (most recent first) |
Part of what makes the Samson and Delilah so interesting as a work of art is the extreme disparity in the response it evokes from people - both those who have seen it perhaps just once, as well as scholars who may have studied it for half a lifetime.
Below you will find comments both for and against the attribution, as well as more general observations that visitors to the site have sent in. Please recommend the comments you find most interesting and let us know how you see it too.
You are viewing comments chronologically with the most recent first; you can also order them by the number of reader recommendations they have recieved.
 |
|
| |
While I am not an avid student of art history, there seems to be something amiss in "Samson and Delilah" beyond the Biblical hero's toes.
The overall lighting effect appears to me to be completely off. Delilah's skin is far too hot for the light portrayed in the painting. Where is that light source coming from?
Elizabeth Baker, Photo Archivist, Burbank, U.S.A.
|
|
|
| |
The detail of the brushstrokes just looks hurried and unfinished. Even a student wouldn't make that mistake when copying an old master. The painting's execution suggests to me that the figures were painted by different people, using different techniques and during different periods - they just look pasted on. Even I wouldn't make such clumsy blending with computer graphics.
Lee-Yan Marquez, Grpahic Designer, Auckland, New Zealand
|
|
|
| |
You have presented a very strong case and can count me as an unofficial supporter. I am obviously no expert, and like one or two of the other commenters, have never been especially enamored of Rubens' work -- however, in addition to convincing me that at the very least a more aggressive investigation needs to be conducted, you have inspired in me a desire to reexamine my prior disinterest in Rubens' work. The close-up side-by-side comparison seems particularly striking. I, too, would be interested in hearing the National Gallery make a compelling argument supporting their claim and addressing your items directly.
Jenny M, Attorney, SC, USA
|
|
|
| |
I wanted to thank you for your efforts to show that the painting "Samson and Delilah" at the National Gallery and supposedly by Rubens, needs to be seriously investigated for authenticity. After comparing details from his other contemporary paintings, I find it difficult to believe that "Samson and Delilah" was done by the same artist. The lack of subtlety and precision that are characteristics of Rubens are just not there. As an admirer of Rubens and his wonderful accomplishments I would hope that the truth behind this situation can be found.
Bruce Bennett, Medical Librarian, San Francisco, United States
|
|
|
| |
I believe that this site has made a convincing/compelling argument that the Samson and Delilah hanging in the National Gallery is an imposter. The most credible evidence was on the style/workmanship of the painting. The styles are too divergent, one being blatantly inferior.
Karren Mackay-Mitzs
|
|
|
| |
You've made your argument very well- not that you have to. The painting is obviously of lower quality. In this case, it looks like the wish to believe has overcome common sense.
Jennifer Emick, Alternative Religion Guide, Fremont, United States
|
|
|
| |
The analysis provided on this site is rendered patiently and meticulously - very much like the master himself. Thank you for speaking up on behalf of the great Peter Paul Rubens, who undoubtedly would be mortified to have people attribute this copy to him.
Pamela Andreatta, EdD, MFA, Professor, Ann Arbor, USA
|
|
|
| |
The first time I saw Samson and Delilah in the National Gallery I remember being confused as it just didn't look like a Rubens. I was particularly struck by the use of colour in the painting which reminded me of the sort of copies you see run-of-the-mill art students fashioning while sitting in front of the master's original. Your website is extremely convincing and has greatly compounded my doubts about the painting's authenticity. I long to hear the National Gallery's response, and just hope they have the guts to admit they were wrong and blew several million quid of tax payers' money.
Tedd George, writer, London, UK
|
|
|
| |
In looking at the first few comparisons (the closeups of the faces) I thought the paintings on the left looked like pieces of sculpture. There was no true light and shade when compared to the painting on the right. Rubens could paint emotion - there was no emotion in the Samson/Delilah painting.
Re: the rugs. In the painting on the right, you can feel the nap of the rug. In the painting on the left, again, it looked like painted marble.
The two paintings were definitely rendered by two different artists.
NORA MACKENZIE, Records Manager, ELMSFORD, USA
|
|
|
| |
Obvious Fake
James Turner, psycotherapist, San Jose, United States
|
|
|
|
