Although Johannes Vermeer is famous for his masterpiece “Girl with a Pearl Earring,” not much is known about who modeled for the painting. The curiosity aroused by the mystery brought about several theories about the true identity of the model.
The first candidate is Maria Vermeer, who was the eldest daughter of Johannes Vermeer. Johannes Vermeer found the source of inspiration from daily life. His artworks focused on everyday life scenes from neighborhoods in Delft as a result. This artistic style of Vermeer drove critics to formulate a theory that Vermeer's daughter may have posed for the portrait. To support the idea, one critic even commented that only a father could sketch such portraits.
Magdalena Van Ruijven, who was the only daughter of Vermeer's patron, Pieter Van Ruijven, was also proposed as a candidate. The Vermeer and Van Ruijven families were close neighbors, making it possible that the painting was a request for his daughter from Van Ruijven. This can be further speculated considering the fact that the painting was given to Magdalena Van Ruijven as a wedding gift.
The last theory is the tronie theory. Tronie refers to a popular genre of 17th-century Dutch paintings that portrays exaggerated facial expressions of fictional characters. This genre may have influenced the painting of Vermeer profoundly, making him focus on the representation of an imaginary figure: in this case, an anonymous girl in exotic clothing and a huge pearl in her ear. With the balanced use of light and darkness, the painter focuses on the facial expressions and effectively depicts the delicate emotion of the girl in the painting. Such characteristic is similar to what the tronie genre keyed on.
Recently, there has been a ton of debate as to the identity of the model of Johannes Vermeer's masterpiece. More specifically, in regards to the passages, the writer put forth the idea that there is three-way we can elaborate on this model's identity. However, the lecturer is quick to point out that there are some serious flaws in the writer's claims. In fact, the professor believes the three possibilities of the explanation of the model are inaccurate, and addresses, in detail, the trouble with each point made in the reading text.
To begin with, the author states that the model may be the painter's elder daughter. Some professors in the same field, however, stand in firm opposition to this claim. In the listening, for example, the professor claims that it never be the painter's daughter. He goes on to say that different unknown models were found at that time for painting. The model should be from these girls.
Secondly, one group of scholars represented by the writer thinks that the model may be Vermeer's patron name, Pieter Van. Of course, though, not all experts, in the same field believe this is accurate. Again the professor specifically addresses this point when he claims that in the 17th century the portrait was the symbol of dignity so, the picture is not only for the purpose. Additionally, he notes that the light balance indicates it is not the picture of Pieter Van's daughter.
Finally, the author wraps his argument by positing that it may be the portrait of an imaginary figure. Not surprisingly, the lecturer takes issue on this matter by contending that as the facial expression is said that it is not an imaginary figure. It must be a portrait of any anonymous girl.
To sum up, both the writer and professor hold conflicting views about the identity of the model of Johannes Vermeer's masterpiece. It is clear that they will have trouble in finding common grounds on this issue.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 127, Rule ID: IN_REGARD_TO[1]
Message: Use simply 'regarding' or 'with regard to'.
Suggestion: regarding; with regard to
...ermeers masterpiece. More specifically, in regards to the passages, the writer put forth the ...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 1, column 234, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'models'' or 'model's'?
Suggestion: models'; model's
...e is three-way we can elaborate on this models identity. However, the lecturer is quic...
^^^^^^
Line 3, column 229, Rule ID: ADVERB_WORD_ORDER[5]
Message: The adverb 'never' is usually put after the verb 'be'.
Suggestion: be never
...r example, the professor claims that it never be the painters daughter. He goes on to sa...
^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 242, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'painters'' or 'painter's'?
Suggestion: painters'; painter's
...e professor claims that it never be the painters daughter. He goes on to say that differ...
^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
finally, however, if, may, second, secondly, so, as to, for example, in fact, of course, to begin with, to sum up
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 19.0 19.6327345309 97% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 12.9520958084 54% => OK
Conjunction : 2.0 11.1786427146 18% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 14.0 13.6137724551 103% => OK
Pronoun: 32.0 28.8173652695 111% => OK
Preposition: 45.0 55.5748502994 81% => OK
Nominalization: 4.0 16.3942115768 24% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1594.0 2260.96107784 71% => OK
No of words: 328.0 441.139720559 74% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.85975609756 5.12650576532 95% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.25567506705 4.56307096286 93% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.64706492303 2.78398813304 95% => OK
Unique words: 172.0 204.123752495 84% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.524390243902 0.468620217663 112% => OK
syllable_count: 486.9 705.55239521 69% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 4.96107784431 81% => OK
Article: 10.0 8.76447105788 114% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 2.70958083832 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 8.0 4.22255489022 189% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 19.7664670659 91% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 22.8473053892 79% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 38.2185075714 57.8364921388 66% => OK
Chars per sentence: 88.5555555556 119.503703932 74% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.2222222222 23.324526521 78% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.27777777778 5.70786347227 110% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 5.25449101796 76% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 8.20758483034 49% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 6.88822355289 58% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 10.0 4.67664670659 214% => Less facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.168186557803 0.218282227539 77% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0517365753037 0.0743258471296 70% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.055969732235 0.0701772020484 80% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0912898770384 0.128457276422 71% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0457493133163 0.0628817314937 73% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 10.6 14.3799401198 74% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 61.67 48.3550499002 128% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.1 12.197005988 75% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.91 12.5979740519 87% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.8 8.32208582834 94% => OK
difficult_words: 68.0 98.500998004 69% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 12.3882235529 93% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 11.1389221557 83% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.9071856287 92% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 Out of 6
---------------------
Note: the e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.