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 "Portrait of an Elderly Woman in a White Bonnet." The painting was 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 in the 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 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.
The article talks about some existing doubts over the authenticity of a rembrandt's painting named "portrait of an Elderly woman in a White Bonnet". However, the professor's opinion is that the painting is an original rembrandt and refute each reason presented, casting doubts in the author's beliefs.
Firstly, the reading points out that the portrait shows some inconsistencies between the woman's dress and her jewels. The first one is the expected of a domestic employee, whereas the jewels are clearly expensive ones. The professor disproves this by stating that, with the aim to increase its value, the painting was repainted some years after the original one was done. therefore, the real rembrandt's work was hidden under this one; which that point falls apart.
Secondly, the article argues that rembrandt was a specialist representing lights and shadows, and in the painting, it is obvious that they do not fit together. Nonetheless, the orator contradicts this point, noting that in the work done by rembrandt, lights and shadows have a high level of realism, typical of his work; remarking the unconvincing of this argument.
Finally, the writer remarks that an exam made to the back side of the piece threw that it was composed of several smaller pieces in order to created a bigger one. Furthermore, the author argues that do not exist any work of rembrandt with those characteristics. Notwithstanding, the lecturer point out the weakness of this point, saying that this was devised afterward to make it larger, and therefore, more valuable. Beside, the original painting was created in a wood, which form part of another piece of wood used by rembrandt in other work.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 172, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'professors'' or 'professor's'?
Suggestion: professors'; professor's
...n in a White Bonnet'. However, the professors opinion is that the painting is an orig...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 373, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Therefore
... years after the original one was done. therefore, the real rembrandts work was hidden un...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...one; which that point falls apart. Secondly, the article argues that rembra...
^^^^^^^
Line 17, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...the unconvincing of this argument. Finally, the writer remarks that an exam...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
finally, first, firstly, furthermore, however, nonetheless, second, secondly, so, then, therefore, whereas
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 10.4613686534 115% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 0.0 5.04856512141 0% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 7.30242825607 82% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 12.0772626932 108% => OK
Pronoun: 25.0 22.412803532 112% => OK
Preposition: 36.0 30.3222958057 119% => OK
Nominalization: 1.0 5.01324503311 20% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1440.0 1373.03311258 105% => OK
No of words: 275.0 270.72406181 102% => OK
Chars per words: 5.23636363636 5.08290768461 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.07223819929 4.04702891845 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.85437173762 2.5805825403 111% => OK
Unique words: 160.0 145.348785872 110% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.581818181818 0.540411800872 108% => OK
syllable_count: 423.0 419.366225166 101% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 3.25607064018 31% => OK
Article: 13.0 8.23620309051 158% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 1.51434878587 132% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 2.5761589404 39% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 13.0662251656 92% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 21.2450331126 104% => OK
Sentence length SD: 31.9073093333 49.2860985944 65% => OK
Chars per sentence: 120.0 110.228320801 109% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.9166666667 21.698381199 106% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.83333333333 7.06452816374 125% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 4.19205298013 95% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 4.33554083885 161% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 4.45695364238 90% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.27373068433 23% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.230501121878 0.272083759551 85% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0879413553809 0.0996497079465 88% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0795138893177 0.0662205650399 120% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.156213461796 0.162205337803 96% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.111057814722 0.0443174109184 251% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.7 13.3589403974 110% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 57.61 53.8541721854 107% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 11.0289183223 97% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.41 12.2367328918 110% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.92 8.42419426049 106% => OK
difficult_words: 73.0 63.6247240618 115% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 10.7273730684 103% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.498013245 103% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.2008830022 98% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 76.6666666667 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 23.0 Out of 30
---------------------
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.