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 wearyet 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 shadowwhich 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 reading passage argues that some paintings attributed to Rembrandt are not Rembrandt's work. It cites the example of the Portrait of an Elderly Woman in a White Bonnet and presents three attributes of the painting, which suggest that it was not a work by Rembrandt. The lecture, however, invalidates each of the reasons raised in the passage and maintains that the Elderly Woman portrait was a work by Rembrandt.
First, the reading passage claims that the inconsistencies evident in the woman's dressing, actually suggest that it is not a painting by Rembrandt; as Rembrandt is known for his attention to details. However, the lecture negates this point. It stated that the forecolour currently seen in the painting was not part of the original painting as it was afterwards added to improve the painting's value. The lecture added that once the forecolour is removed, the portrait will look consistent in dressing.
Furthermore, the reading passage posits that since Rembrandt is a master in light and shadow, the improper fit of light and shadow is another attribute that gives credence to why the Elderly Woman painting was not done by Rembrandt's. Nevertheless, the lecture opposes this point by attributing the defect in light and shadow to the forecolour which was later introduced. Also, it stated that in the original painting, the woman was wearing a simple colour of light and shadow stuff, and the current anomaly is as a result of the forecolour.
Finally, the reading passage claims that since the painting was done on panels glued together, it could not have been by Rembrandt; as Rembrandt is not known for doing that. Again, the lecture refutes this point by stating that the initial painting was done on a single piece of panel and that the glued panels came about due to the addition of forecolour. It further stated that the wood used in the original painting was traced to the same tree used in another of Rembrandt's painting.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, but, finally, first, furthermore, however, look, nevertheless, so, as a result
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 19.0 10.4613686534 182% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 2.0 5.04856512141 40% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 7.30242825607 110% => OK
Relative clauses : 17.0 12.0772626932 141% => OK
Pronoun: 27.0 22.412803532 120% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 41.0 30.3222958057 135% => OK
Nominalization: 3.0 5.01324503311 60% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1629.0 1373.03311258 119% => OK
No of words: 328.0 270.72406181 121% => OK
Chars per words: 4.96646341463 5.08290768461 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.25567506705 4.04702891845 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.67405510729 2.5805825403 104% => OK
Unique words: 140.0 145.348785872 96% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.426829268293 0.540411800872 79% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 491.4 419.366225166 117% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 3.25607064018 154% => OK
Article: 12.0 8.23620309051 146% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.25165562914 160% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 0.0 2.5761589404 0% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 13.0 13.0662251656 99% => OK
Sentence length: 25.0 21.2450331126 118% => OK
Sentence length SD: 47.9511585832 49.2860985944 97% => OK
Chars per sentence: 125.307692308 110.228320801 114% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.2307692308 21.698381199 116% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.23076923077 7.06452816374 102% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 4.19205298013 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 4.33554083885 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 4.45695364238 45% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.27373068433 164% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.297652874407 0.272083759551 109% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.126126929738 0.0996497079465 127% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0925554025062 0.0662205650399 140% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.207134801635 0.162205337803 128% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.079438745693 0.0443174109184 179% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.6 13.3589403974 109% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 54.56 53.8541721854 101% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 11.0289183223 108% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.84 12.2367328918 97% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.44 8.42419426049 100% => OK
difficult_words: 74.0 63.6247240618 116% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.5 10.7273730684 126% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 10.498013245 114% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.2008830022 107% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Write the essay in 20 minutes.
Rates: 73.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 22.0 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.