High Quality
Open the downloaded document, and select print from the file menu (PDF reader required).
•
•
1912
•
Oil on canvas
•
57.480315 inches x 57.480315 inches (rounded off to the nearest cm)Hail friends!
Description And Sources Of The PaintingHere, for you, is a description of that famous painting, byMarcel Duchamp.The painter bound together about 20 sundry shots of a nude woman, and sundered,stripped, and lessened them, then lapped them over one another.
The artist said, that the stop-motion photography of Étienne-Jules Mareyflowed into thispainting.There was a book, that the artist may have seen, by a critter, by the name, of
was thetitle of the book. In it was a chain of twenty-four imitations, of a naked womangoing down a stairs.Thomas Eakins, of the U.S.A., did also chains of likenesses movin in time. The paintermay have seen these, as well as the others.
An art critic for a newspaper, called the
New York Times,
was named Julian Street. He wrote,that Marcel’s painting looked, as if it were "an explosion in a shingle factory".
The Artist
th
day of July, in the year, of our Lo’ward,1887. He left that body upon the 2
nd
day of October, in the year, of our Lo’ward, 1968.He was leadin founder of dadaism.After he made 20 paintings, he left off of painting, to spend the rest of his life playin chess.
What Genre (French For “Gender”) Is the Painting?
The painting shows, to us, elements of both the sunderin and bindin together, used bycubists,and the movin and stirrin and busy bustle of thefuturists.
2 features, of this painting, are common, with the most kindlikecubistpaintings of thesame time. One, of the features, is the reliance on sundry tones, of but one color.The other feature, common tocubist paintings, the lessenin of the form, andchangin of curved surfaces to flat ones.The spot, where this painting leaves behind thecubistkind, is in the movin, of thewoman’s likeness. The chain, of images, each in an unlike time, and space, fromthe others, has been likened to the works, of the so-calledfuturistmovement.Saga
The first trial, of the artist,Marcel Duchamp, to show the painting, to numbers of folks, was histakin, of the work, to a showin. The spot, where the showin was given, was named the “
Salondes Indépendants
”, which is French for “Room of Independents”.The town, wherein the spot was, where the showin was given, was Paris, France. The show wasmeant for works only of thecubistgender.One, of the jurists, bound with the said showin, went by the name, Albert Gleizes.Albert asked, of the brothers, of Marcel Duchamp, that they bear upon Marcel, to take thepainting out, of the showin, or else to paint a new title over that, which he had erst painted.Those selfsame brothers, of Marcel Duchamp, went by the names, Jacques Villon, and RaymondDuchamp-Villon.I looked up the bio, of the jurist, Albert Gleizes, and found that he was closely bound toJeanCocteau. Cocteau had sought out Albert, for collaboration.Jean Cocteauwas named as one of the so-called “pilots” (fuehrers) of the Priory of Sion. Thatconnects thecubismmovement with the fake “illuminati” (the eliminati, whose members, of
today, are bein eliminated, even as you read this).Marcel Duchampdid not change the title, of his painting. He carried it to his home. It was notshown in the showin.In the year of our Lo’ward, 1913, Marcel lent his painting to a showin in the city of New York, inthe United States of America. The showin was known, as the Armory Show. Those, of America,who saw his modern art painting, were said, to have been “scandalized”.
At the Armory Show,
Frederic C. Torrey bought this, Marcel’s
, for 300smackers. Frederic dealt in
, in
San Francisco, whichwas a city, in the United States of America
.
A man was named Walter Arensberg. Walter took great interest in matters connected with oneof the foremost rosicrucians,Francis Bacon. It has recently come to light, that the rosicrucianswere founded by jesuits, for the purpose to control them, whom they termed “protestant”.As you will see, the link, between Walter Arensberg, and rosicrucianism, will be one, of many,that tied the painter,Marcel Duchamp, withmasonry, and with other jesuit-led organizations.
Walter even founded a foundation, that was named, after Francis Bacon.Marcel Duchampwentto the trouble, to color, with his own hands, a real-sized photograph, of Nude DescendingStaircase No. 2.Walter was thought of, as a good friend of Marcel Duchamp’ s. In the year of our Lo’ward, 1927,
did Walter Arensberg buy the selfsameoriginal painting, which had been in the hold of FredericC. Torrey, presumably, unless Frederic had sold it, in the meantime.Walter Arensberg, and his wife had a big holdin of oil paintings, and other artworks. There weremore than 1,000 thins. Some time, in the 1940’s, they began to seek after a place, wheretothey could give their holdin, for stayin showin. They began with UCLA, they made a deal, butUCLA did not fulfill the conditions timely.Next, the Arensbergs began to deal with many other setups. There were longlastin talks andmeetins with a man, whose name was Fiske Kimball, and with his wife, Marie. Fiske was known,as the “director” of the Philadelphia Museum of Art.Eventually, the Walter, and his wife, picked the Philadelphia Museum of Art, to be given theirholdin of fine art paintings. Those they gave, on the 27
th
day of December, in the year of ourLo’ward, 1950.In the year of our Lo’ward, 2009, the Philadelphia Museum of Art still held
, in a holdin, named “The Louise and Walter Arensberg Collection”.I have notes, for another article, that would show, to you, several weighty links, between themuseum, andfreemasonry, which is a jesuit-infiltrated setup. Thus, one more link, between
Marcel Duchamp, and his art works, andfreemasonry, rosicrucianism, and jesuits, is shown.
Symbolism, Psychology Of The Painting
It has been shown, to me, that thefamous painting, under our viewin, is “not doin nothing fornobody. That [it], to me, has no significance.” Nevertheless, to fill up the yard, and to stir upyour thinkin, I’ll tell, to you, some of those, which I have seen, in thismodern art painting.Thisabstract painting arthas a sunburst. To be healthy, and natural, a sunburst ought to bebright, in its middle. However, in thisoriginal painting, the middle, of the sunburst, is darker,than is the outer yard. That is a turnabout, of what is good, healthy, and natural.There is a penetration, by a phallic image. To be healthy, and natural, the male organ ought tobe bright, while the female receptacle ought to be dark. However, theoil paintinghas a reverseyin-yang penetration by the phallic shape.The phallus is dark, while the receptacle is bright. Again, the artist has confused, and turnedabout from that, which is natural and healthy.Downward goin, to the right, shows that artist was in way of goin into materialistic (orconceptual) phase of his life’s time. I have no doubt that, if you go deeply into his life’s saga,you will find that this is true.The reversal of light and dark, in the yin-yang, and the sunburst, contexts, shows that he was apervert. By that I do not mean, that he was, or was not, a sexual pervert, but one, who mayhave endorsed that, which he knew to be untrue.I find the jaggedness, of thefine art painting, to be unserene.
Add a Comment