MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

An Old Master Revivified: Rembrandt Among 19th Century French Artists

2001· article· en· W2342879190 on OpenAlexaff
Alison McQueen

Bibliographic record

VenueDutch Crossing · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicHistorical Art and Culture Studies
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArtGeniusVisual artsCraftStudioNarrativePaintingArt historyLiterature

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the nineteenth century, French artists and critics identified Rembrandt as an important precursor for their own goals, and he was crafted as a mentor particularly for printmakers. Books and articles on Rembrandt proliferated and numerous scenes depicting fictional narratives brought the events of his daily life before a broad public. Three such works are considered here and demonstrate how Rembrandt was made into a more accessible old master artist. By depicting Rembrandt's family, patrons, and pet monkey, and in recreating the setting of his studio filled with the objects he valued, these scenes brought Rembrandt's experiences and art into the grasp of everyday life. Indeed reaching out for Rembrandt and approximating his artistic achievements was exactly what many French artists, particularly printmakers, wanted to accomplish. In their hope of reigniting interest in prints, particularly etchings, French artists and critics turned to Rembrandt as their standard. Printmakers—both those who produced original and reproductive prints such as Jacque, Haden, Lepic, Guérard, and Courtry—sought to evoke Rembrandt's presence in their work and in their lives. They made expeditions to study his prints in public collections and bought them for their own private collections. Some made pilgrimages to Amsterdam and others produced meticulous copies or emulated the compositions of his prints. Through these acts of homage, French artists felt they both absorbed some of the ‘genius’ of the Old Master and brought his achievements closer within their grasp.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.885
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.031
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.207 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDutch CrossingSame topicHistorical Art and Culture StudiesFrench-language works237,207