Controversial and Scandalous Art Quiz

Answer: Akhenaten

Akhenaten, the tenth Pharaoh of Egypt's 18th Dynasty, reigned from about 1351-1334 BC. He abandoned the cult Amun-Ra and the other Egyptian gods, and replaced their worship with a single deity, the sun disc, Aten. He moved his capital city from Thebes to a new city, now called Amarna; as a result, art from his reign is often known as Amarna art. Amarna art is more natural in its portrayal of people, animals, and inanimate objects.

It shows more action than earlier Egyptian art. For some reason, still not agreed upon by scholars, the Pharaoh himself is portrayed as an androgynous figure with thick lips, thin arms and legs, wide hips and a protruding belly. Members of the royal family are shown with strange, misshapen heads. Whether this is an accurate portrayal of the Pharaoh and his family, or some new sort of artistic convention, is unknown.

At any rate, as soon as Akhenaten died, so did his new religion, and Egyptian artists went back to painting and sculpting in the old style.

Answer: Michelangelo

Most of the criticism and outrage over the piece involved the many nude figures it contained. For example, the Vatican's own Master of Ceremonies, Biagio da Cesena, said that "It was disgraceful that in so sacred a place there should have been depicted all those nude figures, exposing themselves so shamefully, and that it was no work for a papal chapel but rather for the public baths and taverns." Shortly after Michelangelo's death in 1564, during the reign of Pope Pius IV, the painter Daniele da Volterra was hired to paint fig leaves and clothing to cover the offending parts of the fresco. According to Andrew Graham-Dixon in his book "Renaissance", this led to the unfortunate da Volterra being known as "Il Braghettone" ("the breeches-maker").

Answer: Anne of Cleves

Holbein seems to have flattered the young princess; in his famous portrait of her, she appears to be an attractive young lady. But when she came to England and met Henry in the flesh, he was appalled. As Michael Farquhar reports in his book, "Royal Scandals", the king's first words upon their initial meeting were, "I like her not." In a letter to Thomas Cromwell, Henry complained that she stank and her breasts sagged.

They were married on January 6, 1540, but Henry was so repelled by her that he could not bring himself to consummate the marriage.

In another letter to Cromwell, written after his wedding night, he said, "I liked her before not well, but now I like her much worse . . . [I] could never in her company be provoked and steered to know her carnally." Anne agreed to a quick divorce, and received a handsome settlement that enabled her live out the rest of her life in comfort. Thomas Cromwell was not so lucky; he was accused of treason and beheaded a few days after the divorce became final. Curiously, Holbein retained his post as King's Painter, and does not seem to have incurred Henry's wrath.

Answer: Judith Beheading Holofernes

"Judith Beheading Holofernes" is based on a story in the Old Testament Book of Judith, where Judith gets the Assyrian general Holofernes drunk, and, after he has passed out, she and her maid cut off his head. Other painters had told the story before, so it wasn't the subject matter that was controversial, it was the manner in which it was shown.

Artemisia's father, Orazio, was also an artist. In 1611, when Artemisia was about 18, he hired the painter Agostino Tassi to help him with a project he was working on, and to give his daughter private lessons. Well, one day Tassi raped Artemisia. Despite this inauspicious beginning, Artemisia continued to have consensual relations with Tassi for several months afterwards, because (she claimed) he had promised to marry her. Nine months after the initial assault, Artemisia's father sued Tassi for raping his daughter and depriving her of her virginity.

The seven month-long trial that followed must have been the talk of Rome. Artemisia claimed that Tassi had lured her into a bedroom under the pretense of looking for a painting, had thrown her on the bed and raped her, despite her scratching his face and even stabbing him with a knife. To explain their ongoing affair, she said, "What I was doing with him, I did only so that, as he had dishonored me, he would marry me." Tassi, on the other hand, denied everything. "Never have I had carnal relations nor tried to have it with the said Artemisia... I've never been alone in Artemisia's house with her." He later claimed that he had visited her house only in order to safeguard her honor. Unfortunately for Tassi, it was shown during the course of the trial that he had previously served time in jail for rape, and that among his victims were his wife and sister-in-law. Furthermore, he had boasted to several companions of having taken Artemisia's virginity. There were a lot more accusations and counter-accusations, but, in the end, Tassi was found guilty, although he only served eight months in prison for his crime. This could not have made Artemisia happy, because, in "Judith Beheading Holofernes", she painted her own face as Judith, and . . .well, I'll let you guess who she painted as Holofernes. The painting is notable for its extreme violence and bloody realism. A good online account of the trial can be found on Tracy Marks' website, "Artemisia, Renaissance Baroque Artist."

Answer: The Naked Maja

The female nude was nothing new in Western art; they had appeared in paintings and sculpture throughout every period of history. But usually they appeared in some sort of mythological or allegorical setting, bathing, or as symbols of innocence. There's nothing innocent about the lady in Goya's painting; she is lying on her back in bed, propped up by some pillows, totally nude, and staring directly at the viewer with a most lecherous expression on her face.

The work is believed to have been painted around 1798, perhaps commissioned by the Spanish Prime Minister, Manuel de Godoy.

Another nearly identical painting, but with the same model fully dressed, called "The Clothed Maja", was painted about the same time; both works were in Godoy's collection.

In 1815, Goya was called before the Spanish Inquisition to answer questions about the painting, but his testimony has been lost. The model has never been positively identified, but for many years she was thought to be the Duchess of Alba.

Answer: J. M. W. Turner

Joseph Mallord William Turner (1775 - 1851) began his career as a rather conventional landscape painter, but in later life began experimenting with light and color in unconventional ways. Although usually classified as a Romantic painter, his later works were almost Impressionist in nature. Today he is regarded as one of the most important English artists of all time.

A 2005 BBC poll named Turner's "The Fighting Temeraire" Britain's greatest painting. In 2011, an 1839 painting of Turner's, "Modern Rome - Campo Vaccino", sold for $44.9 million at auction. Contemporary critics were sharply divided in their opinion of Turner's merits. John Ruskin said that his works "stirringly and truthfully measure the moods of Nature." Others were less impressed, pointing out that many of his paintings seem unfinished, that he was careless in his depiction of historical scenes, and "indistinct." Perhaps the most famous detractor of Turner was Mark Twain, who, in his book "A Tramp Abroad," described Turner's "The Slave Ship" as looking like "a tortoise-shell cat having a fit in a platter of tomatoes." Just between you and me, I think Twain may have been on to something.

Answer: Nocturne in Black and Gold: The Falling Rocket

James A. McNeill Whistler (1834 - 1903) was not a Cockney. He was, in fact, an American, now remembered primarily for his portrait, "Whistler's Mother", which is more correctly known as "Arrangement in Grey and Black No. 1". Ruskin published his review a magazine called "Fors Clavigera" in 1877, following an exhibition at the Grosvenor Gallery. Whistler promptly sued Ruskin, asking for damages of 1000 pounds.

The jury found in Whistler's favor, but awarded him damages of one farthing, the smallest possible sum, less than one cent in American money. Ruskin's friends paid his legal costs, but the cost of the trial forced Whistler to declare bankruptcy. Ironically, "The Falling Rocket" later sold for 800 pounds, four times Whistler's initial asking price.

Answer: Olympia

To the modern eye, it is difficult to see what all the fuss was about. The painting shows a nude woman lying on a bed, with her hand covering her private parts, wearing a flower in her hair. Many have noted that it bears more than a passing resemblance to Titian's "Venus of Urbino". What got the critics, and especially the public, up in arms, is that it is clear that this woman is not a goddess, but a high-class prostitute. 19th century Paris was full of prostitutes, but evidently one was not supposed to paint them. The public was outraged; the journalist Antonin Proust recalled that, "If the canvas of the Olympia was not destroyed, it is only because of the precautions that were taken by the administration." The "precaution" was to hang the painting very high up, out of reach of the crowds.

Most of the critics didn't like it, either. Jules Claretie fulminated in "Le Figaro": "What's this yellow-bellied Odalisque, this vile model picked up who knows where, and who represents Olympia?" Journalist Edmond About demanded "the gallery be fumigated to free it from the painting's corruption."

Actually, the "vile model" was not a prostitute at all, but a very respectable lady named Victorine Meurent, who was an accomplished artist in her own right; in fact, in 1876, the Salon accepted her submissions while rejecting Manet's. As a final irony, after stirring up all this controversy by painting a prostitute, Manet died in in 1883, at age 51, from complications due to syphilis.

Answer: One of the shoulder straps on the lady's dress is loose

It is impossible for me to understand how even the most prudish among us could find anything objectionable about "Portrait of Madame X." It shows a lovely lady wearing a dark, low-cut (but still very modest) gown, her face turned in profile, with her right hand resting on a table. That's it. But it shows the right strap of her dress loose and hanging down. That was enough to suggest to Victorian imaginations that Madame X a) had just engaged in sex; b) was about to engage in sex; or c) both. Critic Albert Woolf, writing for "Le Figaro," observed: "One more struggle, and the lady will be free." An anonymous critic writing for "L'Artiste" opined about "the indecency of her dress that looks like it is about to fall off." You would think the French would be a little more broadminded.

It didn't help, of course, that the model for the painting was 24 year-old Virginie Amélie Avegno Gautreau, an American who had married a rich French businessman, and who was rumored to be less than a model for proper behavior. Poor Sargent had to repaint the shoulder strap to make it appear securely fastened, and soon left France and moved to England. And poor Madame Gautreau, humiliated by the scandal, was forced to retire from society - temporarily.

Answer: Chicago

Harold Washington was the first African-American Mayor of Chicago, serving from 1983 until 1987. At 11:00 a.m. on November 25, 1987, Washington suffered a heart attack at his desk in City Hall. He was immediately rushed to Northwestern Memorial Hospital, where he was pronounced dead at 1:36 p.m. Before the afternoon was over, there were rumors that when the late mayor had been taken to the emergency room, it had been discovered that he was wearing women's undergarments beneath his business suit.

Shortly after Washington's death, David K. Nelson, Jr., a white student at the School of the Art Institute of Chicago, painted "Mirth & Girth," a "full-length frontal portrait of a portly grim-faced Harold Washington clad in a white bra and G-string, garter belt, and stockings". On May 11, 1988 the painting was placed on display in a student exhibition at the School of the Art Institute of Chicago, and immediately caused a furor. Early that day, Aldermen Edward Jones and William C. Henry arrived at the Art Institute, took down the painting and set it on the floor, facing the wall. It was rehung after they left. Later, Aldermen Dorothy Tillman, Bobby Rush and Allen Streeter came to the Art Institute, took down the painting, cut a gash in it, and wrapped it in brown paper. The Chicago Police were called, and the painting was taken into police custody, with Chicago Police Department Superintendent Leroy Martin calling it "an incitement to riot." It was returned to Nelson the following day, albeit in damaged condition.

The firestorm was far from over. Jesse Jackson and Operation PUSH threatened to boycott the Art Institute if it displayed any more paintings they felt were offensive to African-Americans. Students staged "free speech" rallies in support of Nelson. The School of the Art Institute of Chicago took out ads in all major Chicago newspapers to apologize for the incident. It was a fun time to be living in Chicago, especially if you lived only a few blocks from the Art Institute.

As a final note, the ACLU filed suit on Nelson's behalf against the aldermen, Superintendent Martin, and the City of Chicago. The case, Nelson vs. Streeter, dragged on for six years, but eventually Nelson was awarded a settlement of $95,000. "Mirth & Girth" has not been publicly displayed since the incident.