@ArtWatchUK Like you, Michael, I am not a Durer scholar. I'd be grateful if you could point out the concealment in the NG's catalogue entry on the painting, available freely online https://t.co/c9UxK7wb7Q
@ArtWatchUK You cannot accuse the painting's owner of not being transparent about the changes in appearance after its cleaning:
https://t.co/663sXZlV3N
@PhilipHensher@RichardBratby As the British and French fought together at Ypres, this witticism manages to be both not terribly amusing and strangely pointless.
@ArtWatchUK Michael, I find it fascinating that you can write this and still (rightly) praise a book whose raison d'etre is to show that there is no such thing as 'comparative photography'. The medium is the message, baby!
@ArtWatchUK You raise many valid points of principle (have you seen the re-colouring of the Piero Nativity? Reversible, apparently, but still...), but your blanket refusal to entertain the idea that the NG might occasionally know what it is doing just makes you look like a man with a grudge.
@ArtWatchUK Michael, what parts of Holbein's extant designs for the Ambassadors were changed in the 1990s? The example you have given is a repainting of a lost area.
@ArtWatchUK Wherein Martin Wyld says of the 'original' nose, 'The nose bone fell out in France in the seventeenth or eighteenth century. This one, I'm pretty certain, is by my predecessor here in 1891 and there was the remains of another one underneath it.'
@ArtWatchUK Of course the link you supplied that the NG "never fesses up on it's [sic!] fakes" is to a 2010 exhibition on, er, forgeries and misattributions at the NG. So when and where and by whom do you think the St George was painted, Michael?
@william_whyte Dog in the manger here: three-and-a-bit-years is nowhere near long enough to digest a life and write about it with the perspective one expects from a major project like ODNB. It's not a newspaper obit; there's no race to scoop the competition (also lousy copy editing - tsk tsk).