The Ghost In the Canvas
Anonymous
art world. Supposedly Renoir was once painting a portrait of a rich patron.
Before the painting could be completed the patron suffered a violent death
on the way to the artist's studio for the last session. Renoir, of course,
never got paid nor was he able to complete the painting. He expunged the
portrait and reused the canvas for another one of his masterpieces.
Well in the late seventies, one hundred years to the date of the death of
his original patron, his image began to faintly appear in the background
of the painting. At first it was most readily seem with an infrared camera
but it has continued to get stronger over the decades. The restoration
experts have been unable to clean the ghostly image of the dead man from
the canvas in spite of their best high tech efforts.
The faceless ghost appears in the upper right quadrant of the canvas where
the new painting has curtains. Unfortunately I can't remember the name of
the painting. Anyone got more info on this?
aemilia
<snip crossposting AGAIN>
Well, I work in an art museum. In fact, we have a new exhibition going
on display that has the same exact kind of painting on display. What
can often happen when an artist paints over another painting, the
original image can bleed through over the years. Especially if he did
not treat the canvas extensively enough to thwart the inevitable.
We have a painting in our collection of a Late Venetian Renaissance
painter, which depicts three figures, two women and a man, yet the
woman in the middle looks EXTREMELY out of place. After x-raying the
piece, they noticed that there were several layers to the painting,
and that the odd woman in the middle was then "out" of the final
painting by having landscape painted over it. But, over the years, she
has bled through. In the 1800s, some Victorian art
destroyers.......er....conservationists cleaned out the landscape and
brought the woman to the foreground once again.
If Renoir had painted this portrait and then after the guys death
realized that either A) the painting sucked or B) he wasn't going to
get paid anyway, he probably just painted over it, but not with enough
coatings, and the image now appears as a ghost. Nothing supernatural
about it, except for maybe the supernatural talent of Pierre Auguste
Renoir, one of my favorite artists.
<I really wanted to send this to all the crossposted groups to give a
free art lesson, but I do know better>
aemilia
"In their jars the snail-nosed babies moon and glow.
He hands her the cut-out heart like a cracked heirloom."
-Sylvia Plath
Phil Edwards
<nob...@replay.com> wrote:
<ghost of Renoir's patron shows up through overpainting>
Anonymous <nob...@replay.com> crossposted this message to six groups:
alt.folklore.urban
alt.folklore.ghost-stories
sci.skeptic
alt.fan.art-bell
alt.paranormal
alt.art
My apologies for continuing the crosspost, and for posting to groups I
don't read. Somebody posting as Anonymous <nob...@replay.com> makes a
habit of crossposting messages to groups with widely differing subject
matter and styles, with a view to generating cross-posted threads
which will cause widespread annoyance and inconvenience.
Alt.folklore.urban appears to be one of his main target groups.
If you're following up to Anonymous's original, please check your
newsgroups line and remove the groups which don't seem appropriate. I
don't believe alt.folklore.urban is appropriate; if you feel otherwise
I'll happily discuss it on the group. Followups set.
Phil "" Edwards
>A co-worker was telling us yesterday what I think is an urban legend of the
>art world. Supposedly Renoir was once painting a portrait of a rich patron.
>Before the painting could be completed the patron suffered a violent death
>on the way to the artist's studio for the last session. Renoir, of course,
>never got paid nor was he able to complete the painting. He expunged the
>portrait and reused the canvas for another one of his masterpieces.
>
>Well in the late seventies, one hundred years to the date of the death of
>his original patron, his image began to faintly appear in the background
>of the painting. At first it was most readily seem with an infrared camera
>but it has continued to get stronger over the decades. The restoration
>experts have been unable to clean the ghostly image of the dead man from
>the canvas in spite of their best high tech efforts.
>
>The faceless ghost appears in the upper right quadrant of the canvas where
>the new painting has curtains. Unfortunately I can't remember the name of
>the painting. Anyone got more info on this?
--
Phil Edwards http://www.users.zetnet.co.uk/amroth/
"It seems that the British, like God, were originally everywhere"
- Frank Lentricchia
Ben Walsh
It must be depressing, Dave me ould mucker. No-one follows up to you
anymore. Even the $˘ient0l0gi$t$ have got your number. Your modus operandii
had spread around Usenet circles, and your crossposted trolls don't do what
they used to do. Nothing, now, but enemies, as you have poisoned your
reputation in every corner. No friends, and now, no-one will play
thread-contaminent wars with you anymore except for a handful of the
newcomers and the clueless.
And year after year, their numbers grow fewer
Some day no-one will march there at all
Thanks for playing, David, really. It's been real.
ben "no-one will go a-waltzing, David, with thee" w.
Ultima2K
<nob...@replay.com>" that invited the SPAMBOT flood from alt.religion.scient olo
gy into several news groups by cross posting into it.
To Anonymous <nob...@replay.com>
"nobody is about right"
Anonymous the coward wrote:
> <some obviously made up story to cross post>
--
Tom Stamm
http://members.aol.com/Ultima2K
Remove "NOSPAM" from the reply address to reply directly.
Becca Ward
<yet another cross-posted scolding of David Greene>
Hello to the following newsgroups:
alt.folklore.ghost-stories
sci.skeptic
alt.fan.art-bell
alt.paranormal
alt.art
My guess is that more than a few of you (especially those in
alt.folklore.ghost-stories and alt.art) are scratching your heads and
wondering what the hell is going on. I myself wonder sometimes ...
For some of you, this is probably a repeat, and I do apologize for the
continued cross-post: In the past few months, an individual -- widely
believed to be David Greene, based upon his chosen topics and "disfavored"
newsgroups -- has been cross-posting inappropriate (off-topic of
off-charter) material into and out of (among other newsgroups)
alt.folklore.urban. I'm not quite sure why; he seems to find it
entertaining when the clashing styles of discussion among the targetted
newsgroup lead to uproars -- he takes advantage of folks' natural tendency
to simply respond to a message without looking at the newsgroups and
deciding whether some of those newsgroups should be trimmed. Those of you
in alt.fan.art-bell and alt.folklore.ghost-stories are probably quite
familiar with how unpleasant such encounters can be.
In my opinion -- and I speak only for myself -- this does not benefit any
of the newsgroups in question, even when the thread is arguably on-topic
for all newsgroups listed (with Mr. Greene, it rarely is). Unfortunately,
Ultima2K has chosen, for some inexplicable reason, to start the
unpleasantness rolling for us -- although he has a perfectly nice spitting
contest already going on with Mr. Greene in alt.folklore.urban itself,
and doesn't really need to start another one.
I've set follow-ups to this message back into alt.folklore.urban itself --
that's the only newsgroup that is really concerned about what's on-topic
for alt.folklore.urban, and is the only one with the slightest interest in
the disagreement between Mr. Greene and Ultima2K. If for some reason
someone wants to actually talk about this, you can reach me via email; or
you can join us in afu -- please limit such inquiries to afu only, since
there's no need to inflict that newsgroup's navel-gazing upon the others.
Becca Ward
--
Bruce is apparently interested in relevant facts, for some
unaccountable reason, whereas I am interested in juicy gossip.
-- Deborah Stevenson
wordw...@home.com
channel, or perhaps discovery magazine. There was, in fact, such and
image and it is starting to show through, Unfortunately, there is
nothing ghostly about it - just chemistry and time.
Madeleine Page
: Anonymous <nob...@replay.com> wrote:
:>Supposedly Renoir was once painting a portrait of a rich patron.
:>Before the painting could be completed the patron suffered a violent death
:>on the way to the artist's studio for the last session. Renoir [...] ,
:>expunged the portrait and reused the canvas [...]
[image reappers]
:>The faceless ghost appears in the upper right quadrant of the canvas where
:>the new painting has curtains.
This makes the story unlikely, to me. If Renoir had a rich patron who was
paying to have his portrait painted, it's very unlikely that said patron
would appear in the upper right quadrant of the picture. The bloke with
the money nearly always goes front and centre, no?
: Well, I work in an art museum. In fact, we have a new exhibition going
: on display that has the same exact kind of painting on display. What
: can often happen when an artist paints over another painting, the
: original image can bleed through over the years. Especially if he did
: not treat the canvas extensively enough to thwart the inevitable.
Is this not called "pentimento"?
Madeleine "which word, oddly enough, is not in my version of the SOED"
Page
The Avocado Avenger
>On Tue, 30 Mar 1999 20:26:24 GMT, aemilia...@yahoo.com (aemilia)
>wrote:
>>Nothing supernatural
>>about it, except for maybe the supernatural talent of Pierre Auguste
>>Renoir, one of my favorite artists.
>>
>><I really wanted to send this to all the crossposted groups to give a
>>free art lesson, but I do know better>
><Mwah!>
>>aemilia
>Phil "afu welcomes careful posters" Edwards
What I liked about this is that Anon's dastardly plan actually produced
a follow-up I enjoyed immensely.
Stacia "wouldn't David be proud" K.
Stacia * The Avocado Avenger * Life is a tale told by an idiot;
http://www.io.com/~stacia/ * Full of sound and fury,
Remove the guacamole to reply! * Signifying nothing.
Ben Walsh
David, David, David.
For a troll to allow himself to be trolled shows that he's really losing his
touch.
Ultima2K
crossposting into alt.religion.scient ol ogy. Inviting yet again the SPAMBOT
flood. What sort of mentally illness causes a person to behave in such a
immature manner? Anonymous must be a sad, lonely, unhappy, lame and lost loser.
Anonymous wrote:
<nothing worth reading>
--
Tom Stamm
http://members.aol.com/Ultima2K
Remove "NOSPAM" from reply address to reply directly
Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters
|Is this not called "pentimento"?
|Madeleine "which word, oddly enough, is not in my version of the SOED"
The American Heritage, 3rd Edition, Unabridged Electronic Version, makes
the following remarks:
pen ti men to (p nôtå-m nót ) n., pl. pen ti men ti (-t ). An
underlying image in a painting, as an earlier painting, a part of a
painting, or an original draft, that shows through, usually when the top
layer of paint has become transparent with age. [Italian, correction,
pentimento, from pentire, to repent, from Latin paenit re.]
Yours, Lulu...
--
quilty _/_/_/_/ THIS MESSAGE WAS BROUGHT TO YOU BY: \_\_\_\_ n o
@ibm. _/_/ Postmodern Enterprises \_\_
net _/_/ \_\_ d o
_/_/_/ IN A WORLD W/O WALLS, THERE WOULD BE NO GATES \_\_\_ z e
Phil Edwards
wrote:
>Nothing supernatural
>about it, except for maybe the supernatural talent of Pierre Auguste
>Renoir, one of my favorite artists.
>
><I really wanted to send this to all the crossposted groups to give a
>free art lesson, but I do know better>
<Mwah!>
>aemilia
Phil "afu welcomes careful posters" Edwards
Anonymous
>Anonymous wrote in message <1999033016...@mail.replay.com>...
>
> It must be depressing, Dave me ould mucker. No-one follows up to you
'zat so? Then you won't mind my asking them.
> Your modus operandii
> had spread around Usenet circles, and your crossposted trolls don't do what
> they used to do. Nothing, now, but enemies, as you have poisoned your
> reputation in every corner. No friends, and now, no-one will play
> thread-contaminent wars with you anymore except for a handful of the
> newcomers and the clueless.
So why do you still play, bennie??? Are you some kind of scientology
forgery bot? I hear being a scientologist is even more fun than being
Irish.
> And year after year, their numbers grow fewer
> Some day no-one will march there at all
Then you can thank me now.
> Thanks for playing, David, really. It's been real.
OK I admit it. I am the bad, bad dave. But I can't help it.
Please, for my sake, contact ab...@u.washington.edu and tell
them I've been bad, bad, bad. Then they can do keystroke
monitoring when I log in and catch me and cancel my account.
Please - it is the only way I can get help.
> ben "no-one will go a-waltzing, David, with thee" w.
The bad, bad Dave.
LITTLEPJoo
name of the painting. It would be cool to see something like this.
PJ
Chris Sutor
: Anonymous <nob...@replay.com> crossposted this message to six groups:
So was your message, which I'm replying to. Doesn't tat mean you're just
as guilty as he is? Or maybe even more so, since his message was actually
on topic.
: alt.folklore.urban
: alt.folklore.ghost-stories
: sci.skeptic
: alt.fan.art-bell
: alt.paranormal
: alt.art
....and exactly *which* newsgroup is it off topic for? Looks like it's
bang on target for all of them, to me.
Looks to me like you're trying to start a flame-fest by continually
complaining about any posts that come through an anonymous remailler, and
then just because they're crossposted to more than one group of interest.
Also, for the few of you who still don't "get it" - anon...@replay.net
is not a single account - it's not one person. It's an anonymous
remailler, and not all messages coming through it will be from the same
person. Complaining that this is the same person who did X, or that did Y,
because it's same email address only displays a lack of knowledge of the
subject you're attacking.
: My apologies for continuing the crosspost, and for posting to groups I
: don't read. Somebody posting as Anonymous <nob...@replay.com> makes a
: habit of crossposting messages to groups with widely differing subject
: matter and styles, with a view to generating cross-posted threads
: which will cause widespread annoyance and inconvenience.
: Alt.folklore.urban appears to be one of his main target groups.
The message was asking if the story was an urban legend of not. Explain
how asking if something is an urban legend is offtopic in
alt.folklore.urban?
I've seen one of these "apology-whine" messages from you or another
person, following numerous threads. I'm beginning to suspect that there's
no even a human at the other end of your email address, and merely a
robot-poster triggered by certain email addresses.
: If you're following up to Anonymous's original, please check your
: newsgroups line and remove the groups which don't seem appropriate. I
: don't believe alt.folklore.urban is appropriate; if you feel otherwise
: I'll happily discuss it on the group. Followups set.
What you feel is irrelevant. You do not have sole claim to any newsgroup,
especially not in the unmoderated backwaters of the alt. heierarchy.
: Phil "" Edwards
:>A co-worker was telling us yesterday what I think is an urban legend of the
:>art world. Supposedly Renoir was once painting a portrait of a rich patron.
:>Before the painting could be completed the patron suffered a violent death
:>on the way to the artist's studio for the last session. Renoir, of course,
:>never got paid nor was he able to complete the painting. He expunged the
:>portrait and reused the canvas for another one of his masterpieces.
:>
:>Well in the late seventies, one hundred years to the date of the death of
:>his original patron, his image began to faintly appear in the background
:>of the painting. At first it was most readily seem with an infrared camera
:>but it has continued to get stronger over the decades. The restoration
:>experts have been unable to clean the ghostly image of the dead man from
:>the canvas in spite of their best high tech efforts.
:>
:>The faceless ghost appears in the upper right quadrant of the canvas where
:>the new painting has curtains. Unfortunately I can't remember the name of
:>the painting. Anyone got more info on this?
: --
: Phil Edwards http://www.users.zetnet.co.uk/amroth/
: "It seems that the British, like God, were originally everywhere"
: - Frank Lentricchia
--
COBALTatTIGERDENdotCOM I'd really like a New World Order, but
----==============---- I can only afford a slightly used one.
now with 10% real *****************************************
fruit juice! Don't blame me, I voted for Richard Dangerous
Phil Edwards
On 31 Mar 1999 11:20:12 GMT, Chris Sutor <cob...@tiger.tigerden.com>
wrote:
>Phil Edwards <amr...@zetnet.co.uk> spake thusly:
>
>: Anonymous <nob...@replay.com> crossposted this message to six groups:
>
>So was your message, which I'm replying to.
You're replying in public, and on all six groups, despite the fact
that I set followups to afu. And I apologised for the crosspost and
explained why I was doing it.
>: alt.folklore.urban
>: alt.folklore.ghost-stories
>: sci.skeptic
>: alt.fan.art-bell
>: alt.paranormal
>: alt.art
>
>....and exactly *which* newsgroup is it off topic for? Looks like it's
>bang on target for all of them, to me.
Sci.skeptic discusses anomalous events from a sceptical viewpoint.
Alt.paranormal is there to discuss the same kind of events from the
opposite viewpoint. Alt.folklore.ghost-stories is a good place to talk
about Weird Stories; so is alt.fan.art-bell, only their Weird Stories
aret supposed to be true. Alt.art, I dunno. And alt.folklore.urban
discusses and dissects urban folklore, in its own way.
There is no way in the world that any one post could be appropriate
for more than two of those groups. The approach and the style of a
group are just as significant in determining whether a post is
on-charter as the headline subject matter.
>Looks to me like you're trying to start a flame-fest by continually
>complaining about any posts that come through an anonymous remailler, and
>then just because they're crossposted to more than one group of interest.
I don't like crashing other people's groups, and the last thing I want
is to start a flamewar; I tried to be as uninflammatory as possible.
>Also, for the few of you who still don't "get it" - anon...@replay.net
>is not a single account
YM nob...@replay.com. Do try and keep up.
> - it's not one person. It's an anonymous
>remailler, and not all messages coming through it will be from the same
>person
No shit, Sherlock.
AFU has been under attack since the beginning of the year by a troller
using the Replay anonymous remailer. No, I don't know it's one person,
but he, she or they has or have a very consistent MO - posting
material which is almost but not quite on-charter to several
(generally six) different groups. And it's consistent with the MO used
by a certain David Greene of the University of Washington, who used to
plague afu under his own name. In the circumstances, the hypothesis
that all these different six-group off-charter cross-posts come from
different people is the one that needs propping up.
>: Somebody posting as Anonymous <nob...@replay.com> makes a
>: habit of crossposting messages to groups with widely differing subject
>: matter and styles, with a view to generating cross-posted threads
>: which will cause widespread annoyance and inconvenience.
>: Alt.folklore.urban appears to be one of his main target groups.
>
>The message was asking if the story was an urban legend of not. Explain
>how asking if something is an urban legend is offtopic in
>alt.folklore.urban?
You're not responding to what I said. The post itself could be
entirely on-topic for a.f.u; what makes it a problem for a.f.u is the
fact that it's cross-posted to unrelated groups.
>I've seen one of these "apology-whine" messages from you or another
>person, following numerous threads. I'm beginning to suspect that there's
>no even a human at the other end of your email address, and merely a
>robot-poster triggered by certain email addresses.
You can suspect what you like. What I've written (and what, on a rough
count, eight other people have written) has been triggered off by
/what's been posted/ and /where it's been posted/.
>You do not have sole claim to any newsgroup,
>especially not in the unmoderated backwaters of the alt. heierarchy.
Never said I did, Chris.
Phil "little Godwin" Edwards
Mitcho
[Chris' lengthy whinge also snipped]
> COBALTatTIGERDENdotCOM I'd really like a New World Order, but
> ----==============---- I can only afford a slightly used one.
> now with 10% real *****************************************
> fruit juice! Don't blame me, I voted for Richard Dangerous
Well Phil, you better quit while you're ahead. From his or her
aggressivley clever.sig, Chris has revealed he (or she? Who can say?)
is far too witty a foil for a simple unemployed Mancunian such as
yerself.
Mitcho
--
The Urban Redneck o ozy...@employees.org o Goat Hill, California
http://www.employees.org/~ozyman