Thursday, January 24, 2019

Left Bracket Sixth Round: Klee v. Patenier!



Paul Klee (6-1, 66-33, .656) beat Andy Goldsworthy for a second time, to arrive at this point.  Meanwhile, Patenier (5-1, 43-29, .597) lost to Monet, and now needs to regain momentum to stay alive.  Whatever happens, the Tournament will lose one of the artists that I, at least, could not have predicted making it anywhere near this far!  And it will also retain one of them.


Paul Klee
1879 - 1940
German
Klee is known for his simple stick figures, suspended fish, moon faces, eyes, arrows, and quilts of color, which he orchestrated into fantastic and childlike yet deeply meditative works.... By 1915, he had turned his back to nature and never again painted after the model. With abstracted forms and merry symbols, he expressed the most diverse subjects drawn from his imagination, poetry, music, literature, and his reaction to the world around him . His subjects reveal his impish humor and his bent toward the fantastic and the meditative. 
- The Met's Heilbrunn Timeline of Art History










Joachim Patenier (aka"Patinir")
Patenier - engraving by Cornelius Cort

1485ish - 1524
Dutch
[He is] the first Western artist known to have specialized in landscape painting.... The basic elements of his landscape style—the high viewpoint overlooking vast tracts, where earthy brown foregrounds merge into woodland and meadow greens and again into the hazy blues of distant mountains—do not differ from those of his predecessors, particularly David. Yet the picturesque melancholy with which he invested the woods and rivers and the great ghostly rocks that jut up abruptly in the middle distance of such paintings as his Baptism of Christ (c. 1515) and his Charon Crossing the Styx (1520–24) strike a personal note that won Patinir instant success and many imitators.
- Britanica
  • Skunked German Expressionist Max Hermann Pechstein in Round 1.
  • Beat Francis Picabia in Round 2.
  • Stunned Pablo Picasso with a one-vote victory in Round 3. YOUR VOTE COUNTS!!!
  • Defeated Camille Pissarro in the Fourth Round by a single vote. YOUR VOTE COUNTS!!!
  • Upset Raphael in Round 5!
  • Lost to some cat named Monet in Round 6.







Tuesday, January 22, 2019

Left Bracket Sixth Round: Dürer v. Altdorfer!



Welcome to the Albrecht Bowl, a super-duper match-up between the best-known masters of the early German Renaissance!   Herr Dürer, the older Albrecht (6-1, 65-24, .730) was a big influence on Herr Altdorfer (5-1, 55-33, .625), who owned some of his work and may well have met the older man or even served as his apprentice for a while.  And now, all these years later, they meet head to head in this online art tournament.

Dürer knocked out Caravaggio to get to this round; the Chiaroscuro King went 6-2-2, 78-45, .634 for the 13th best record among Tournament leavers.  Altdorfer lost to Pieter Bruegel, who is currently going head to head with Degas over on the right.


Albrecht Dürer
1471 - 1528
German
 No artist better fits Thomas Carlyle's definition of genius, as the "transcendent capacity of taking trouble," than Albrecht Dürer. The industry of the man was breathtaking, his mastery of detail astonishing, yet everything he did seemed fresh and newly minted. The most intellectual of northern Renaissance artists, but the one who responded most immediately to nature, to the world and the people around him, he was profoundly religious yet supremely open-minded.
- New York Times










Albrecht Altdorfer
c.1480-1538
German
"Albrecht Altdorfer’s Landscape with a Double Spruce marks the beginning of a long and harmonious marriage between the medium of etching and the subject of landscape." "The sheet demonstrates remarkable spontaneity and a freedom of draftsmanship that echoes that of the artist’s numerous landscape drawings. Altdorfer’s revolutionary landscapes galvanized a group of artists later known as the Danube School."
- The Met's Heilbrunn Timeline of Art History
  • Defeated Sir Lawrence Alma-Tadema by a single vote in Round 1.
  • Crushed American minimalist sculpter Carl Andre in Round 2.
  • Spent a year and a half subduing Switzerland's Jacques-Laurent Agasse in Round 3.
  • Edged Fra Angelico by a two-vote swing in Round 4.  YOUR VOTE COUNTS!!!
  • Beat Giacomo Balla easily in Round 5.
  • Trounced by Pieter Bruegel in Round 6.







Monday, January 21, 2019

Element of the Month: Thorium!

January's Element of the Month:

Thorium!
Th
90

Atomic Mass: 232.03806 amu
Melting Point: 1750 °C
Boiling Point: 4788 °C

So, if the sun produces its awesomely convenient life-sustaining heat and light through an endless (for present purposes) process of atomic fusion, than why aren't we blasted off the face of the planet by lethal radiation every morning? "Because God intelligently designed it so we wouldn't be" is a reasonably coherent response, especially if it's a shortcut for "because an organism could not evolve within an environment in which it could not survive," but I'm thinking more about the mechanism here. And a mechanism is needed, because the "solar wind" is a real and potent thing. You may have seen it light up the northern sky in an aurora, or blasting a tail of debris off of any passing comet, and thought to yourself "dang, here is a force not to be messed with." You'd be right! If the sun's radioactive discharge didn't blast your own tail off directly, it would over time blast away our lovely planet's atmosphere, with important ecological consequences.

Fortunately, we have the Earth's magnetic field, which repels just the right amount of radiation to let the luckier among us muddle through our threescore and ten. Because the world is a big ol' magnet, there are two (and occasionally an ephemeral third) powerful fields around the planet that capture high energy electrons and protons, keeping them from reaching the atmosphere or surface, and generally keeping things copacetic. Thanks, Van Allen belts!

Wait, though. Why is the world a big ol' magnet? Well, that's because much of the innards of the Earth is a metallic liquid, mostly consisting of workhorse Elements Iron and Nickel, which circulate in a constant convective motion. "Convective motion" means that hot matter becomes less dense and rises up, while cooling matter becomes more dense and sinks, and so stuff moves in circles. The classic example of convection is on the stovetop, where you can watch little gyres of confection form in your boiling water or soup or whatever.

I haven't been able to find good information on how fast the Earth's internal metallic slurry is cycling around, and although I bet there are some educated guesses I also suspect that we don't really know. What we do know is that when you spin "ferromagnetic" metals (Iron! Nickel!) around each other, it generates magnetic fields and/or electricity. It's how generators work. Heck, you probably remember messing with magnets and wires back in science class, when you were young and every day was still a new miracle. All this means that Planet Earth, although not an especially powerful magnet per cubic centimeter, is certainly a really, really big magnet -- big enough to generate the Van Allen belts. Thanks, geomagnetism!

That brings us to today's question, which is "why is it so hot in the planet's interior?" That's important, because you need heat to drive the convective currents that generate the magnetic fields that moderate the powerful rays of the sun... which are however not powerful enough to heat the planetary interior, so there must be yet something else going on.

There are a couple of things that keep it hot down there. One thing is just the pressure of the outer portions of the planet crushing down on the interior, but that doesn't really count because it is steady and evenly distributed; it doesn't generate any new heat. There is, however, some very old "new" heat still being dissipated, which is the impact energy of the Earth's own formation. Let's ignore that part, though, because the "new" "new" heat that drives convection within the Earth comes from the radioactive decay of atomic Elements. Now, once upon a time, long before you were born even, the internal heat of the Earth was much greater, fueled by the radioactive decay of Uranium and a radioactive isotope of Potassium, Potassium-40. But K-40 has a half-life of only 1.25 billion years, so more than 90% of the interior's original stock has already done the radioactive-decay thing, and then Uranium is well known to be a bit of an eager beaver as well.

Enter Thorium.

The Centerfold!

This is apparently Thorium.  But what I know about Thorium or anything else?

A heavy silvery metal that is radioactive, but not wildly radioactive, Thorium has a half-life more than ten times as long as Potassium-40. In fact, it has a half-life that is three times as long as the age of the planet, meaning that of all of the Thorium that we started with, we must have... geez... oh, something like 85% of it still left? So it's still down there, decaying very very slowly, releasing the heat that convects the Iron/Nickel that generates the magnetic field that blocks the hard radiation that would desolate the planet! All part of the weird Rube Goldberg machine that keeps Earth habitable for your benefit!

Now, a couple caveats. First is, nobody really knows for sure what's going on in the core, and many geophysicists think that it's pretty much pure nickel and iron down there, with the Thorium action all taking place only in the lower mantle. That would still make it important for all things tectonic and geothermal, but would make it less of a day-to-day player in the geomagnetism business.

The other caveat is that when I say that Thorium is "mildly" radioactive, that doesn't mean you should keep piles of it around the house. For that matter, it was probably a bad idea in retrospect for generations of outdoor gear suppliers to exploit the fact that Thorium filament glows with a very clear and bright light and use it as the go-to material for lantern mantles. Turns out that's a bang-up way to generate small but maybe significant amounts of Radon, which is nasty stuff. Also, although the mantles were probably OK in their unlit state for the average lantern user, you probably wouldn't want to be a worker at the lantern-mantle factory. For obvious reasons, this and other commercial uses of Thorium have long been on the phase-out. At the same time, there is occasional interest and a few prototypes of Thorium atomic power plants. In theory, these seem like a good idea -- you'd need more a lot more fuel to generate significant amounts of power, because the fuel is pretty mellow... but the fuel is pretty mellow, so perhaps it would be easier to contain and control safely? Or that could just be me being extremely naive.

Thorium was isolated and identified by Jöns Jacob Berzelius, one of the brainiest of the brainy Swedish chemists of the 19th Century. He also bagged Silicon, Selenium, and Cerium, let his grad students get the credit for Lithium and Vanadium, invented some of the basic vocabulary of chemistry, and developed a shorthand notation in which Elements were represented by letters with little numbers to show their relative proportions in a substance -- in fact, the system we use today. If you ever end up taking a Chemistry test in the afterlife, and you are sitting next to Jöns Jacob Berzelius, you will be tempted to peek at his answers.

Mr. Berzelius, artist unknown, University of
Oxford Museum of the History of Science

Saturday, January 19, 2019

The Ladder of Art -- Week #8

Cast your votes for up to four of these seven artists by Friday the 25th.  For clarifications, consult the Ladder of Art FAQ.


Last Week's Results

This Week's Contest


Frank Auerbach
Born 1931
German; works in the UK

Tournament Record: Placed 485th. Lost to John James Audubon and Hendrick Avercamp. 6 votes for, 21 votes against (.222).





Roy Lichtenstein
1923 - 1997
American

Tournament Record: Placed 486th (tie). Lost to the Limbourg Brothers and Sol LeWitt. 5 votes for, 18 votes against (.217).





Yves Klein
1928 - 1962
French

Tournament Record: Placed 486th (tie). Lost to Paul Klee and Franz Kline. 5 votes for, 18 votes against (.217).





Sir Godfrey Kneller
1646 - 1723
German; worked in Britain

Tournament Record: Placed 488th (tie). Lost to Oskar Kokoschka and Raoul Hausmann. 5 votes for, 20 votes against (.200).





Baron Antoine-Jean Gros
1771 - 1835
French

Tournament Record: Placed 492th (tie). Lost to Juan Gris and Greuze. 4 votes for, 20 votes against (.167).
  • Placed Third in Ladder Week #5
  • Tied for Third in Ladder Week #6
  • Tied for Fourth in Ladder Week #7




Charles-François Daubigny
1817 - 1878
French

Tournament Record: Placed 505th.  Lost to Salvador Dali and Aelbert Cuyp. 4 votes for, 26 votes against (.133).
  • Finished First in Ladder Week #2
  • Finished First again in Week #4 
  • ...and again in Week #6






Domenichino
1581 - 1641
Italian

Tournament Record: Placed 507th (tie).  Lost to Donatello and Dosso Dossi. 3 votes for, 21 votes against (.125).
  • Tied for First, Ladder Rung #1 
  • First Place, Week #3
  • Tied for First, Week #5
  • Tied for Fourth in Week #7





Cast up to four votes in the comments by Friday morning!

Thursday, January 17, 2019

Left Bracket Sixth Round: Picasso v. Ely!



When Leonardo da Vinci advanced to take on Monet on Tuesday, it sent Timothy Ely (5-1, 50-41, .549) over to the Left Bracket to take on the winner of Rockwell v. Picasso.  It turns out that's Picasso (8-1, 78-32, .709).  The Spaniard has huge name recognition, but he's taking on a Northwest UnitedStatsian artist on his home court.  Who knows what crazy art-related things might happen! 

Norman Rockwell, what a Tournament that man had!  He came in only 33rd in the First Round of the Play-In Tournament, then surged just enough to claim one of the 12 golden tickets to the Big Show in the Second Round, and after that just kept gutting it out for an amazing ride that featured a ten to five win over Raphael.  Yes, that Rafael.  Rockwell's .673 final voting average puts him at third place among the 483 artists who have left the Tournament, and -- keep in mind -- there are only 29 still standing! 


Pablo Picasso
1881 - 1973
Spanish
Pablo Picasso [was] one of the greatest and most-influential artists of the 20th century and the creator (with Georges Braque) of Cubism. The enormous body of Picasso’s work remains, and the legend lives on—a tribute to the vitality of the “disquieting” Spaniard with the “sombre…piercing” eyes who superstitiously believed that work would keep him alive. For nearly 80 of his 91 years, Picasso devoted himself to an artistic production that contributed significantly to and paralleled the whole development of modern art in the 20th century.
- Encyclopedia Britannica










Timothy Ely
born 1949
American
Timothy C. Ely is an renowned and enigmatic figure in the book world. He is part of that discipline, yet lives and works in a universe apart. His one-of-kind manuscript books combine elaborate and often mysterious painted and drawn folios contained within finely crafted bindings, which are his inventions or variations on traditional binding techniques. Each book carries layers of both materials and meaning. Close study of each drawing can elicit revelations, personal to each viewer.
- Abby Schoolman Books
  • Took First Place in Phase 1, Flight 7, with a voting score of .813.
  • Tied for First in Phase 2, Flight 5 of the Play-In Tournament with a voting score of .500.
  • Laid a beating on William Dobson in Round 1.
  • Surprised Man Ray in Round 2.
  • Upset Édouard Manet in Round 3 by a single vote. YOUR VOTE COUNTS!!!
  • Beat fellow Play-In Tournament artist Ernst Haeckel in Round 4.
  • Stunned Henri Matisse in Round 5.
  • Lost badly to Leonardo da Vinci in Round 6.