2. 
3. 
4. 
5. 
6. 
Some improved formatting here, though it's hardly 49 images' worth. Also, if Richter's formatting is any guide, we'd need to standardize the images to show more or less the same features (head and neck with little in the shoulder). Finally, the finish would need to be standardized. What do you all think?
5. 
6. 
Some improved formatting here, though it's hardly 49 images' worth. Also, if Richter's formatting is any guide, we'd need to standardize the images to show more or less the same features (head and neck with little in the shoulder). Finally, the finish would need to be standardized. What do you all think?
Here, in any event, is the basic information on each: 1. George Washington Carver, 1864-1943, science (botany); 2. Mary Douglas, 1921-2007, science (anthropology); 3. Virginia Woolf, 1882-1941, literature; 4. William Edward Burghardt Du Bois, 1868-1963, literature, philosophy; 5. Barbara McClintock, 1902-1992, science (physiology/medecine); 6. Alice Hamilton, 1869-1970, science (toxicology).
By the way, the portrait below is of Edward Kennedy "Duke" Ellington, 1899-1974, composer.
And all the images, like Richter's, are from an encyclopedia, another parameter for how he made his selection, apparently (circa 1971, that is). The encyclopedia in this case is, perhaps needless to say, Wikipedia. (Got a problem with that? I think it's apt, insofar as the catalogue describing Richter's work mentions that he was interested in how cultural excellence is constructed and portrayed. So, yeah.)
This looks great, Stuart!
ReplyDelete