MENU

Sections

  • Home
  • Education
  • Donate to the Centreville Spy
  • Free Subscription
  • Spy Community Media
    • Chestertown Spy
    • Talbot Spy
    • Cambridge Spy

More

  • Support the Spy
  • About Spy Community Media
  • Advertising with the Spy
  • Subscribe
February 15, 2026

Centreville Spy

Nonpartisan and Education-based News for Centreville

  • Home
  • Education
  • Donate to the Centreville Spy
  • Free Subscription
  • Spy Community Media
    • Chestertown Spy
    • Talbot Spy
    • Cambridge Spy
Arts Looking at the Masters Spy Journal

Looking At The Masters: Gustav Klimt

September 12, 2024 by Beverly Hall Smith Leave a Comment

Internationally known artist Gustav Klimt (1862-1918) grew up in Baumgarten, a town near Vienna. His father was an engraver of gold and silver items, a occupation that made a strong impression on Gustav. Klimt studied at the Vienna College of Applied Arts, where he excelled. He and other students were assigned mural projects in newly built private and public buildings on Vienna’s Ringstrasse. When Klimt was teenager he and fellow artists began painting wall and ceiling murals in the villa built for Empress Elisabeth and in the Art History Museum. He was awarded the Emperor’s Prize for his murals in the auditorium of the Burg Theater in Vienna (1887-88). Klimt’s early paintings were influenced by art of ancient Egypt up to the Renaissance. Many were paintings of young semi-nude females representing allegorical figures. They were considered by some to be too sensual, but Klimt’s reputation grew.

“Judith I” (1901)

The art of Vienna was moving into a new phase known as the Vienna Secession. The young artists of Vienna, like others in major art academies in Europe, were rejecting the old Academy style and embracing a new and different style. When the Vienna Secession was started in 1897, Klimt was elected its first chairman. “Judith I” (1901) (34”x17”) is an example of his more decorative style, known as his “Golden Style.” The decorative gold frame was designed and made by his brother who was a goldsmith.  The subject is Judith and Holofernes, the Old Testament story of the beautiful Jewish woman who cut off the head of Holofernes, the general who was about to destroy her town. It was a popular subject for artists from the 17th Century onward.

Klimt’s figures are more sensual as a result of the gold leaf used to create the background pattern. Judith wears a diamond choker and diaphanous gown with gold patterns. Judith’s eyes are almost closed, her mouth is open, and she shares an ecstatic moment with the viewer as she presents the head of Holofernes.  

The model for Judith was his life-long lover Emile Floge (1874-1952). She was the sister of Helene Floge, who married Klimt’s brother in 1897. Klimt had many affairs during his life, resulting in six children, none with Emile. They did not live together, but the affair continued until Klimt’s death in1918. Emile modeled for many of his paintings. On her own, Emile was a fashion designer and proprietor of a popular women’s clothing store in Vienna. She provided the Viennese avant-guard with elegant fashions in the new style.  

Klimt visited Ravenna, Italy, in 1903, and he fell in love with the golden Byzantine mosaics in the 6th Century Church of San Vitale. He described the mosaics as being “of unbelievable splendor” and a “revelation.” His golden mosaic frieze decorated a room in the Vienna Secession building for the 14th exhibition. Titled “Beethoven Frieze, the work” was 7 feet tall and 112 feet long. He used gold paint, stucco, mirrors, and mother of pearl. The gold mosaic style also was used in painting the dining room walls of the Vienna Werkstatte (workshop) (1905-09) and three walls of the dining room of the Villa Stoclet in Brussels (1905-11).  

“The Kiss” (1908)

Klimt was incredibly prolific. He managed to paint many individual works despite his heavy schedule of commissions. The subjects of “The Kiss” (1908) (71’’x71’’) are considered by many art historians to be Klimt and Emile, locked in a passionate embrace. His unruly black hair is crowned by green leaves, resembling ivy, and his hands embrace her face. Her hair is decorated with flowers. She turns her face to his, eyes closed, waiting for the kiss. One of her hands circles his neck and the other holds on to his hand. Her face, shoulder, elbow, and feet are painted in flesh tones. Both figures are encased in a gold, patterned robe. His side is decorated with a variety of black rectangles representing maleness. Her side is decorated with circular patterns representing the female. Klimt made her gown partially transparent by creating a different set of circular patterns with bouquets of flowers and using the patterns to elongate and outline her back and buttocks. The couple kneel on a bed of individually painted flowers on bright green grass.

“Adele Block Bauer” (1907)

“Adele Bloch-Bauer” (1907) (55.1”x55.1’’) was one of Klimt’s last works in his “Golden style.” The painting was called the Austrian “Mona Lisa.” Klimt was a popular portrait painter among the new Jewish bourgeoise. Adele Bloch-Bauer (1881-1925) was a salon hostess and patron of the arts. 

This portrait is considered a masterpiece of his style. Adele’s large, dark eyes, blushing cheeks, and red lipstick are sensuous. The unusual position of her hands was to hide a broken finger that she found awkward. The stunning diamond choker was a wedding present from her husband. Lavish gold bracelets encircle her arm. Her gown, meant partially to reveal her shape, is designed with patterns of the all-seeing eye and golden triangles. The diaphanous outer gown contains squares with her initials A and B.

When the Nazis stole the painting from the Block-Bauer residence, it was given the name “Woman in Gold” and put on display. Adele’s diamond necklace was taken by Hermann Goering. The 2015 movie “Woman in Gold,” starring Helen Mirren and Ryan Reynolds, told the story of Maria Altmann, niece of Adele Block Bauer, who fought to retrieve the painting. “Woman in Gold” was a landmark case of restitution of Nazi plunder. The painting was purchased for $135 million from Maria Altmann in 2006 by the Neue Galerie in New York City. It hangs in the New York gallery at the wish of the Altmann family. 

“Death and Life” (1910-1911)

After his “Golden style” period, Klimt painted several allegorical paintings such as “Death and Life” (1910-1915) (71’’x79’’). They tell provocative stories. When the painting was originally exhibited in 1911 at an International Exhibition in Rome, it was titled “Death” and it won first prize. When the painting was exhibited in 1912 at the International Exhibition in Dresden, it was titled “Death and Life.” Klimt retouched the work in 1915, two years after World War I began, painting large black crosses on Death’s robe. He added more figures and brighter primary colors to the group, and he painted over the gold background with a dark gray-green. In that year his mother, with whom he still lived, died. The 1915 version of the painting is the one shown here.

Death is represented by a dark figure with a grinning skull that stares at Life. His skeletal fingers grip a red club. Life is represented by several figures from all stages of life, infancy to aged. Prominently placed is a newborn male baby surrounded by several young women, the largest female nude, probably representing the mother. The older woman with gray hair wears a blue patterned head scarf. The lovers, one a single adult male with dark hair and tanned skin, the other a nude female with pale skin and red hair, embrace. The cycle of life is represented. The group is surrounded with a pattern of brightly colored flowers and geometric designs. 

With the exception of the female just to the left of the mother figure and whose eyes are open, all appear comfortably asleep, unaware of the presence of Death. Whether or not she is looking at Death is a mystery. The 1915 revisions are often interpreted as Klimt offering hope.

“Death and Life” in Leopold Museum, Vienna

On November 15, 2022, a climate activist group threw an oily black substance on “Death and Life,” on display at the Leopold Museum in Vienna.  One protestor glued himself to the glass that covered the painting. Having tried several different ways, and for several years, to get European governments to stop drilling for oil, and having had no success, the group announced it was disbanding. The group’s message was “New oil and gas drilling is a death sentence to humanity.” Fortunately, the group always chose paintings that were under glass, so no damage was done to the paintings. 

“Bauermgarten” (1907) (43”x43’’)

“Bauermgarten” (1907) (43”x43’’) represents another source of Klimt’s inspiration: his love of rustic gardens. Klimt also loved Vienna, and he left it reluctantly for very short periods. Friends who traveled with him observed he was never so happy as when he was coming home. He would sing, “The wind is blowing briskly toward my homeland.” He made several paintings of gardens filled with daisies, poppies, roses, sunflowers, and others, all popular garden flowers, composed in triangular patterns. These paintings also were incredibly popular in his time as well as today. This painting was sold at a Sotheby’s auction in March 2017 for $59.3 million, the highest price ever paid for a Klimt painting at auction.

“Avenue in the Park of Schloss Kamer” (1912)

In addition to painting flower gardens, Klimt painted scenes near his beloved summer home in the village of Unterach, located on the south shore of Lake Attersee. “Avenue in the Park of Schloss Kammer” (1912) (43.3”x43.3”) is one of his many depictions of scenes around the Schloss Kammer castle and the Lake. A cobble stone drive leads to the yellow walls of the castle, but what dominates the painting is the avenue of tall trees along the way. Later in Klimt’s life, he experimented with realism, but he always included his decorative patterns. This scene is a kind of paradise. It is peaceful and inviting. Klimt painted for his own pleasure, but these were among his most popular and purchased paintings.

 

“Art is a line around your thoughts.” (Klimt)

The Spy Newspapers may periodically employ the assistance of artificial intelligence (AI) to enhance the clarity and accuracy of our content.

Filed Under: Looking at the Masters, Spy Journal

An Idea Whose Time Has Come: Replace Presidential Election Debates With Candidate Forums by David Reel

September 9, 2024 by David Reel Leave a Comment

Recently the Harris campaign and the Trump campaigns finally agreed on the following protocol for their debate on Tuesday night September 10.

90 minutes of debate time with two commercial breaks.

Moderators are ABC News anchor and managing editor David Muir and ABC News Live “Prime” anchor Linsey Davis. 

No opening statements. 

Closing statements will be two minutes per candidate.

No live audience.

Each candidate’s microphone will be muted when it isn’t their turn to speak.

The candidates cannot ask each other questions. 

Each candidate has two minutes to answer each question with a two-minute rebuttal and an additional minute for a follow-up, clarification, or response.

Candidates will stand behind podiums and are prohibited from interacting with their staff.

No pre-written notes or props. 

It will air on ABC and stream on ABC News Live, Disney +, and Hulu. Viewers can also stream the debate on the ABC app on a smartphone or tablet, on ABC.com and connected devices.

Post debate, ABC News staff will provide their analysis, their fact checks and their opinions on the biggest takeaways from the night.

One has to wonder how much thoughtful analysis, reliable fact checks, and opinions on the biggest takeaways from the night can occur immediately after the debate rather than after more deliberative, rigorous, and objective thinking.

The bottom line is the current presidential debate process in broken. The reasons are simple and were addressed recently by the Washington Post’s Editorial Board and by Washington Post columnist Philip Bump. 

The Post’s editorial board cited a Post and Schar School of Policy and Government at George Mason University survey reporting only 3 in 10 residents of six of the most important states in this year’s presidential election trusted the media will fairly and accurately report political news. Bump has written “Americans simply don’t trust the media, particularly when it comes to politics.”

That media includes, but is not limited to the following major television broadcasting networks — ABC, NBC, CBS, FOX NEWS, MSNBC, CNN, PBS, and CW.

Recently, the words “an existential threat to democracy” have been used ad infinitum.

I suggest one unaddressed existential threat to democracy is when the media who is not trusted by Americans proposes debate ground rules, develops debate questions, moderates a debate, and offers rapid response post-debate analysis and rapid response post-debate fact checking for presidential debates.

To address that threat, I suggest there is a much better system based a model on policy discourses from a time when America was deeply divided, just as we are now. 

Iin 1858, (three years before the start of civil war), Abraham Lincoln engaged in widely followed political dialogue with Stephen A. Douglas. All that dialogue was characterized by open, candid, civil, and issue- driven conversations focused on helping voters learn more about the views of Lincoln and Douglas. 

These conversations with voters often included supporters applauding for their candidate. When that happened Douglas said, “My friends, silence will be more acceptable to me in the discussion of these questions than applause. I desire to address myself to your judgement, your understanding, and your consciences, and not to your passions or your enthusiasms.”

To do that today, we need to reduce the currently outsized role of television in presidential election debates. Instead of debates they could broadcast candidate forums.

These forums could feature one candidate at a time in a 90-minute prime time broadcast. In that broadcast they could talk about whatever they wanted to, including, but not limited to why they want to be president, what has prepared them to serve, and what exactly they will strive to accomplish if elected. Speaking for a 90-minute forum will be a way to demonstrate to voters their stamina, their understanding of issues, and their communication skills.

Candidate eligibility for a televised forum could be the same as those in place for the current debates — polling thresholds and appearing on enough state ballots to theoretically get a majority of electoral votes in the November election.

Those forums could be broadcast on a rotating basis starting with the broadcast network with the highest levels of viewership, then rebroadcast, unedited, on all the other networks. 

In addition, verbatim unedited transcripts of the forums could be widely circulated by print and other electronic media outlets.

At a time when Americans do not trust the media on political news, candidate forums could:

Eliminate the media setting debate rules, preparing debate questions, serving as debate moderators, and offering their rapid reaction post event analysis and fact checks.

Maximize voter’s opportunities to reach their own conclusions about candidates based on what they observe during a forum and/or read about after a forum. 

Provide all voters with easily accessible and more reliable information prior to voting.

Now more than ever, candidate forums instead of debates are an idea whose time has come.

David Reel is a public affairs and public relations consultant who lives in Easton.

 

The Spy Newspapers may periodically employ the assistance of artificial intelligence (AI) to enhance the clarity and accuracy of our content.

Filed Under: David, Spy Journal

Why Isn’t Harris Winning More if Trump is So Bad? By J.E. Dean

September 4, 2024 by J.E. Dean Leave a Comment

I heard less about Kamala Harris’ momentum this weekend. This morning, I read that Trump is leading in four of the seven battleground states. All this follows a three-week period that should have been an election disaster for Donald Trump. He is getting crazier in his name-calling. He flip-flopped on reproductive rights. And he just is not looking well. I read one tweet on X that questioned whether he would “make it” to November.

What is happening? Shouldn’t the Harris-Walz ticket be surging? Younger, low-income voters who favored Trump before President Biden’s exit from the race now support Harris by double digits. Does that mean that Trump is picking up support elsewhere to partially offset other losses in support?

I do not know the answers and am not sure I want to know them. I frequently question the choices of Trump voters, but I am not ready to call them idiots, “deplorables,” or suggest they should not have the right to vote. I wonder about the enthusiasm for Trump demonstrated by many of the ex-president’s followers. What are they enthusiastic about? In interviews, these supporters do not seem to be the type of people who have read all 900+ pages of Project 2025.

One explanation for Trump’s resilience in the polls is that Harris’ economic message is not what many voters want to hear. Promises to tax corporations and billionaires, for example, often fall on deaf ears. People do not believe that taxing Bill Gates or Elon Musk will solve their personal problems. Instead, many believe the new taxes will be evaded or, worse, wasted by the government before benefiting people that could use help. Many voters still believe Reagan’s claim that “Government is not the solution to our problem; it is the problem.”

Many voters, especially White males, also remain skeptical of Harris, which is to say they do not trust her. Some simply do not want a woman in the White House. But others believe Trump when he says that she is a communist bent on destructing America. By destructing America, he means imposing new rules and regulations meant to create a more equitable society. These voters assume some of those rules and regulations will change their lives. One claim I have heard many times is that employment opportunities will go to “minorities” (who is the minority these days?) at their expense.

Trump appears confident that a combination of “destroying the brand” of Harris and Walz while promising to close the border and end inflation (isn’t inflation already ending?) will be enough to win the election. He may be right.

The Harris agenda should be attractive to most voters. A more equitable society is a safer one. And most of us do not like housing shortages that result in homelessness, school-age children not being properly fed, unavailable health care to many, failing schools, and more. The problem, I think, is that it is difficult to communicate proposal details to skeptical, sometimes lazy, voters.

 A call to stop millions of undocumented immigrants from entering the country is simpler to understand than a detailed plan to expand housing opportunity by tax credits, promoting denser housing in cities, and other similar regulations. Harris is not yet trying to educate voters on her proposals, apparently believing that slogans like “We won’t go back” are all that is needed to win in November. For example, she is not attempting to explain how her proposal to address the housing shortage would work, how it would impact individuals. All I hear is that it will be easier to buy a house if you are a low-income person.

So, what is my advice to the candidates? If I wanted Trump to win the election, I would tell him to visit a hypnotist who would help him focus. Without the craziness, Trump’s message, racist as it is, would reach more voters who might support it. Trump, in other words, is his own worst enemy. His base is fine with his simple MAGA agenda, but they are starting to worry about his age and sanity.

I, of course, do not want Trump to win. My advice to Harris is to get comfortable talking policy in greater details while being careful not to offer policy proposals that lend themselves to Trump’s demagoguery. Moderate and independent voters are hungry for a candidate who is not Trump, but they also need to be comfortable with that candidate. They hunger for an intelligent discussion of policy alternatives.

Harris has the first part nailed. She is the antithesis of Trump in likeability, ethics, energy, and more. The second part requires stronger performances in interviews, a better-than-expected showing at the September 10 debate, and the ability to not succumb to Trump’s attacks on her gender, ethnic background, and history as a California progressive.

Can Harris do it? Our future may depend on it.

J.E. Dean is a retired attorney and public affairs consultant. He writes on politics, government, and, too infrequently, other subjects.

 

The Spy Newspapers may periodically employ the assistance of artificial intelligence (AI) to enhance the clarity and accuracy of our content.

Filed Under: 3 Top Story, Spy Journal

  • « Previous Page
  • 1
  • …
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9

Copyright © 2026

Affiliated News

  • Chestertown Spy
  • Talbot Spy
  • Cambridge Spy

Sections

  • Sample Page

Spy Community Media

  • Sample Page
  • Subscribe
  • Sample Page

Copyright © 2026 · Spy Community Media Child Theme on Genesis Framework · WordPress · Log in