nc33/multispan_quoref huggingface dataset:
The Rokeby Venus is the only surviving nude by Velázquez, but three others by the artist are recorded in 17th-century Spanish inventories. Two were mentioned in the Royal collection, but may have been lost in the 1734 fire that destroyed the main Royal Palace of Madrid. A further one was recorded in the collection of Domingo Guerra Coronel. These records mention "a reclining Venus", Venus and Adonis, and a Psyche and Cupid.Although the work is widely thought to have been painted from life, the identity of the model is subject to much speculation. In contemporary Spain it was acceptable for artists to employ male nude models for studies; however, the use of female nude models was frowned upon. The painting is believed to have been executed during one of Velázquez's visits to Rome, and Prater has observed that in Rome the artist "did indeed lead a life of considerable personal liberty that would have been consistent with the notion of using a live nude female model". It has been claimed that the painting depicts a mistress Velázquez is known to have had while in Italy, who is supposed to have borne his child. Others have claimed that the model is the same as in Coronation of the Virgin and Las Hilanderas, both in the Museo del Prado, and other works.The figures of both Venus and Cupid were significantly altered during the painting process, the result of the artist's corrections to the contours as initially painted. Pentimenti can be seen in Venus's upraised arm, in the position of her left shoulder, and on her head. Infra-red reveals that she was originally shown more upright with her head turned to the left. An area on the left of the painting, extending from Venus's left foot to the left leg and foot of Cupid, is apparently unfinished, but this feature is seen in many other works by Velázquez and was probably deliberate. The painting was given a major cleaning and restoration in 1965–66, which showed it to be in good condition, and with very little paint added later by other artists, contrary to what some earlier writers had asserted.

Question: What is the name of the artist whose corrections to the contours as initially painted resulted in the figures of both Venus and Cupid being significantly altered during the painting process?
Answer: Velázquez
The Rokeby Venus is the only surviving nude by Velázquez, but three others by the artist are recorded in 17th-century Spanish inventories. Two were mentioned in the Royal collection, but may have been lost in the 1734 fire that destroyed the main Royal Palace of Madrid. A further one was recorded in the collection of Domingo Guerra Coronel. These records mention "a reclining Venus", Venus and Adonis, and a Psyche and Cupid.Although the work is widely thought to have been painted from life, the identity of the model is subject to much speculation. In contemporary Spain it was acceptable for artists to employ male nude models for studies; however, the use of female nude models was frowned upon. The painting is believed to have been executed during one of Velázquez's visits to Rome, and Prater has observed that in Rome the artist "did indeed lead a life of considerable personal liberty that would have been consistent with the notion of using a live nude female model". It has been claimed that the painting depicts a mistress Velázquez is known to have had while in Italy, who is supposed to have borne his child. Others have claimed that the model is the same as in Coronation of the Virgin and Las Hilanderas, both in the Museo del Prado, and other works.The figures of both Venus and Cupid were significantly altered during the painting process, the result of the artist's corrections to the contours as initially painted. Pentimenti can be seen in Venus's upraised arm, in the position of her left shoulder, and on her head. Infra-red reveals that she was originally shown more upright with her head turned to the left. An area on the left of the painting, extending from Venus's left foot to the left leg and foot of Cupid, is apparently unfinished, but this feature is seen in many other works by Velázquez and was probably deliberate. The painting was given a major cleaning and restoration in 1965–66, which showed it to be in good condition, and with very little paint added later by other artists, contrary to what some earlier writers had asserted.

Question: What is the title of the painting given a major cleaning and restoration in 1965–66?
Answer: Rokeby Venus
The Rokeby Venus is the only surviving nude by Velázquez, but three others by the artist are recorded in 17th-century Spanish inventories. Two were mentioned in the Royal collection, but may have been lost in the 1734 fire that destroyed the main Royal Palace of Madrid. A further one was recorded in the collection of Domingo Guerra Coronel. These records mention "a reclining Venus", Venus and Adonis, and a Psyche and Cupid.Although the work is widely thought to have been painted from life, the identity of the model is subject to much speculation. In contemporary Spain it was acceptable for artists to employ male nude models for studies; however, the use of female nude models was frowned upon. The painting is believed to have been executed during one of Velázquez's visits to Rome, and Prater has observed that in Rome the artist "did indeed lead a life of considerable personal liberty that would have been consistent with the notion of using a live nude female model". It has been claimed that the painting depicts a mistress Velázquez is known to have had while in Italy, who is supposed to have borne his child. Others have claimed that the model is the same as in Coronation of the Virgin and Las Hilanderas, both in the Museo del Prado, and other works.The figures of both Venus and Cupid were significantly altered during the painting process, the result of the artist's corrections to the contours as initially painted. Pentimenti can be seen in Venus's upraised arm, in the position of her left shoulder, and on her head. Infra-red reveals that she was originally shown more upright with her head turned to the left. An area on the left of the painting, extending from Venus's left foot to the left leg and foot of Cupid, is apparently unfinished, but this feature is seen in many other works by Velázquez and was probably deliberate. The painting was given a major cleaning and restoration in 1965–66, which showed it to be in good condition, and with very little paint added later by other artists, contrary to what some earlier writers had asserted.

Question: What is the title of the painting on the left of which is an area extending from Venus' left foot to the left leg and foot of Cupid that is apparently unfinished?
Answer: Rokeby Venus
In part because he was overlooked until the mid-19th century, Velázquez found no followers and was not widely imitated. In particular, his visual and structural innovations in this portrayal of Venus were not developed by other artists until recently, largely owing to the censorship of the work. The painting remained in a series of private rooms in private collections until it was exhibited in 1857 at the Manchester Art Treasures Exhibition, along with 25 other paintings at least claimed to be by Velázquez; it was here that it became known as the Rokeby Venus. It does not appear to have been copied by other artists, engraved or otherwise reproduced, until this period. In 1890 it was exhibited in the Royal Academy in London, and in 1905 at Messrs. Agnews, the dealers who had bought it from Morritt. From 1906 it was highly visible in the National Gallery and became well-known globally through reproductions. The general influence of the painting was therefore long delayed, although individual artists would have been able to see it on occasion throughout its history.
Velázquez's portrait is a staging of a private moment of intimacy and a dramatic departure from the classical depictions of sleep and intimacy found in works from antiquity and Venetian art that portray Venus. However, the simplicity with which Velázquez displays the female nude—without jewellery or any of the goddess's usual accessories—was echoed in later nude studies by Ingres, Manet, and Baudry, among others. In addition, Velázquez's depiction of Venus as a reclining nude viewed from the rear was a rarity before that time, although the pose has been painted by many later artists. Manet, in his stark female portrayal Olympia, paraphrased the Rokeby Venus in pose and by suggesting the persona of a real woman rather than an ethereal goddess. Olympia shocked the Parisian art world when it was first exhibited in 1863. Olympia gazes directly out at the viewer, as does Velázquez's Venus, only through the reflection of the mirror.

Question: What is the title of that which was exhibited at Messrs in 1905??
Answer: Rokeby Venus
In part because he was overlooked until the mid-19th century, Velázquez found no followers and was not widely imitated. In particular, his visual and structural innovations in this portrayal of Venus were not developed by other artists until recently, largely owing to the censorship of the work. The painting remained in a series of private rooms in private collections until it was exhibited in 1857 at the Manchester Art Treasures Exhibition, along with 25 other paintings at least claimed to be by Velázquez; it was here that it became known as the Rokeby Venus. It does not appear to have been copied by other artists, engraved or otherwise reproduced, until this period. In 1890 it was exhibited in the Royal Academy in London, and in 1905 at Messrs. Agnews, the dealers who had bought it from Morritt. From 1906 it was highly visible in the National Gallery and became well-known globally through reproductions. The general influence of the painting was therefore long delayed, although individual artists would have been able to see it on occasion throughout its history.
Velázquez's portrait is a staging of a private moment of intimacy and a dramatic departure from the classical depictions of sleep and intimacy found in works from antiquity and Venetian art that portray Venus. However, the simplicity with which Velázquez displays the female nude—without jewellery or any of the goddess's usual accessories—was echoed in later nude studies by Ingres, Manet, and Baudry, among others. In addition, Velázquez's depiction of Venus as a reclining nude viewed from the rear was a rarity before that time, although the pose has been painted by many later artists. Manet, in his stark female portrayal Olympia, paraphrased the Rokeby Venus in pose and by suggesting the persona of a real woman rather than an ethereal goddess. Olympia shocked the Parisian art world when it was first exhibited in 1863. Olympia gazes directly out at the viewer, as does Velázquez's Venus, only through the reflection of the mirror.

Question: What is the title of the work that was bought from Morritt by dealers?
Answer: Rokeby Venus
In part because he was overlooked until the mid-19th century, Velázquez found no followers and was not widely imitated. In particular, his visual and structural innovations in this portrayal of Venus were not developed by other artists until recently, largely owing to the censorship of the work. The painting remained in a series of private rooms in private collections until it was exhibited in 1857 at the Manchester Art Treasures Exhibition, along with 25 other paintings at least claimed to be by Velázquez; it was here that it became known as the Rokeby Venus. It does not appear to have been copied by other artists, engraved or otherwise reproduced, until this period. In 1890 it was exhibited in the Royal Academy in London, and in 1905 at Messrs. Agnews, the dealers who had bought it from Morritt. From 1906 it was highly visible in the National Gallery and became well-known globally through reproductions. The general influence of the painting was therefore long delayed, although individual artists would have been able to see it on occasion throughout its history.
Velázquez's portrait is a staging of a private moment of intimacy and a dramatic departure from the classical depictions of sleep and intimacy found in works from antiquity and Venetian art that portray Venus. However, the simplicity with which Velázquez displays the female nude—without jewellery or any of the goddess's usual accessories—was echoed in later nude studies by Ingres, Manet, and Baudry, among others. In addition, Velázquez's depiction of Venus as a reclining nude viewed from the rear was a rarity before that time, although the pose has been painted by many later artists. Manet, in his stark female portrayal Olympia, paraphrased the Rokeby Venus in pose and by suggesting the persona of a real woman rather than an ethereal goddess. Olympia shocked the Parisian art world when it was first exhibited in 1863. Olympia gazes directly out at the viewer, as does Velázquez's Venus, only through the reflection of the mirror.

Question: What is the name of the painting whose general influence was long delayed?
Answer: Rokeby Venus
In part because he was overlooked until the mid-19th century, Velázquez found no followers and was not widely imitated. In particular, his visual and structural innovations in this portrayal of Venus were not developed by other artists until recently, largely owing to the censorship of the work. The painting remained in a series of private rooms in private collections until it was exhibited in 1857 at the Manchester Art Treasures Exhibition, along with 25 other paintings at least claimed to be by Velázquez; it was here that it became known as the Rokeby Venus. It does not appear to have been copied by other artists, engraved or otherwise reproduced, until this period. In 1890 it was exhibited in the Royal Academy in London, and in 1905 at Messrs. Agnews, the dealers who had bought it from Morritt. From 1906 it was highly visible in the National Gallery and became well-known globally through reproductions. The general influence of the painting was therefore long delayed, although individual artists would have been able to see it on occasion throughout its history.
Velázquez's portrait is a staging of a private moment of intimacy and a dramatic departure from the classical depictions of sleep and intimacy found in works from antiquity and Venetian art that portray Venus. However, the simplicity with which Velázquez displays the female nude—without jewellery or any of the goddess's usual accessories—was echoed in later nude studies by Ingres, Manet, and Baudry, among others. In addition, Velázquez's depiction of Venus as a reclining nude viewed from the rear was a rarity before that time, although the pose has been painted by many later artists. Manet, in his stark female portrayal Olympia, paraphrased the Rokeby Venus in pose and by suggesting the persona of a real woman rather than an ethereal goddess. Olympia shocked the Parisian art world when it was first exhibited in 1863. Olympia gazes directly out at the viewer, as does Velázquez's Venus, only through the reflection of the mirror.

Question: What is the title of Velázquez's depiction that represents a staging of a private moment of intimacy and a dramatic departure from the classical depictions of sleep and intimacy found in works from antiquity and Venetian art that portray Venus?
Answer: Rokeby Venus
On 10 March 1914, the suffragette Mary Richardson walked into the National Gallery and attacked Velázquez's canvas with a meat cleaver. Her action was ostensibly provoked by the arrest of fellow suffragette Emmeline Pankhurst the previous day, although there had been earlier warnings of a planned suffragette attack on the collection. Richardson left seven slashes on the painting, particularly causing damage to the area between the figure's shoulders. However, all were successfully repaired by the National Gallery's chief restorer Helmut Ruhemann.Richardson was sentenced to six months' imprisonment, the maximum allowed for destruction of an artwork. In a statement to the Women's Social and Political Union shortly afterwards, Richardson explained, "I have tried to destroy the picture of the most beautiful woman in mythological history as a protest against the Government for destroying Mrs. Pankhurst, who is the most beautiful character in modern history." She added in a 1952 interview that she didn't like "the way men visitors gaped at it all day long".The feminist writer Lynda Nead observed, "The incident has come to symbolize a particular perception of feminist attitudes towards the female nude; in a sense, it has come to represent a specific stereotypical image of feminism more generally." Contemporary reports of the incident reveal that the picture was not widely seen as mere artwork. Journalists tended to assess the attack in terms of a murder (Richardson was nicknamed "Slasher Mary"), and used words that conjured wounds inflicted on an actual female body, rather than on a pictorial representation of a female body. The Times described a "cruel wound in the neck", as well as incisions to the shoulders and back.

Question: What did Helmut Huhemann repair?
Answer: Velázquez's canvas
On 10 March 1914, the suffragette Mary Richardson walked into the National Gallery and attacked Velázquez's canvas with a meat cleaver. Her action was ostensibly provoked by the arrest of fellow suffragette Emmeline Pankhurst the previous day, although there had been earlier warnings of a planned suffragette attack on the collection. Richardson left seven slashes on the painting, particularly causing damage to the area between the figure's shoulders. However, all were successfully repaired by the National Gallery's chief restorer Helmut Ruhemann.Richardson was sentenced to six months' imprisonment, the maximum allowed for destruction of an artwork. In a statement to the Women's Social and Political Union shortly afterwards, Richardson explained, "I have tried to destroy the picture of the most beautiful woman in mythological history as a protest against the Government for destroying Mrs. Pankhurst, who is the most beautiful character in modern history." She added in a 1952 interview that she didn't like "the way men visitors gaped at it all day long".The feminist writer Lynda Nead observed, "The incident has come to symbolize a particular perception of feminist attitudes towards the female nude; in a sense, it has come to represent a specific stereotypical image of feminism more generally." Contemporary reports of the incident reveal that the picture was not widely seen as mere artwork. Journalists tended to assess the attack in terms of a murder (Richardson was nicknamed "Slasher Mary"), and used words that conjured wounds inflicted on an actual female body, rather than on a pictorial representation of a female body. The Times described a "cruel wound in the neck", as well as incisions to the shoulders and back.

Question: What is the full name of the person that Mary Richardson called the most beautiful character in modern history?
Answer: Emmeline Pankhurst
On 10 March 1914, the suffragette Mary Richardson walked into the National Gallery and attacked Velázquez's canvas with a meat cleaver. Her action was ostensibly provoked by the arrest of fellow suffragette Emmeline Pankhurst the previous day, although there had been earlier warnings of a planned suffragette attack on the collection. Richardson left seven slashes on the painting, particularly causing damage to the area between the figure's shoulders. However, all were successfully repaired by the National Gallery's chief restorer Helmut Ruhemann.Richardson was sentenced to six months' imprisonment, the maximum allowed for destruction of an artwork. In a statement to the Women's Social and Political Union shortly afterwards, Richardson explained, "I have tried to destroy the picture of the most beautiful woman in mythological history as a protest against the Government for destroying Mrs. Pankhurst, who is the most beautiful character in modern history." She added in a 1952 interview that she didn't like "the way men visitors gaped at it all day long".The feminist writer Lynda Nead observed, "The incident has come to symbolize a particular perception of feminist attitudes towards the female nude; in a sense, it has come to represent a specific stereotypical image of feminism more generally." Contemporary reports of the incident reveal that the picture was not widely seen as mere artwork. Journalists tended to assess the attack in terms of a murder (Richardson was nicknamed "Slasher Mary"), and used words that conjured wounds inflicted on an actual female body, rather than on a pictorial representation of a female body. The Times described a "cruel wound in the neck", as well as incisions to the shoulders and back.

Question: What was Lynda Nead referring to being the specific stereotypicall image of feminism?
Answer: Velázquez's canvas
On 10 March 1914, the suffragette Mary Richardson walked into the National Gallery and attacked Velázquez's canvas with a meat cleaver. Her action was ostensibly provoked by the arrest of fellow suffragette Emmeline Pankhurst the previous day, although there had been earlier warnings of a planned suffragette attack on the collection. Richardson left seven slashes on the painting, particularly causing damage to the area between the figure's shoulders. However, all were successfully repaired by the National Gallery's chief restorer Helmut Ruhemann.Richardson was sentenced to six months' imprisonment, the maximum allowed for destruction of an artwork. In a statement to the Women's Social and Political Union shortly afterwards, Richardson explained, "I have tried to destroy the picture of the most beautiful woman in mythological history as a protest against the Government for destroying Mrs. Pankhurst, who is the most beautiful character in modern history." She added in a 1952 interview that she didn't like "the way men visitors gaped at it all day long".The feminist writer Lynda Nead observed, "The incident has come to symbolize a particular perception of feminist attitudes towards the female nude; in a sense, it has come to represent a specific stereotypical image of feminism more generally." Contemporary reports of the incident reveal that the picture was not widely seen as mere artwork. Journalists tended to assess the attack in terms of a murder (Richardson was nicknamed "Slasher Mary"), and used words that conjured wounds inflicted on an actual female body, rather than on a pictorial representation of a female body. The Times described a "cruel wound in the neck", as well as incisions to the shoulders and back.

Question: What is the first name of the person who left seven slashes on the painting?
Answer: Mary
On 10 March 1914, the suffragette Mary Richardson walked into the National Gallery and attacked Velázquez's canvas with a meat cleaver. Her action was ostensibly provoked by the arrest of fellow suffragette Emmeline Pankhurst the previous day, although there had been earlier warnings of a planned suffragette attack on the collection. Richardson left seven slashes on the painting, particularly causing damage to the area between the figure's shoulders. However, all were successfully repaired by the National Gallery's chief restorer Helmut Ruhemann.Richardson was sentenced to six months' imprisonment, the maximum allowed for destruction of an artwork. In a statement to the Women's Social and Political Union shortly afterwards, Richardson explained, "I have tried to destroy the picture of the most beautiful woman in mythological history as a protest against the Government for destroying Mrs. Pankhurst, who is the most beautiful character in modern history." She added in a 1952 interview that she didn't like "the way men visitors gaped at it all day long".The feminist writer Lynda Nead observed, "The incident has come to symbolize a particular perception of feminist attitudes towards the female nude; in a sense, it has come to represent a specific stereotypical image of feminism more generally." Contemporary reports of the incident reveal that the picture was not widely seen as mere artwork. Journalists tended to assess the attack in terms of a murder (Richardson was nicknamed "Slasher Mary"), and used words that conjured wounds inflicted on an actual female body, rather than on a pictorial representation of a female body. The Times described a "cruel wound in the neck", as well as incisions to the shoulders and back.

Question: What is the last name of the person whose painting was successfully repaired by the National Gallery?
Answer: Velázquez
On 10 March 1914, the suffragette Mary Richardson walked into the National Gallery and attacked Velázquez's canvas with a meat cleaver. Her action was ostensibly provoked by the arrest of fellow suffragette Emmeline Pankhurst the previous day, although there had been earlier warnings of a planned suffragette attack on the collection. Richardson left seven slashes on the painting, particularly causing damage to the area between the figure's shoulders. However, all were successfully repaired by the National Gallery's chief restorer Helmut Ruhemann.Richardson was sentenced to six months' imprisonment, the maximum allowed for destruction of an artwork. In a statement to the Women's Social and Political Union shortly afterwards, Richardson explained, "I have tried to destroy the picture of the most beautiful woman in mythological history as a protest against the Government for destroying Mrs. Pankhurst, who is the most beautiful character in modern history." She added in a 1952 interview that she didn't like "the way men visitors gaped at it all day long".The feminist writer Lynda Nead observed, "The incident has come to symbolize a particular perception of feminist attitudes towards the female nude; in a sense, it has come to represent a specific stereotypical image of feminism more generally." Contemporary reports of the incident reveal that the picture was not widely seen as mere artwork. Journalists tended to assess the attack in terms of a murder (Richardson was nicknamed "Slasher Mary"), and used words that conjured wounds inflicted on an actual female body, rather than on a pictorial representation of a female body. The Times described a "cruel wound in the neck", as well as incisions to the shoulders and back.

Question: What is the first name of the person who was sentenced to six months' imprisonment?
Answer: Mary
On 10 March 1914, the suffragette Mary Richardson walked into the National Gallery and attacked Velázquez's canvas with a meat cleaver. Her action was ostensibly provoked by the arrest of fellow suffragette Emmeline Pankhurst the previous day, although there had been earlier warnings of a planned suffragette attack on the collection. Richardson left seven slashes on the painting, particularly causing damage to the area between the figure's shoulders. However, all were successfully repaired by the National Gallery's chief restorer Helmut Ruhemann.Richardson was sentenced to six months' imprisonment, the maximum allowed for destruction of an artwork. In a statement to the Women's Social and Political Union shortly afterwards, Richardson explained, "I have tried to destroy the picture of the most beautiful woman in mythological history as a protest against the Government for destroying Mrs. Pankhurst, who is the most beautiful character in modern history." She added in a 1952 interview that she didn't like "the way men visitors gaped at it all day long".The feminist writer Lynda Nead observed, "The incident has come to symbolize a particular perception of feminist attitudes towards the female nude; in a sense, it has come to represent a specific stereotypical image of feminism more generally." Contemporary reports of the incident reveal that the picture was not widely seen as mere artwork. Journalists tended to assess the attack in terms of a murder (Richardson was nicknamed "Slasher Mary"), and used words that conjured wounds inflicted on an actual female body, rather than on a pictorial representation of a female body. The Times described a "cruel wound in the neck", as well as incisions to the shoulders and back.

Question: What is the first name of the person Richardson called the most beautiful character in modern history?
Answer: Emmeline
Bud Doyle is a jockey who has discovered the secret to get his favorite mount, Six-Shooter, to boost his performance. If he simply chants the phrase, "Whoop-te-doo", the horse responds with a burst of speed. There is a special bond between the jockey and his mount, but there is increasing tension between Doyle and the horse's owner, Pop Blake (who also raised Doyle), over Doyle's relationship with local singer Babe Ellis. Blake sees Ellis as a distraction prior to the upcoming big race, the Camden Stakes.
The owner of the club where Babe sings, Wally Weber, has his eyes on his horse winning the Camden Stakes. When the issues between Pop and Doyle come to a head, Pop tells Doyle that he has to choose: either he stops seeing Babe, or he'll be replaced as Six-Shooter's jockey in the big race. Angry and frustrated, Doyle quits. Weber approaches him to become the jockey for Rose Dawn, Weber's horse, and Doyle agrees, with the precondition that he not ride Royal Dawn in the Camden Stakes, for he wants Six-Shooter to still win the race.  Weber accedes to that one precondition, however, on the day of the race, he makes it clear that Doyle is under contract, and that he will ride Rose Dawn in the race.
Upset, Doyle has no choice but to ride Rose Dawn.  However, during the race, he manages to chant his signature "Whoop-te-doo" to Six-Shooter, causing his old mount to win the race. Furious that his horse lost, Weber goes to the judges, who rule that Doyle threw the race, pulling back on Rose Dawn, to allow Six-Shooter to win, and suspend Doyle from horse-racing.

Question: Which horse does Bud Doyle hope wins the Camden Stakes?
Answer: Six-Shooter
Bud Doyle is a jockey who has discovered the secret to get his favorite mount, Six-Shooter, to boost his performance. If he simply chants the phrase, "Whoop-te-doo", the horse responds with a burst of speed. There is a special bond between the jockey and his mount, but there is increasing tension between Doyle and the horse's owner, Pop Blake (who also raised Doyle), over Doyle's relationship with local singer Babe Ellis. Blake sees Ellis as a distraction prior to the upcoming big race, the Camden Stakes.
The owner of the club where Babe sings, Wally Weber, has his eyes on his horse winning the Camden Stakes. When the issues between Pop and Doyle come to a head, Pop tells Doyle that he has to choose: either he stops seeing Babe, or he'll be replaced as Six-Shooter's jockey in the big race. Angry and frustrated, Doyle quits. Weber approaches him to become the jockey for Rose Dawn, Weber's horse, and Doyle agrees, with the precondition that he not ride Royal Dawn in the Camden Stakes, for he wants Six-Shooter to still win the race.  Weber accedes to that one precondition, however, on the day of the race, he makes it clear that Doyle is under contract, and that he will ride Rose Dawn in the race.
Upset, Doyle has no choice but to ride Rose Dawn.  However, during the race, he manages to chant his signature "Whoop-te-doo" to Six-Shooter, causing his old mount to win the race. Furious that his horse lost, Weber goes to the judges, who rule that Doyle threw the race, pulling back on Rose Dawn, to allow Six-Shooter to win, and suspend Doyle from horse-racing.

Question: What is the full name of the man that ignores Bud Doyle's precondition?
Answer: Wally Weber
Bud Doyle is a jockey who has discovered the secret to get his favorite mount, Six-Shooter, to boost his performance. If he simply chants the phrase, "Whoop-te-doo", the horse responds with a burst of speed. There is a special bond between the jockey and his mount, but there is increasing tension between Doyle and the horse's owner, Pop Blake (who also raised Doyle), over Doyle's relationship with local singer Babe Ellis. Blake sees Ellis as a distraction prior to the upcoming big race, the Camden Stakes.
The owner of the club where Babe sings, Wally Weber, has his eyes on his horse winning the Camden Stakes. When the issues between Pop and Doyle come to a head, Pop tells Doyle that he has to choose: either he stops seeing Babe, or he'll be replaced as Six-Shooter's jockey in the big race. Angry and frustrated, Doyle quits. Weber approaches him to become the jockey for Rose Dawn, Weber's horse, and Doyle agrees, with the precondition that he not ride Royal Dawn in the Camden Stakes, for he wants Six-Shooter to still win the race.  Weber accedes to that one precondition, however, on the day of the race, he makes it clear that Doyle is under contract, and that he will ride Rose Dawn in the race.
Upset, Doyle has no choice but to ride Rose Dawn.  However, during the race, he manages to chant his signature "Whoop-te-doo" to Six-Shooter, causing his old mount to win the race. Furious that his horse lost, Weber goes to the judges, who rule that Doyle threw the race, pulling back on Rose Dawn, to allow Six-Shooter to win, and suspend Doyle from horse-racing.

Question: What is the full name of the person who disapproves of Bud going to see Babe sing?
Answer: Pop Blake
Bud Doyle is a jockey who has discovered the secret to get his favorite mount, Six-Shooter, to boost his performance. If he simply chants the phrase, "Whoop-te-doo", the horse responds with a burst of speed. There is a special bond between the jockey and his mount, but there is increasing tension between Doyle and the horse's owner, Pop Blake (who also raised Doyle), over Doyle's relationship with local singer Babe Ellis. Blake sees Ellis as a distraction prior to the upcoming big race, the Camden Stakes.
The owner of the club where Babe sings, Wally Weber, has his eyes on his horse winning the Camden Stakes. When the issues between Pop and Doyle come to a head, Pop tells Doyle that he has to choose: either he stops seeing Babe, or he'll be replaced as Six-Shooter's jockey in the big race. Angry and frustrated, Doyle quits. Weber approaches him to become the jockey for Rose Dawn, Weber's horse, and Doyle agrees, with the precondition that he not ride Royal Dawn in the Camden Stakes, for he wants Six-Shooter to still win the race.  Weber accedes to that one precondition, however, on the day of the race, he makes it clear that Doyle is under contract, and that he will ride Rose Dawn in the race.
Upset, Doyle has no choice but to ride Rose Dawn.  However, during the race, he manages to chant his signature "Whoop-te-doo" to Six-Shooter, causing his old mount to win the race. Furious that his horse lost, Weber goes to the judges, who rule that Doyle threw the race, pulling back on Rose Dawn, to allow Six-Shooter to win, and suspend Doyle from horse-racing.

Question: What is the name of the horse Bud Doyle is forced to ride?
Answer: Rose Dawn
Bud Doyle is a jockey who has discovered the secret to get his favorite mount, Six-Shooter, to boost his performance. If he simply chants the phrase, "Whoop-te-doo", the horse responds with a burst of speed. There is a special bond between the jockey and his mount, but there is increasing tension between Doyle and the horse's owner, Pop Blake (who also raised Doyle), over Doyle's relationship with local singer Babe Ellis. Blake sees Ellis as a distraction prior to the upcoming big race, the Camden Stakes.
The owner of the club where Babe sings, Wally Weber, has his eyes on his horse winning the Camden Stakes. When the issues between Pop and Doyle come to a head, Pop tells Doyle that he has to choose: either he stops seeing Babe, or he'll be replaced as Six-Shooter's jockey in the big race. Angry and frustrated, Doyle quits. Weber approaches him to become the jockey for Rose Dawn, Weber's horse, and Doyle agrees, with the precondition that he not ride Royal Dawn in the Camden Stakes, for he wants Six-Shooter to still win the race.  Weber accedes to that one precondition, however, on the day of the race, he makes it clear that Doyle is under contract, and that he will ride Rose Dawn in the race.
Upset, Doyle has no choice but to ride Rose Dawn.  However, during the race, he manages to chant his signature "Whoop-te-doo" to Six-Shooter, causing his old mount to win the race. Furious that his horse lost, Weber goes to the judges, who rule that Doyle threw the race, pulling back on Rose Dawn, to allow Six-Shooter to win, and suspend Doyle from horse-racing.

Question: After Bud shouts "Whoop-te-doo", what is the last name of the person who reports him to the judge?
Answer: Weber
Bud Doyle is a jockey who has discovered the secret to get his favorite mount, Six-Shooter, to boost his performance. If he simply chants the phrase, "Whoop-te-doo", the horse responds with a burst of speed. There is a special bond between the jockey and his mount, but there is increasing tension between Doyle and the horse's owner, Pop Blake (who also raised Doyle), over Doyle's relationship with local singer Babe Ellis. Blake sees Ellis as a distraction prior to the upcoming big race, the Camden Stakes.
The owner of the club where Babe sings, Wally Weber, has his eyes on his horse winning the Camden Stakes. When the issues between Pop and Doyle come to a head, Pop tells Doyle that he has to choose: either he stops seeing Babe, or he'll be replaced as Six-Shooter's jockey in the big race. Angry and frustrated, Doyle quits. Weber approaches him to become the jockey for Rose Dawn, Weber's horse, and Doyle agrees, with the precondition that he not ride Royal Dawn in the Camden Stakes, for he wants Six-Shooter to still win the race.  Weber accedes to that one precondition, however, on the day of the race, he makes it clear that Doyle is under contract, and that he will ride Rose Dawn in the race.
Upset, Doyle has no choice but to ride Rose Dawn.  However, during the race, he manages to chant his signature "Whoop-te-doo" to Six-Shooter, causing his old mount to win the race. Furious that his horse lost, Weber goes to the judges, who rule that Doyle threw the race, pulling back on Rose Dawn, to allow Six-Shooter to win, and suspend Doyle from horse-racing.

Question: What is the last name of the person who must stop seeing Babe or he'll be replaced as a jockey?
Answer: Doyle
Bud Doyle is a jockey who has discovered the secret to get his favorite mount, Six-Shooter, to boost his performance. If he simply chants the phrase, "Whoop-te-doo", the horse responds with a burst of speed. There is a special bond between the jockey and his mount, but there is increasing tension between Doyle and the horse's owner, Pop Blake (who also raised Doyle), over Doyle's relationship with local singer Babe Ellis. Blake sees Ellis as a distraction prior to the upcoming big race, the Camden Stakes.
The owner of the club where Babe sings, Wally Weber, has his eyes on his horse winning the Camden Stakes. When the issues between Pop and Doyle come to a head, Pop tells Doyle that he has to choose: either he stops seeing Babe, or he'll be replaced as Six-Shooter's jockey in the big race. Angry and frustrated, Doyle quits. Weber approaches him to become the jockey for Rose Dawn, Weber's horse, and Doyle agrees, with the precondition that he not ride Royal Dawn in the Camden Stakes, for he wants Six-Shooter to still win the race.  Weber accedes to that one precondition, however, on the day of the race, he makes it clear that Doyle is under contract, and that he will ride Rose Dawn in the race.
Upset, Doyle has no choice but to ride Rose Dawn.  However, during the race, he manages to chant his signature "Whoop-te-doo" to Six-Shooter, causing his old mount to win the race. Furious that his horse lost, Weber goes to the judges, who rule that Doyle threw the race, pulling back on Rose Dawn, to allow Six-Shooter to win, and suspend Doyle from horse-racing.

Question: What is the last name of the person that is not allowed to ride Royal Dawn in the Camden Stakes?
Answer: Doyle
Bud Doyle is a jockey who has discovered the secret to get his favorite mount, Six-Shooter, to boost his performance. If he simply chants the phrase, "Whoop-te-doo", the horse responds with a burst of speed. There is a special bond between the jockey and his mount, but there is increasing tension between Doyle and the horse's owner, Pop Blake (who also raised Doyle), over Doyle's relationship with local singer Babe Ellis. Blake sees Ellis as a distraction prior to the upcoming big race, the Camden Stakes.
The owner of the club where Babe sings, Wally Weber, has his eyes on his horse winning the Camden Stakes. When the issues between Pop and Doyle come to a head, Pop tells Doyle that he has to choose: either he stops seeing Babe, or he'll be replaced as Six-Shooter's jockey in the big race. Angry and frustrated, Doyle quits. Weber approaches him to become the jockey for Rose Dawn, Weber's horse, and Doyle agrees, with the precondition that he not ride Royal Dawn in the Camden Stakes, for he wants Six-Shooter to still win the race.  Weber accedes to that one precondition, however, on the day of the race, he makes it clear that Doyle is under contract, and that he will ride Rose Dawn in the race.
Upset, Doyle has no choice but to ride Rose Dawn.  However, during the race, he manages to chant his signature "Whoop-te-doo" to Six-Shooter, causing his old mount to win the race. Furious that his horse lost, Weber goes to the judges, who rule that Doyle threw the race, pulling back on Rose Dawn, to allow Six-Shooter to win, and suspend Doyle from horse-racing.

Question: What is the last name of the person who makes it clear that his jockey must ride Rose Dawn in the race as he is still under contract?
Answer: Weber
Bizet's first opera, the one-act Le docteur Miracle, was written in 1856 when the 18-year-old composer was a student at the Conservatoire de Paris. It was Bizet's winning entry in a competition organised by the celebrated composer Jacques Offenbach, and gained him a cash award, a gold medal, and a performance of the prize work at the Théâtre des Bouffes-Parisiens. In 1857 Bizet was awarded the prestigious Prix de Rome, and as a result spent most of the following three years in Italy, where he wrote Don Procopio, a short opera buffa in the style of Donizetti. By this time Bizet had written several non-stage works, including his Symphony in C, but the poor reception accorded to his 1858 Te Deum, a religious work he composed in Rome, helped convince him that his future lay primarily with the musical theatre. He planned and possibly began several operatic works before his return to Paris in 1860, but none of these projects came to fruition.In Paris, Bizet discovered the difficulties faced by young and relatively unknown composers trying to get their operas performed. Of the capital's two state-subsidised opera houses, the Opéra and the Opéra-Comique, the former offered a static repertoire in which works by foreign composers, particularly Rossini and Meyerbeer, were dominant. Even established French composers such as Gounod had difficulty getting works performed there. At the Opéra-Comique, innovation was equally rare; although more French works were performed, the style and character of most productions had hardly changed since the 1830s. However, one condition of the Opéra-Comique's state funding was that from time to time it should produce one-act works by former Prix de Rome laureates. Under this provision, Bizet wrote La guzla de l'Emir, with a libretto by Jules Barbier and Michel Carré, and this went into rehearsal early in 1862.In April 1862, as the La guzla rehearsals proceeded, Bizet was approached by Léon Carvalho, manager of the independent Théâtre Lyrique company. Carvalho had been offered an annual grant of 100,000 francs by the retiring Minister of Fine Arts, Count Walewski, on condition that each year he stage a new three-act opera from a recent Prix de Rome winner. Carvalho had a high opinion of Bizet's abilities, and offered him the libretto of Les pêcheurs de perles, an exotic story by Carré and Eugène Cormon set on the island of Ceylon (now Sri Lanka). Sensing the opportunity for a genuine theatrical success, Bizet accepted the commission. Because Walewski restricted his grant to composers who had not had any previous work performed commercially, Bizet hurriedly withdrew La guzla from the Opéra-Comique; it has never been performed, and the music has disappeared.

Question: What is the the name of the person who gained a cash award, a gold medal, and a performance of their prize work at the Théâtre des Bouffes-Parisiens?
Answer: Bizet
Bizet's first opera, the one-act Le docteur Miracle, was written in 1856 when the 18-year-old composer was a student at the Conservatoire de Paris. It was Bizet's winning entry in a competition organised by the celebrated composer Jacques Offenbach, and gained him a cash award, a gold medal, and a performance of the prize work at the Théâtre des Bouffes-Parisiens. In 1857 Bizet was awarded the prestigious Prix de Rome, and as a result spent most of the following three years in Italy, where he wrote Don Procopio, a short opera buffa in the style of Donizetti. By this time Bizet had written several non-stage works, including his Symphony in C, but the poor reception accorded to his 1858 Te Deum, a religious work he composed in Rome, helped convince him that his future lay primarily with the musical theatre. He planned and possibly began several operatic works before his return to Paris in 1860, but none of these projects came to fruition.In Paris, Bizet discovered the difficulties faced by young and relatively unknown composers trying to get their operas performed. Of the capital's two state-subsidised opera houses, the Opéra and the Opéra-Comique, the former offered a static repertoire in which works by foreign composers, particularly Rossini and Meyerbeer, were dominant. Even established French composers such as Gounod had difficulty getting works performed there. At the Opéra-Comique, innovation was equally rare; although more French works were performed, the style and character of most productions had hardly changed since the 1830s. However, one condition of the Opéra-Comique's state funding was that from time to time it should produce one-act works by former Prix de Rome laureates. Under this provision, Bizet wrote La guzla de l'Emir, with a libretto by Jules Barbier and Michel Carré, and this went into rehearsal early in 1862.In April 1862, as the La guzla rehearsals proceeded, Bizet was approached by Léon Carvalho, manager of the independent Théâtre Lyrique company. Carvalho had been offered an annual grant of 100,000 francs by the retiring Minister of Fine Arts, Count Walewski, on condition that each year he stage a new three-act opera from a recent Prix de Rome winner. Carvalho had a high opinion of Bizet's abilities, and offered him the libretto of Les pêcheurs de perles, an exotic story by Carré and Eugène Cormon set on the island of Ceylon (now Sri Lanka). Sensing the opportunity for a genuine theatrical success, Bizet accepted the commission. Because Walewski restricted his grant to composers who had not had any previous work performed commercially, Bizet hurriedly withdrew La guzla from the Opéra-Comique; it has never been performed, and the music has disappeared.

Question: What is the name of the person who wrote Don Procopio while in Italy?
Answer: Bizet