The following article contains an answer for the question: What is the last name of the person who would abandon or destroy canvasses before they were completed? , can you please find it? As an artist, Francis Bacon was a late starter. He painted sporadically and without commitment during the late 1920s and early 1930s, when he worked as an interior decorator and designer of furniture and rugs. He later admitted that his career was delayed because he had spent so long looking for a subject that would sustain his interest. He began to paint images based on the Crucifixion in 1933, when his then-patron Eric Hall commissioned a series of three paintings based on the subject. These abstract figurations contain formal elements typical of their time, including diaphanous forms, flat backgrounds, and surrealist props such as flowers and umbrellas. The art critic Wieland Schmied noted that while the early works are "aesthetically pleasing", they lack "a sense of urgency or inner necessity; they are beautiful, but lifeless". The sentiment is echoed by Hugh Davies, who wrote that Bacon's 1933 paintings "suggest an artist concentrating more on formal than on expressive concerns". Bacon admitted that his early works were not successful; they were merely decorative and lacking in substance. He was often harshly self-critical during this period, and would abandon or destroy canvasses before they were completed. He abandoned the Crucifixion theme, then largely withdrew from painting in frustration, instead immersing himself in love affairs, drinking and gambling.When he returned to the topic of the Crucifixion eleven years later, he retained some of the stylistic elements he had developed earlier, such as the elongated and dislocated organic forms that he now based on Oresteia. He continued to incorporate the spatial device he was to use many times throughout his careerthree lines radiating from this central figure, which was first seen in Crucifixion, 1933. Three Studies was painted over the course of two weeks in 1944, when, Bacon recalled, "I was in a bad mood of drinking, and I did it under tremendous hangovers and drink; I sometimes hardly knew what I was doing. I think perhaps the drink helped me to...
Ans: Bacon

The following article contains an answer for the question: What is the title of the person who left facts out of his account? , can you please find it? The NSWCA were outraged by Lord Harris's letter and convened a special meeting to consider their response and subsequently had their honorary secretary, Mr J.M. Gibson, write to The Daily Telegraph in reply. Gibson argued that "the misconduct of those who took possession of the wickets has been exaggerated" and that Lord Harris's account was "universally regarded here as both inaccurate and ungenerous." The letter said that "We cannot allow a libel upon the people of New South Wales so utterly unfounded as this to pass without challenge". It went on to accuse Harris of omitting certain facts in his account, which according to the NSWCA, depicted Australia and the cricket authorities in a poor light. These included an accusation that Harris had failed to note that the NSWCA and the media had immediately and strongly condemned the disturbance and treatment of the English visitors. Gibson also criticised Lord Harris for claiming that Coulthard was "competent", while "admitting 'he had made two mistakes in our innings'", especially as Coulthard's not out ruling against Lord Harris "was openly admitted by his lordship to be a mistake" that favoured the Englishmen. The letter further denied the claim that those who incited the riot were associated with the NSWCA and accused Harris of inflammatory conduct during the disorder. Certainly the conduct of Lord Harris did not tend to calm the general excitement. His lordship elbowed his way out through the crowd in a manner so violent as to invite assault. He kept his men 'exposed to the fury of the mob' for about an hour and a half upon the absurd and insulting plea that if he did not 'the other side would claim the match!'. But not one of the team received a scratch, and Mr. Hornby dragged a supposed offender of very diminutive stature through the mass to the pavilion, a hundred yards away, in triumph, and amidst general applause, with only a torn shirt as the penalty of his heroism. Spofforth, Australia's leading bowler, commented on the incident in an 1891 cricket...
Ans: Lord

The following article contains an answer for the question: What is the name of the person of whose work The Sydney Morning Herald's art writer said, "It often seems to me she's only got one tune, but it's a pretty good tune"? , can you please find it? Oliver was not one to intellectualise her creativity: she preferred to talk about the process of creating her artworks rather than their meanings. Asked about how she approached her art, she stated: My work is about structure and order. It is a pursuit of a kind of logic: a formal, sculptural logic and poetic logic. It is a conceptual and physical process of building and taking away at the same time. I set out to strip the ideas and associations down to (physically and metaphorically) just the bones, exposing the life still held inside. While Oliver was reluctant to discuss meaning in her works, critics have identified recurring themes. Hannah Fink, like art critic John McDonald, noted that there is a pattern to the shapes and structures in Oliver's work. Fink described this as "a consistent vocabulary of elemental forms the spiral, meander, loop and sphere in a repertoire of signature archetypes". McDonald said that Nature is "omnipresent" and referred to them as organisms or their remains.Despite their organic appearance, Oliver's own view was that her work was not grounded in nature's structures. Nevertheless, critics have identified the lifelike qualities of early pieces that resembled shells, claws or tails, or noted the apparent similarities to biological forms. McDonald commented that "For Oliver to deny nature is akin to Balthus saying there is nothing erotic about his paintings or Rothko claiming his works aren't abstract." Both major reviews of Oliver's work (Fenner's 1995 essay and Fink's 2002 journal article) draw attention to dualism and contradiction in the sculptures: Fenner describes them as "delicate and ephemeral, [yet] structurally robust and durable"; Fink sees them as "ethereal but solid, fluid yet rigid, open but closed".Oliver's sculptures are admired for their tactile nature, their aesthetics, and the technical skills demonstrated in their production. Particular works have been singled out for praise. A writer reviewing Vine in the Sydney Hilton admired how it "curls like a fairy...
Ans: Oliver