Sample thematic biography 2

Thematic biography 2 Note: This biography is purely illustrative. The information provided is not based on anyone’s life, and the places and names mentioned are completely fictitious.

Robert Anderson was born on August 20, 1942 and brought up in Parksville, a remote village in southern Scotland. During his lifetime, Robert excelled in the field of art, especially in oil painting and pencil drawing. Despite the name he built for himself, critics view his art as an imitation rather than as original artwork. Thesis statement Critics have long debated whether Robert’s paintings drew on his predecessors’ work and not his own genius. They claim that Robert’s Angelica, the portrait of a maiden with an angelic face – thus the name – was indeed drawn on the same principles as Da Vinci’s Mona Lisa. A close study of the materials indicate that Robert may have used the very same type of oil paint and even the same strokes Da Vinci had used in his Mona Lisa, but on a different face. If you looked closely at the maiden’s features, you would realize that Robert may have only altered the skin color and a few facial curves to make her look different from the Mona Lisa. Experts, however, are aware of such tricks. First argument Another point critics hold against Robert is his sincere attempt to introduce art as a school subject. Many pretend that Robert’s initial intention was to sell his paintings to schools to spread his name among the youth. Several exchanges of letters between Robert and school principals support this pretence. When Robert’s trade with schools failed, some educators saw an opportunity to use Robert’s work for educational purposes. However, when Robert’s art made its way into school curricula, he got all the credit instead of those who endeavored to promote art as an educational incentive. Second argument In all the cases held against him, Robert is depicted as a forger and an impostor. Very few recognize his art as original, and fewer are ready to acknowledge his contribution to learning.

Some consider him unscrupulous for attributing himself a right he never earned, and the evidence against him is solid enough to convince the most credulous. Nevertheless, one can’t deny that such a controversial name in the world of art drew the attention of the world’s most influential people, critics and educators. Third argument