The lecturer says that the painting,
Portrait of an Elderly Woman in a White Bonnet, is truly worked by Rembrandt.
This counters the reading passage's claim that the painting could not be a work
by Rembrandt.
To
begin with, the lecturer claims that pigments must be added after one hundred
years from the time when the painting was painted to increase the value of the
painting. So, it could generate the inconsistency of it. This goes against the
reading passage's claim that because of such an inconsistency, the painting is
not Rembrandt painting.
On
top of that, the lecturer points out that, in fact, the woman in the painting
is wearing simple light-colored clothes. Thus, it reflects light. As a result,
the face is not in partial shadow. This casts doubt on the reading passage's
claim that Rembrandt would never have made such an error.
Finally, the lecturer asserts that several
pieces of wood were which were also for improving the value of the painting.
But originally, the painting was painted on one single piece of wood which
Rembrandt usually used. This is in opposition to the reading passage's claim
that several pieces of wood glued together are also a proper evidence that
Rembrandt did not paint it.