Dr. Braverman began a teaching program in which each week he took a group of dermatology residents to a museum on a regular basis and asked them to describe what they saw in paintings. He found that after several weeks of looking for pertinent features in works of art and having to describe them, the doctors began to do a better job describing what they were seeing.
The program then expanded to include medical students, and eventually Dr. Braverman showed that the students in his teaching groups improved their observational skill significantly. His course became de rigueur. Other medical schools also adopted the program. This course has a great medical application, since it improves diagnostic skills, but it has other applications as well.
|John Singer Sargent's Portrait of Madame X|
After this, Herman has been able to pass on her wisdom to others in the law enforcement field, including the Secret Service and, on a visit to London, the Metropolitan Police of Scotland Yard.
What I know about interpreting artwork has been gleaned completely from following the footsteps of Sister Wendy Beckett as she wandered through many of the world’s major museums in her BBC specials. She is an expert at explaining not only the art but also the artists and the story or idea depicted on the canvas or in marble.
I was always amazed at how she interpreted the emotions on the faces in the pictures, and that is how she brought the scenes to life. Can you tell which of these mourners painted on the wall of the tomb of Ramose II is the eldest and most likely the chief mourner? Hint: perky vs. droopy.
What would a detective see in these paintings? Each of them portrays some sort of crime. Would there be anomalies or clues?
In this dramatic scene taken from the Bible, Judith has beheaded an enemy general, Holofernes. Are we certain that she used the sword on her shoulder? While there is plenty of blood dripping from the head in the basket that Judith had the foresight to bring (as well as a maid to carry it), there is no blood on the weapon.
Murder or misadventure?
The seemingly serene housewife in the window presents an innocent appearance. What makes me think she is mixing a little foxglove into the peas? The two-handed approach is a little unusual.
What is that instrument in her left hand?
Is this just a floozie enjoying the evening with a smirking fool who knows he's onto a sure thing, or is she a prostitute? There is no money on the table, but what do you think?
This is a definite case of Grievous Bodily Harm and the main clue that it might not be self-induced is that a person who is fastidious enough to wear a matching coat and hat would not disfigure himself in such an obvious way.
I swear to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. Perhaps, but she is not in a courtroom; she appears to be practicing in front of a mirror holding a composition notebook instead of a Bible. The crime—Perjury!
Something dreadful has happened to this girl. The body language and the location make that clear. My guess would be sexual assault.
I hope my boss sitting in the background can't see where I am going to put this check. It is late, the shadows lengthen and I am not getting any younger. There is no one on the street and no one in my life, I am going to Tenerife.
Do they extradite for embezzlement?
Sacré bleu I left my curling iron on! Arson!
I interpret the clues in this last case to be suction cups and a surgical mask. There has been a brutal beating resulting in death or maybe this may be the untoward effects of a vigorous CPR.
In this painting by Bellini, Madonna del Prato, it appears to be the usual mother and child portrait. But wait––could the baby be dead? Is this a form of Pietà forecasting the future of the child? You decide.