14:48 15 October 2025

Restored revision 1309064703 by 2802:8011:2104:7401:FDD2:1C1F:C513:121E (talk): Restoring to version before disruption (see ANI)

.

Here we merge graphs from the lineup into a single graph. Press find to merge, draw to open new page.

Empirical representations (1916–1964)

Representation	Date	Medium	Hook count / geometry (per image)	Notes	Citation
Tu m’ (detail, rotated)	1918	Painted shadow	2 long + 3 short	Fragmentary, asymmetrical “S‑curve” fragments	[S1]
Cast Shadows (Ombres portées)	1918	Photograph (shadow)	3 long + 2 short	Ambiguous pairings; other studio anomalies	[S1]
Studio photograph	1916–17 (pub. 1960s)	Photograph	2 long + 3 short	Leaning hooks; perspective inconsistencies; retouching suggested	[S1]
Boîte‑en‑valise print	1941	Retouched print (from studio photo)	2 long + 3 short	Shows alterations relative to source photograph	[S1]
Blueprint (“Hatrack”)	1964	Technical drawing	2 long + 3 short (incoherent curves)	Approved “okay, Marcel Duchamp”; deviates from “S‑curve” logic	[S1]
Schwarz 3D model (edition of 8)	1964	Wood model (carved)	6 equal‑length hooks (symmetrical)	Not bentwood; orientation as a wall unit is impractical; diverges from earlier shadows/photos	[S1]

Hook parity: shifts among “2 long + 3 short,” “3 long + 2 short,” and “6 equal‑length” across snapshots.
Curve logic: early depictions imply “S‑curve” modules (bentwood logic); 1964 blueprint lacks consistent “S” pairing; 1964 model abandons bentwood for carved symmetry.
Installation: Schwarz model’s radial symmetry yields no straightforward wall‑mounted use (half the hooks face down in plausible orientations).
Drafting lineage: Distortions traceable from photographic sources into blueprints are paralleled in other 1964 reconstructions (e.g., shovel shaft convergence; bicycle wheel/stool rail anomalies), underscoring a pattern of translating perspective artifacts into “technical” drawings.^[S1]