{"title":"Emilia Francis, Lady Dilke (2 September 1840–24 October 1904)","authors":"Hilary Fraser","doi":"10.16995/NTN.862","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.16995/NTN.862","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":90082,"journal":{"name":"19 : interdisciplinary studies in the long nineteenth century","volume":"14 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-06-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"84495935","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
When Mary Philadelphia Merrifield (1804–1889) wrote her three major published works on the fine arts in the 1840s, she was simultaneously fulfilling several additional demanding roles. Married to a Brighton barrister with delicate health, and mother to five children between the ages of eight and eighteen living at home, Merrifield’s domestic management alone would have consumed the waking hours of most Victorian women. Her ageing mother also lived with the family, and the education of the younger children was undertaken at home. On the surface, this setting seems an unlikely one for a researcher whose investigation into the authentic materials and methods of the old masters would bring her to the attention of the Fine Arts Commission, convened in response to the challenge of rebuilding the Houses of Parliament after the fire of 1834. Close reading of Merrifield’s published works, together with her own correspondence and that of her broader family and associates, illuminates the complex networks that were fundamental to her ability to research, write, and publish. She was supported by strong and constant encouragement from her husband and collaboration from her family. At the same time, her non-official status seems to have allowed a degree of familiarity in her correspondence with some of the powerful figures in the art-political world, such as Sir Robert Peel or Sir Charles Eastlake, whose support was also key. The pursuit of her research missions on the Continent allowed her to develop her own network of specialist researchers. In the libraries, art academies, and galleries where her identity as a foreign woman seems to have mitigated the social censure normally expected for those of her sex who ventured into activities associated with the male sphere, she secured respect and even friendship. Merrifield’s publications on the materials of the old masters have stood the test of time extraordinarily well. Her writing is not only of note because the author was a woman. Merrifield is still an authoritative source often cited in the publications on technical art history, and her words retain scholarly value related closely to her original aims. Perhaps the informally collaborative nature of her research, writing, and publishing brought the components of opinion and rigorous argument into a just equilibrium.
玛丽·费城·梅里菲尔德(Mary Philadelphia Merrifield, 1804-1889)在19世纪40年代撰写了她出版的三部主要美术作品时，她同时还承担着其他几个要求很高的角色。梅里菲尔德嫁给了一位身体虚弱的布赖顿大律师，又有五个孩子，年龄在8岁到18岁之间，都住在家里。她年迈的母亲也和家人住在一起，年幼的孩子则在家里接受教育。从表面上看，这种背景似乎不太可能出现在一个研究人员身上，因为她对古代大师作品的真实材料和方法的调查，会引起美术委员会(Fine Arts Commission)的注意，该委员会是为了应对1834年大火后重建国会大厦的挑战而召集的。仔细阅读梅里菲尔德出版的作品，连同她自己的信件以及她更广泛的家人和同事的信件，阐明了复杂的网络，这是她研究、写作和出版能力的基础。她得到了丈夫不断的鼓励和家人的支持。与此同时，她的非官方身份似乎使她在与艺术政治世界中一些有影响力的人物的通信中有了一定程度的熟悉，比如罗伯特·皮尔爵士或查尔斯·伊斯特莱克爵士，他们的支持也是关键。她在欧洲大陆的研究任务使她发展了自己的专业研究人员网络。在图书馆、艺术学院和画廊里，她作为一名外国女性的身份似乎减轻了社会对那些冒险参与与男性领域相关活动的女性的谴责，她获得了尊重，甚至友谊。梅里菲尔德出版的有关古代大师作品的出版物经受住了时间的考验。她的作品之所以引人注目，不仅因为作者是一位女性。梅里菲尔德仍然是一个权威的来源，经常被引用在技术艺术史的出版物中，她的话保留了与她最初的目的密切相关的学术价值。也许她的研究、写作和出版的非正式合作性质使观点和严谨的论点的组成部分达到了公正的平衡。
{"title":"Navigating Networks in the Victorian Age: Mary Philadelphia Merrifield’s Writing on the Arts","authors":"Zahira Véliz Bomford","doi":"10.16995/NTN.826","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.16995/NTN.826","url":null,"abstract":"When Mary Philadelphia Merrifield (1804–1889) wrote her three major published works on the fine arts in the 1840s, she was simultaneously fulfilling several additional demanding roles. Married to a Brighton barrister with delicate health, and mother to five children between the ages of eight and eighteen living at home, Merrifield’s domestic management alone would have consumed the waking hours of most Victorian women. Her ageing mother also lived with the family, and the education of the younger children was undertaken at home. On the surface, this setting seems an unlikely one for a researcher whose investigation into the authentic materials and methods of the old masters would bring her to the attention of the Fine Arts Commission, convened in response to the challenge of rebuilding the Houses of Parliament after the fire of 1834. Close reading of Merrifield’s published works, together with her own correspondence and that of her broader family and associates, illuminates the complex networks that were fundamental to her ability to research, write, and publish. She was supported by strong and constant encouragement from her husband and collaboration from her family. At the same time, her non-official status seems to have allowed a degree of familiarity in her correspondence with some of the powerful figures in the art-political world, such as Sir Robert Peel or Sir Charles Eastlake, whose support was also key. The pursuit of her research missions on the Continent allowed her to develop her own network of specialist researchers. In the libraries, art academies, and galleries where her identity as a foreign woman seems to have mitigated the social censure normally expected for those of her sex who ventured into activities associated with the male sphere, she secured respect and even friendship. Merrifield’s publications on the materials of the old masters have stood the test of time extraordinarily well. Her writing is not only of note because the author was a woman. Merrifield is still an authoritative source often cited in the publications on technical art history, and her words retain scholarly value related closely to her original aims. Perhaps the informally collaborative nature of her research, writing, and publishing brought the components of opinion and rigorous argument into a just equilibrium.","PeriodicalId":90082,"journal":{"name":"19 : interdisciplinary studies in the long nineteenth century","volume":"26 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-06-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"76746836","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Glossing an entry in George Eliot’s journal where she records her reaction to paintings by Rubens in Antwerp provides an opportunity to consider the commonplaces and conventions that informed writing about art in the mid-nineteenth century and the place of two uncommonly gifted women as contributors to the discourse of the arts at that time. The paper asks what constituted ‘humbug’ in relation to old masters and what might be regarded as humdrum in their appreciation. In many ways contrasting figures, as authors, George Eliot and Elizabeth Rigby Eastlake manifest the manifold voices of woman writers and the multiple possibilities for writing about art historically. Rigorous researchers, acute observers, and keen literary stylists, they were serious, passionate, and humorous. Both wrote for different purposes and in different genres in ways that allow for an exploration of the degree to which a ‘woman’s experience and observations bring within her special knowledge’ (to quote George Eliot once again), or rather that they might bring special knowledge to a developing and debated realm of knowledge.
{"title":"George Eliot, Lady Eastlake, and the Humbug of Old Masters","authors":"P. Rubin","doi":"10.16995/NTN.830","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.16995/NTN.830","url":null,"abstract":"Glossing an entry in George Eliot’s journal where she records her reaction to paintings by Rubens in Antwerp provides an opportunity to consider the commonplaces and conventions that informed writing about art in the mid-nineteenth century and the place of two uncommonly gifted women as contributors to the discourse of the arts at that time. The paper asks what constituted ‘humbug’ in relation to old masters and what might be regarded as humdrum in their appreciation. In many ways contrasting figures, as authors, George Eliot and Elizabeth Rigby Eastlake manifest the manifold voices of woman writers and the multiple possibilities for writing about art historically. Rigorous researchers, acute observers, and keen literary stylists, they were serious, passionate, and humorous. Both wrote for different purposes and in different genres in ways that allow for an exploration of the degree to which a ‘woman’s experience and observations bring within her special knowledge’ (to quote George Eliot once again), or rather that they might bring special knowledge to a developing and debated realm of knowledge.","PeriodicalId":90082,"journal":{"name":"19 : interdisciplinary studies in the long nineteenth century","volume":"246 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-06-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"75890555","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The subject of this issue of 19 might raise a series of questions: Who were the women writing about old masters? What do we know about these women? How and where were they able to see old masters? Where were they writing? There were in fact many women working across the period and an overview of research on these women reveals recurring themes, such as the importance of networks, travel, translation, and empirical research. Anna Jameson, while ridiculed by Ruskin for knowing ‘as much of art as the cat’, set a precedent for later generations of women writing at the end of the century. This article will initially consider women’s contributions to art writing and the patterns that emerged as the century progressed. The recent National Gallery exhibition ‘Reflections’ brought together Van Eyck and the Pre-Raphaelites, and in the second half of the article I will look at how the Victorian fascination with old masters re-emerges at the end of the century. The study of the early Renaissance in Italian painting was foregrounded by a group of writers, the best known being Roger Fry and Bernard Berenson. This article will ask how and where women in this circle foregrounded analysis of historical techniques. Two case studies will be considered: the National Gallery and the Whitechapel Art Gallery. Art writers discussed will include Julia Cartwright, Vernon Lee, and the writer and artist Christiana Herringham. I will argue that gallery spaces were a nexus for the development of expertise on early Renaissance techniques and their dissemination. The involvement of women in not just art writing, but exhibitions of ‘masterpieces’, offers insight into the shaping of art history at the fin de siecle.
本期《19》的主题可能会引发一系列问题:那些写古代大师作品的女性是谁?我们对这些女人了解多少?他们怎么能在哪里看到古代大师的作品?他们在哪里写字?事实上，在这一时期有许多女性在工作，对这些女性的研究综述揭示了反复出现的主题，例如网络、旅行、翻译和实证研究的重要性。安娜·詹姆森虽然被罗斯金嘲笑为“和猫一样懂艺术”，但却为19世纪末的几代女性作家开创了先例。本文将首先考虑女性对艺术写作的贡献以及随着世纪的发展而出现的模式。最近的国家美术馆展览“反思”汇集了凡·艾克和拉斐尔前派，在文章的后半部分，我将看看维多利亚时代对早期大师的迷恋是如何在本世纪末重新出现的。对早期文艺复兴时期意大利绘画的研究被一群作家所重视，其中最著名的是罗杰·弗莱和伯纳德·贝伦森。本文将探讨如何以及在哪里，女性在这个圈子前景分析的历史技术。将考虑两个案例研究:国家美术馆和白教堂美术馆。讨论的艺术作家将包括Julia Cartwright, Vernon Lee和作家兼艺术家Christiana Herringham。我认为，画廊空间是早期文艺复兴技术专业知识发展及其传播的纽带。女性不仅参与艺术写作，而且参与“杰作”展览，这让我们深入了解了19世纪末艺术史的形成。
{"title":"Women in the Galleries: New Angles on Old Masters in the Late Nineteenth Century","authors":"Meaghan Clarke","doi":"10.16995/NTN.823","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.16995/NTN.823","url":null,"abstract":"The subject of this issue of 19 might raise a series of questions: Who were the women writing about old masters? What do we know about these women? How and where were they able to see old masters? Where were they writing? There were in fact many women working across the period and an overview of research on these women reveals recurring themes, such as the importance of networks, travel, translation, and empirical research. Anna Jameson, while ridiculed by Ruskin for knowing ‘as much of art as the cat’, set a precedent for later generations of women writing at the end of the century. This article will initially consider women’s contributions to art writing and the patterns that emerged as the century progressed. The recent National Gallery exhibition ‘Reflections’ brought together Van Eyck and the Pre-Raphaelites, and in the second half of the article I will look at how the Victorian fascination with old masters re-emerges at the end of the century. The study of the early Renaissance in Italian painting was foregrounded by a group of writers, the best known being Roger Fry and Bernard Berenson. This article will ask how and where women in this circle foregrounded analysis of historical techniques. Two case studies will be considered: the National Gallery and the Whitechapel Art Gallery. Art writers discussed will include Julia Cartwright, Vernon Lee, and the writer and artist Christiana Herringham. I will argue that gallery spaces were a nexus for the development of expertise on early Renaissance techniques and their dissemination. The involvement of women in not just art writing, but exhibitions of ‘masterpieces’, offers insight into the shaping of art history at the fin de siecle.","PeriodicalId":90082,"journal":{"name":"19 : interdisciplinary studies in the long nineteenth century","volume":"14 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-06-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"79289545","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Although his long-time companion and wife, Mary Costelloe Berenson, was Bernard Berenson’s most conspicuous female protegee, she was obligated to write under a pseudonym. She therefore focused a large share of her energies in assisting Bernard in his research and writing, as well as in shaping the reception of his school of connoisseurship through articles and reviews. Among the several sapphic women in their circle studying art — a group Mary dubbed the ‘Virgins of the Hill’ — Maud Cruttwell was perhaps the most outwardly successful. Having studied under the tutelage of both Mary and Bernard Berenson, she established an independent reputation by publishing a series of popular artist monographs in rapid succession. Though she eventually became disillusioned with the field of art history, her contributions, important for their popularization of Berensonian connoisseurship, long remained benchmark resources in, as well as models for, the study of Italian Renaissance art.
{"title":"Maud Cruttwell and the Berensons: ‘A preliminary canter to an independent career’","authors":"Tiffany L. Johnston","doi":"10.16995/NTN.821","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.16995/NTN.821","url":null,"abstract":"Although his long-time companion and wife, Mary Costelloe Berenson, was Bernard Berenson’s most conspicuous female protegee, she was obligated to write under a pseudonym. She therefore focused a large share of her energies in assisting Bernard in his research and writing, as well as in shaping the reception of his school of connoisseurship through articles and reviews. Among the several sapphic women in their circle studying art — a group Mary dubbed the ‘Virgins of the Hill’ — Maud Cruttwell was perhaps the most outwardly successful. Having studied under the tutelage of both Mary and Bernard Berenson, she established an independent reputation by publishing a series of popular artist monographs in rapid succession. Though she eventually became disillusioned with the field of art history, her contributions, important for their popularization of Berensonian connoisseurship, long remained benchmark resources in, as well as models for, the study of Italian Renaissance art.","PeriodicalId":90082,"journal":{"name":"19 : interdisciplinary studies in the long nineteenth century","volume":"54 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-06-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"78842356","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Mary Berenson (14 February 1864–23 March 1945)","authors":"Tiffany L. Johnston","doi":"10.16995/NTN.858","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.16995/NTN.858","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":90082,"journal":{"name":"19 : interdisciplinary studies in the long nineteenth century","volume":"63 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-06-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"73045715","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Maria, Lady Callcott (19 July 1785–21 November 1842)","authors":"Caroline Palmer","doi":"10.16995/NTN.849","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.16995/NTN.849","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":90082,"journal":{"name":"19 : interdisciplinary studies in the long nineteenth century","volume":"3 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-06-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"75488201","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Maria Alambritis reviews the exhibition ‘Christiana Herringham: Artist, Campaigner, Collector’ at Royal Holloway (14 January–8 March 2019).
Maria Alambritis在皇家霍洛威(2019年1月14日至3月8日)回顾了“克里斯蒂安娜·赫林厄姆:艺术家、活动家、收藏家”展览。
{"title":"Review of ‘Christiana Herringham: Artist, Campaigner, Collector’, Royal Holloway, Emily Wilding Davison Building","authors":"M. Alambritis","doi":"10.16995/NTN.852","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.16995/NTN.852","url":null,"abstract":"Maria Alambritis reviews the exhibition ‘Christiana Herringham: Artist, Campaigner, Collector’ at Royal Holloway (14 January–8 March 2019).","PeriodicalId":90082,"journal":{"name":"19 : interdisciplinary studies in the long nineteenth century","volume":"255 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-06-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"76998593","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Anna Brownell Jameson (17 May 1794–17 March 1860)","authors":"Diane apostolos-Cappadona","doi":"10.16995/NTN.866","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.16995/NTN.866","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":90082,"journal":{"name":"19 : interdisciplinary studies in the long nineteenth century","volume":"19 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-06-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"82892256","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
In his 1920 review of Vernon Lee’s avant-garde pacifist allegory Satan, the Waster: A Philosophical Trilogy, George Bernard Shaw salutes the author as a representative of ‘the old guard of Victorian cosmopolitan intellectualism’. Shaw’s formulation reflects the fact that he is writing after the watershed (and bloodshed) of World War I had rendered cosmopolitanism a contested concept. He looks back nostalgically to a cultural moment when the idea of transnational European cooperation seemed both right-thinking and realizable, a moment that he identifies with the figure of Vernon Lee (1856–1935). A century on, as we face another watershed in Anglo-European relations, it seems timely to revisit that cosmopolitan ideal, at once old guard and avant-garde, and how it inflected Victorian cultural history. This article will take a particular aspect of Lee’s protean oeuvre — her contribution to the historiography of art — as a starting point for reflecting on the cosmopolitan mobility of nineteenth-century female art historians, and how their unsettling subversion of national cultural boundaries was a shaping factor in the evolving identity of British art and art history as produced in Great Britain. It will consider in particular the transnational contribution of the late-Victorian historian of French art, Emilia Dilke (1840–1904), alongside Lee’s own books on Renaissance Italy.
{"title":"Writing Cosmopolis: The Cosmopolitan Aesthetics of Emilia Dilke and Vernon Lee","authors":"Hilary Fraser","doi":"10.16995/NTN.844","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.16995/NTN.844","url":null,"abstract":"In his 1920 review of Vernon Lee’s avant-garde pacifist allegory Satan, the Waster: A Philosophical Trilogy, George Bernard Shaw salutes the author as a representative of ‘the old guard of Victorian cosmopolitan intellectualism’. Shaw’s formulation reflects the fact that he is writing after the watershed (and bloodshed) of World War I had rendered cosmopolitanism a contested concept. He looks back nostalgically to a cultural moment when the idea of transnational European cooperation seemed both right-thinking and realizable, a moment that he identifies with the figure of Vernon Lee (1856–1935). A century on, as we face another watershed in Anglo-European relations, it seems timely to revisit that cosmopolitan ideal, at once old guard and avant-garde, and how it inflected Victorian cultural history. This article will take a particular aspect of Lee’s protean oeuvre — her contribution to the historiography of art — as a starting point for reflecting on the cosmopolitan mobility of nineteenth-century female art historians, and how their unsettling subversion of national cultural boundaries was a shaping factor in the evolving identity of British art and art history as produced in Great Britain. It will consider in particular the transnational contribution of the late-Victorian historian of French art, Emilia Dilke (1840–1904), alongside Lee’s own books on Renaissance Italy.","PeriodicalId":90082,"journal":{"name":"19 : interdisciplinary studies in the long nineteenth century","volume":"4 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-06-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"78181218","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：