Portrait of Marie Antoinette with her children: What dat mouth do? For my assignment, I will be comparing the two pieces of art titled Louis XIV painted by Hyacinthe Rigaud and Portrait of Marie Antoinette With Her Children by Marie-Louise-Elisabeth Vigee-Lebrun. I will be analyzing and breaking down the different techniques used in both paintings and explaining the similarities between them as well. Though the paintings contain the same family throughout both, there is a clear imbalance in power and something very normal for this time period. I will be elaborating on the difference in social status between the two paintings, even though they are the same family. During the time period, France was in serious trouble, the country was having struggles for political power and many no longer wanted the monarchy system in place. King Louis XIV ruled France with an iron fist since a very young age, he was referred to as the “Sun King”. The two paintings clearly show the social status and hierarchy involved in the everyday life during this time period. In Louis XIV, the painting was meant to be put on display in the Palace of Versailles and be a …show more content…
The piece shows Marie posing with her three children, the reason for this painting was to create a public message depicting her as more than just elegance and put her on the same level as the general public. Because the painting was meant for the eyes of the general public the painting is rather bland and lacks detail. Instead of Marie looking down on the population showing off her lavish and extravagant items she has just her children attempting to depict herself as a regular mother just like every other female raising children. There is very little details in the paint except for the empty baby carriage which was most likely only included to honor the death of one of her children at a young
The painting depicts a mother and her four children, who are all leaning on her as she looks down solemnly, her tired, despondent expression suggests she felt trapped in her roles as being a mother and a wife. The woman and her children are clearly the focal point of the artwork as the bright colours used to paint them stand out impeccably against the dull, lifeless colours of the background. This painting appears to be centred around the ideology that women are home-keepers, whose main role is to satisfy and assist her husband while simultaneously minding the children and keeping the home tidy and ready for his return. The social consequences of this artwork could have been that the woman could have been berated for not taking pleasure out of being a mother and raising her children, as a woman should. She could have been made redundant as her husband may have felt as though she is no longer useful if she couldn’t adequately adhere to her roles as a mother and a
Many viewers from Cassatt’s time would expect that not only is she painting an everyday scene (as did many other impressionists), but that she is also painting from her experience – the female artist as mother. However, the gaze Cassatt casts on her subject is not nurturing, as a result of her color and compositional choices. Instead, her lens is cold, frank and straight to the point. Cassatt’s Little Girl lives on to explicitly oppose her era’s principles on how a female artist sees and treats their subject. If this piece were painted by a male, with his gaze, it would be completely different – more idyllic. How does he interpret what she sees? The child would be curled up with a smile on her face and the dog in her arms. He would illuminate the child through bright, warm colors. He would emphasize the domesticity of the moment. But Cassatt throws those images away and provides the viewer with her fresh take on a familiar scene. She renders the slack little girl with lots of blue, taking away from the painting’s potential homeliness, but makes up for it with her skill and talent. By projecting her gaze onto the subject, Cassatt articulates and asserts her own ideology: images of domesticity, the woman’s maternal role and beauty are not interdependent. Little Girl shows the viewer just how. The
Isabel Archer: Her Quest For Freedom And Downfall The Portrait of a Lady is the most stunning achievement of Henry James's early period--in the 1860s and '70s when he was transforming himself from a talented young American into a resident of Europe, a citizen of the world, and one of the greatest novelists of modern times. Quest of freedom “The Portrait of a Lady” is a story about protagonist Isabel Archer, a penniless orphan. Many rich suitors come to her with a proposal of marriage but she declines, as she wanted to make an art of her life that is to follow her dreams, as she was a spirited and intelligent young woman. She was strong minded and stubbornly independent with an intensely sensual nature and a powerful desire to explore and engage with the world on her own and sees marriage as a prison that would limit her ability to experience her life. Isabel unexpectedly inherits a fortune, freeing her particularly from the need to marry. Now she could do whatever she wanted. She wanted to confidently pursue her dream and didn’t want anyone hold her back. Her cool independence is not a very "feminine" ideal, she seems to show no need but to fly. During her childhood she spends her time reading romantic philosophy, cultivating an idealistic view of the world of art, philosophy and learning, that of Europe but couldn’t have a practical taste of things. So when she inherits a fortune whole world spreads out in front of her giving her the opportunity to fulfil her dreams and to make an art of her life. She wanted to enjoy and break free. Now she could see and feel things in real terms. She didn’t want to get married and put an end to her freedom. She was a proud woman and was not shy to express what she felt. When someone asks her ...
As seen in Leonardo da Vinci’s Mona Lisa, the background of nature was more detailed, and Mona Lisa herself is smiling, meanwhile Madonna Enthroned Between two Angles by Duccio, was more focused on Mary and Jesus (Document A). These two paintings show the great amount of difference between these two time periods, because of the painting from the Renaissance, the Mona Lisa, was more lively and focused more on beauty. This goes to show the appreciation of life itself, as it didn’t depict a horrible disease or anything but the beauty of the lady that is depicted and the surroundings. With the Medieval painting, The Madonna, the viewer has a more fixed focus on Jesus and the frowning Mary. This painting shows the importance of Christianity and the people wanting to be with Jesus, rather than this life. For literature the same is true. Hamlet, by Shakespeare, shows that people were quite satisfied with their quality of life. “What a piece of work is a man! how noble in reason! how infinite in faculty! in form and moving how express and admirable! in action how like an angel! in apprehension how like a god! the beauty of the world! the paragon of animals!” (Document B). This passage goes to show the Renaissance showed people how amazing life is. It showed that beauty of nature, and how during this time period it was you were living like
“The Grafin von Scholfeld with her Daughter” is oil on canvas art piece painted in 1793. It is a painting of a woman holding her daughter on her lap, the woman being “The Grafin von Schonfeld.” The woman is dressed in clothing that is from the upper class or a royalty stature in the late 1700’s. The clothing looks rich in material and sleek like silk in the colors of wine and a rich green. She has a covering on her head that looks like an extravagant scarf that drapes over her shoulder on one side, also made of the same silky material used for her dress. The woman has pale skin, reddish brown hair, bluish eyes, and rosy cheeks. Her eyes look very real and penetrating when you examine the painting. The daughter is about the age of 5 or 6 years old. Her arms are around her mother’s neck and legs draped across her mother’s lap. The daughter is wearing a white fluid dress that looks thin in material with a red sash around her midsection. The daughter has the same reddish brown hair and rosy cheeks. The mothers and daughters eyes are equally as big in size, while the child’s eyes seem also very real and youthful.
The years he worked on this, as well as a few years prior, are known as his early Nice period. Throughout this period, his main subject was always, or almost always, a female figure or an odalisque that he portrayed as either seated, reclining in some interior that he created himself, or simply standing. After 1930, there was a bolder simplification and new vigor that was present in his art. Some of that can be seen in The Yellow Dress, such as in the woman’s face, where he does not express much detail. As this painting was started in 1929, it is not yet as noticeable, as after this piece of
Jules Bastien-Lepage is the artist who painted Joan of Arc in 1879. He painted a masterpiece using oil on canvas. He used a 100 x 110 in. Medium. This is a skillful representation of young girl amazed by the sight of saints in her garden in Lorraine, France. They're inspiring her to take arms against the English who invaded her homeland. The significant formal elements are lines, colors, and space. The movement of horizontal lines pulls the eye upward towards her face. The light on Joan of arc emphasizes the importance of her presence. Then diagonal lines move the eye to the saints seen in the trees. I'm drawn diagonally from the saints to the illuminated house in the background giving the piece space, perspective, and depth. This unifies the
One of the most important elements of Versailles that affected Louis XIV’s reign was the use of propaganda. The Palace contained “paintings, statues, tapestries” (Page) and a general grandness that significantly promoted Louis’ name. Louis himself was a “prominent subject in the artwork” (Montclos 330) and was portrayed as handsome and god-like. Even in the aspects of the Palace where Louis wasn’t literally being represented, the grand nature of Versailles sent out a message that the King was living lavishly, and was therefore very powerful. Louis XIV used the grandiosity of his Palace and the art inside to promote himself to his people.
Jacques-Louis David’s Portrait of Monsieur Lavoisier and his Wife of 1788 is a stark departure from his better-known history genre paintings. While this dual portrait is still painted according to neoclassical aesthetics, it is ideologically distinct from most of David’s oeuvre. David’s most praised paintings revolve around male figures and involve masculine duty. However this portrait of Monsieur Lavoisier, a renowned scientist of 18th century France, and his wife instead focuses in on the woman and explores the changing role of women in French society.
The theme I have chosen for comparison is the female self-portraiture. The first piece is The Two Fridas by Frida Kahlo. She created this piece in 1939 during the Surrealism period and can be found currently at Museo de Arte Moderno (Museum of Modern Art) in Mexico City. It depicts two almost identical Fridas sitting on a bench, holding hands with exposed hearts. The second piece is Self Portrait by Judith Leyster and depicts Judith herself in the midst of painting one of her commonly known pieces of the Merry Company, to turn towards the viewer in an inviting way. This piece was created in 1630 during the Dutch Baroque period and can be currently found at the National Gallery of Art. The two women are showing two very different emotions, Frida
Like most wars the French Revolution caused a surge in art creation. During this time period the two major artistic styles in France were the Neoclassical Style and Romanticism or the Romantic Style. In this essay I will explore the effects of the revolution on two particular pieces of art, Jacques-Louis David’s “The Intervention of the Sabine Women” and Eugène Delacroix’s “Liberty Leading the People”.
After close analysis of the painting in front of me I have come up with several observations. One of which is the theatrical scene in front of me. The woman seems unlikely to be wearing such high class garments if she were a peasant worker, and to have a baby in a wagon so playful seems impossible in reality . The diagonal composition is pleasing and the lightweight the image contains seems in a rococo style . This piece reminds me of fete grande because of the naturalistic environment vs the classical woman in the foreground . The Loose brushstrokes and drapery though also suggest it to be baroque. The subject matter and stylistically speaking The Joys of Motherhood (Fig 1) depicts a beautiful woman and her child completely overlooking the reality society had in the fact that the country simplicity is reflected as a high virtue . This also serves as an illustration of the close bond a mother should have with her children. Stylistically this painting expresses a decorative landscape as well as a joyful scene. These types of idealized country scenes were very popular during this time because country or rural subjects were seeking equality such as those of the cities . This is a reason why Fragonard would paint these dynamic decorative pastoral life paintings much of which was influenced by Boucher
1. Select one of the following pair of artworks and describe the differences you observe between them. Each pair consists of art of the Early Renaissance (Chapter 21) and that of the High and Late Renaissance (Chapter 22). Examine the composition, technique, position of the figures, and facial expressions, as well as any relevant elements of art and principals of design (see handout from September or Google “art elements and design principals”).
Within this essay, I will be referencing the works of Henri Matisse and Pablo Picasso in relation to Paul Cezanne’s work to see how they were both inspired by and created their own offerings in their works. The specific artwork that I will be comparing will be Matisse’s “Bonheur de Vivre (Joy of Life)”, Picasso’s “Les Demoiselles d’Avignon” and Cezanne’s “The Large Bathers” which can all be found through the references provided.
The scene is the Spanish court of King Philip 1V. The most obvious focal point of the composition is the young princess, the infant Margarita, who is emphasized by her position in the center of the painting by the light that sines brilliantly on her alone (Klein, 142). By the implied lines created by the gaze of the two maids of honor who bracket her. But the figures out side this central group, that of the dwarf on the right, who is also a maid of honor, and the painter on the left (it’s self portrait of Velazquez), gaze away from the infant (Klein,