The Genre And Of Female Sitters

Published Date: 02 Nov 2017

Table of Contents

1 Introduction

It is Inevitable that the eighteenth century experienced a boom in English Portraiture painting. Portrait painting is a genre in painting in which the intent is to depict the visual appearance of the subject and these may include human beings, animals and non-moving objects. Rouquet (1755) clearly stated that according to English custom portraits were used as gifts between men and women and these popularised the genre. There was a subsequent increase in demand by very rich people who engaged various experienced artists and this in return expanded the market (Perry, 1994). Portraiture painting sparked much interesting ‘academic and aesthetic debate’ (pg18) and it was highly regarded as a very good medium of transition of ‘cultural ambitions, values and believes’(Perry 1994, p18).

On the other hand, the genre was also highly criticised despite the popularity it gained, its practitioners were looked upon as ‘mere face painters’ (Barrel, 1986 cited in Conway, 1997, pg1). The genre itself was at the time described as ‘the wretched business of face painting’ (pg1) and the entire field as ‘socially and artistically detrimental’ (pg1) which could not instil any good social morals into society but rather bring about unworthy popular acclaim. The genre was seen as an obstacle in nurturing the talent of England’s outstanding painters (Conway, 1997). Portrait painting was further seen as a‘frivolous branch of the art’ (pg2) which relied for its existence on money. ‘Riches, liberality and taste, are fluctuating, local, and temporary---Vanity is immutable, universal, and eternal’(Morning Star, 1777 cited in Conway, 1997, pg2). The suggestion made was that the genre was thought to attract vain rich patrons who were pandered to by artists for the sake of personal enrichment, compared to the genre of history painting which was considered to be a more noble type of art.

Sir Joshua Reynolds was one renowned artist of the time and one of the first English painters to paint portraits. Despite his fame and the talent in the genre, he was highly criticised as having chosen the genre as a way to make money (Conway, 1997). However, Reynolds is also seen as one artist who put up a strong challenge to the way in which the genre was perceived. He was not just keen on mastering portrait painting but rather even more interested in how his subjects appear in them, as he placed much more emphasis on fashion, respect and status.

Reynolds was especially famous for his female portraiture, which was also quite controversial at the time. While some critics believe that his portraits elevated the status of their female sitters, others argued that while they may have done this at face value they also used and exploited the female sitters as objects of desire for the artists own personal advancement.

This essay will examine the qualities of dignity and status of sir Joshua Reynolds female portraits, make comparison of signs of status of female portraits, and finally critically evaluate whether Reynolds’ approach in reality elevated the status and dignity of his female subjects.

2 Reynolds’ Grand style

In his Discourses in Art to the Royal Academy Reynolds remarks of portrait painters, rather patronisingly:‘ ...and perhaps of not so great merit, is the cold painter of portraits. But his correct and just imitation of his objects has its merit.’(Discourse 3, 1770, cited in Wark, 1999, pg52). Reynolds and the Academy at large have a systematic belief that plain portraiture falls towards the bottom of art’s hierarchical ladder of achievement. He later said in his Discourse IV in 1771 when talking of portrait painting ‘the lower may be improved by borrowing from the Grand’ (discourse iv 1771, in Reynolds 2009 p84). He felt that lowly regarded portrait painting could be infused with grandeur and a more modern noble artistic heritage by incorporating classical themes. This practice is thought to have derived from the French Neo-classical tradition passed on by artists such as Nicholas Poussin (Perry1994). Reynolds’ role at the time was not just as an established artist but also as the president of the Royal Academy; his position of authority meant he was able to inform as much as to exhibit art. It appears to be with conviction that Reynolds outlined the aesthetic parameters of the single ’Grand Style’ portrait paintings (Perry 1994, p19). His firm belief was that a mix of both antiquity and modern procured more artistic merit. The most famous artistic device used by Reynolds was ‘Quotation’, ‘...where by reference to classical allegory enabled men of education to recognise a set of familiar classical illusions and thus be united in public taste" (Pointon1997, p71). By means of ‘Quotation’ Reynolds could elevate the genre of portraits nearer to the level of historic painting, while at the same time complementing the sitter and satisfying the patron (Cherry and Harries, 1982).

By incorporating classical themes in female portraiture paintings could serve a variety of decorative functions. For example,’ ‘Mrs Teresa Parker’, 1770-2 was originally commissioned by the Parker Family at the Family home of Saltram. It was later hung at the Royal Academy in the 1773 exhibition, and later sent to Devon to hang as a pendant in the saloon at Saltram house (Retford, 2003). It was first a personal family portrait, second an academic piece open to public scrutiny and finally it could be displayed in balance with classical art decorating a stately home. This ability for a painting to take on so many roles could only be advantageous to the artist (Conway, 1998). It was also an advantage to raise the Grandeur of female portrait painting; to a level where it might approach the esteem given to historic painting, this in turn would have been likely to increase the financial value of such work. An example of this is Mr Gardiners’ commission of a portrait of his fiancé and her sisters. Gardiner commissioned Reynolds to produce the portrait for £450 (Pointon, 1994); an amount equivalent to the price paid for a historic painting at the time. Gardiner’s instructions were for:

some emblematic or historical subject; the idea of which, and the attitudes of which will best suit their forms, cannot be so well imagined as by one who has so eminently distinguished himself by his genius and poetic invention

(Gombrich , 1966, p129)

The amount paid for the portrait together with deference to artistic vision that could only be imagined by one such as Reynolds himself, illustrates how successful Reynolds was in ‘elevating’ the status of the genre at the time. Reynolds was held in high regard and seemed proud of this fact, his authority in this specialisation commanded much praise and financial gain.

3 How Reynolds attempted to elevate status

3.1 Use of dress

Feminine issues were at the centre of discussion in the eighteenth century as during that time women's roles revolved around ‘family life and domesticity’(Perry 1994, p19) and women had been excluded from the perceived male dominant sphere of civic life such as politics, trade and law to mention a few (Perry 1994). In trying to redefine and mediate on the issues Sir Reynolds transformed the iconographic representation of women in his portraiture painting, to elevate their status and give a perception of them having a significant role in society. To do this Reynolds attempted to readdress the issues of women and fashion and in an endeavour to elevate women’s status to that of men. He felt that the question of ever changing fashion ‘ridicules’the genre status (Penny 1986, p27). He believed that the ancient was closer to nature, thus he opted to work between the contemporary style and older styles, which is evident in the work of Van Dyck and Lely (Penny 1986).

In his discourse Vii Reynolds talks much about dressing female sitters for the sake of ‘likeness and dignity’and conceived the concept of a common dress style for sitters. This ‘general dress’ was painted in an antique style, which was associated with the ancient Romans and Greeks. This served to dignify the sitter (Warner 1989). The dress was said to be of an expensive fabric and very delicate in handling and refined in colour (Penny 1986).

3.2 Representation of the body

Shawer-Taylor (1990) linked Reynold’s Female portraits to classical sculpture and gave examples of the Duchess of Hamilton whose skin was described as almost marble-like, and whose anatomical proportions were similar to classical forms. Though Reynolds was much influenced by the antique, his style also incorporated elements from the Late Renaissance and Mannerist movements (such as Parmigianino) which added grace to his portraiture. Such influences were prominent in the portrait of the Duchess of Hamilton who was depicted with a ‘…high waist, a delicate chest and narrow shoulder, set above elongated inflated stomach and thighs’ (Shawer-Taylor, 1990, p149). Reynolds further linked the portraits genre to historic paintings through concealment of the idiosyncratic features of individual sitters which gave rise to ‘likeness’ in his paintings. He literally transforms the female sitter to be the ‘embodiment of beauty, chastity and domestic virtues’ (Perry 1994 p?). The lack of professional or political standing of women at the time, made elevation of their status by imbuing them with positive abstract qualities more possible, and their transformation in painting into novel subjects enabled accessibility to wider audiences.

3.3 Use of landscape

In order to further ennoble and proffer grace to female portraits. Reynolds depicted a calm and natural environment which added simplicity to his use of poses. He enhanced this through the use of a common landscape which augments the dignity of the sitter, a device that was also used by Gainsborough.

3.4 Example of Mrs Carnac

In trying to give a clear picture of what Reynolds conceived for the genre, arguably the best portrait of his‘Grand style’is the portrait of Mrs Carnac (see appendix 1), which illustrates the previous points about use of dress, hairstyle, poses and landscape. Mrs Carnac is painted in front of tree trunks or wood, she has her head turned to the right, and her left hand, holding up her skirt is placed on her hip, while her right hand falls naturally by her side. Her pose resembles that of the hand-in waist coat portraits of male sitters, and this is used as a device to transfer status to the female subjects of his paintings. She is dressed in a white gold-embroidered dress, with a gauze scarf over her shoulder, wearing a gold sash and her hair is powdered and with crimson and white plumes. The luminosity, as well as the pose and the dress bestow the figure with importance and enhance her status. Reynolds touches were very fine showing a very good skill in dealing with the representation of fabrics texture and tonality, which was also in common with Van Dyck’s style. Mrs Carnac’s skin is immaculately white; except blushed cheeks which were a common feature in most of Reynolds’ portraits, meanwhile her hair looped high on the head with white and pink feathers, which probably represented the fashion of the time. Mrs Carnac is also characterised by her high waist, tantalising chest, and narrow shoulders set above inflated stomach and thighs a common style of Reynolds borrowed from the Renaissance masters.

Mrs Carnac’s dress is a kind of hybrid, and exemplifies Reynolds’ philosophy as it fuses together both contemporary and antique features, castigating the ever-changing fashion that had previously lowered the status of portrait painting from his perspective. Mrs Carnac is painted having just stopped after a stroll to contemplate her back yard landscape and Reynolds’ portrait of her therefore depicts a creature of sensibility. Her appearance denotes ignorance of the presence of the painter and this unawareness of the audience gives the impression that her response to the setting is spontaneous and authentic. The candour of the painting in regard to her expression and pose, expresses her character and internal virtue. In this regard it has been suggested that there is an element of voyeurism at play in Reynolds' female portraits (Perry, 2007). This seems especially true when regarding this image of Mrs Carnac as she does not meet the viewer's gaze and therefore appears to have been captured in a private moment of contemplation, a private moment in which the viewer has been invited by the painter to take part in. Though the portrait is beautiful and quite pleasing to the eye the painting also offers a hint of sexual intrigue.

4 Reynolds use of Mythology and Allegory

The tradition of female portraits was established as a marriage right for those recently or about to be married (Pointon, 1994). These may have portended to a grand day and a happy union, but it is interesting to note the equivalent portrait for the male counterpart was generally held back until civil or military achievement was established. As Pointon (ibid) observes ‘ ...rather their portraits would celebrate their grand tour’ (pg59). It seems by comparison to men, a woman’s achievement reached its height at the altar; this was to be their defining moment. As such, the sum content of the achievement was limited in any depiction of their success. Male portraits tended to be specific to their accolades; the man attired in corresponding suits of rank and attesting his status in a candid representation. With these limitations in mind it would seem appropriate and inventive that Reynolds should rework the allegoric conventions in female portraiture.

Reynolds’s opinion on the subject is clearly presented in his Discourse VII 1776:

‘.. And therefore dress his figure something with the general air of the antique for sake of dignity, and preserve something of the modern for the sake of likeness’

Fawkes Tobin (1999, p209).

Reynolds Grand Style system involved the reworking of both antique and renaissance sources to aspire to a higher aesthetic formula (Perry, 1994). By this means Reynolds hoped to dignify the female to a status beyond ‘bride- to – be’ to something more mythological and mysterious.

Arguably, ‘Three ladies Adoring a Term of Hymen’ which was exhibited at the Royal Academy in 1774 (no 216) was one of the best works which exemplified mythological and allegoric aspects. Customarily the sitters of these portraits were normally not named however, in most cases, the public recognised them. The three sitters in this portrait were identifiable as there were named as Elizabeth (centre), Lady Anne Townshend (right) and Barbra (left) who were daughters of Sir William Montogomy. The commissioner of the painting was identified as Hon, Luke Gardiner a member of parliament for Co Dublin and Privy Council of Ireland who had some intentions to marry in the family. The ladies were brought up in Ireland and due to the beauty attributed to them were referred to as ‘The Irish Graces’ and that also was what influenced Gardiner to include the sisters in a portrait he commissioned of his wife.

The portrait shows the three ladies in different poses. The first figure which is on the left side is kneeling down, the central figure is resting her knee on the stool and the third one is upright, her hand raise above her head. The postures create visual movement, when viewed either from left to right or visa verse and an implied vertical line can be drawn when connecting them from their heads which signifies an element of unity among the sitters. The stool is decorated with a carpet which looks to be of oriental origin and the background is decorated with a ‘crimson drapery billows’ (Pointon, 1997, p61). The three women are holding a chain of flowers which perhaps symbolises familial love and connection, and it looks as if they are about to lay them for decoration. Within the room are a vase and an altar which appear to be of ancient antique design. This suggests to us that that the scene might depict a sacred place for the gods as there is a flame and smoke blurring the prevailing light. The presence of the altar is an indication of sacrificial activity. At the back, as the viewer peers between the centre and the right hand figure, is the torso and head believed to be of Hymen the Roman god of marriage. By featuring the three subjects in such a way and before such a background Reynolds indirectly elevates their status, in a way that is akin to the art of ancient Greece or Rome. By situating the subjects in such a ‘timeless’ manner, Reynolds also confers a hint of immortality. This approach had the effect of elevating the status and social standing of the sitters, which no doubt had a positive effect on Reynolds’own fame and fortune as other potential patrons were attracted to the potential benefits of commissioning a portrait.

As previously mentioned Reynolds also attempted to ennoble and confer status to his female sitters, by use of his classical antique dress style, and this is also a feature of ‘Three ladies Adoring a Term of Hymen’. The colour of dresses differs which probably denotes their marital status, this status is also identified in their arrangement in the painting which appears to represent a chronological process from left to right. The young one is bent picking flowers to far left, perhaps denoting the fact that it was not yet time for her to marry. The centre figure is standing but is not yet past the statue of Hymen, and the oldest one past the statue and standing taller than the rest, this and her white dress communicating the fact that she has already married, and as Pointon (1994) points out has lost her virginity. Clearly, symbolism in this regard has been used to provide a mechanism through which to articulate subject like sex in an indirect and acceptable manner. It is not just the status of their sexual progression, but the flowing arrangement of these three young ladies in the act of gathering flowers helps articulate a sensuousness that is sexually implicit. Finally, looking at the scene as a whole we can see a unifying theme of the beauty and wealth of the sitters, for the genre was popular amongst the rich people around the eighteenth century and they used it to celebrate their status. The ladies were painted in an enactment of a ‘rite of passage’ from childhood, to the responsibilities of womanhood marriage and sexuality. There is also a sense of the timelessness of these roles, and of their importance suggested from the allegorical aspects of the painting. In this way Reynolds may have reinforced the expectations of society towards the responsibilities of women through such a painting, but also elevated their position.

5 Did Reynolds really elevate the status of his sitters?

Although a full length portrait painting of the ladies was prominently displayed in the Academy Exhibition and this may have conferred the female sitters with some grace and popularity it can be argued that it came at a price. There was such a noticeable contrast between females and males portraits that is worthy of discussion here. As mentioned earlier, males were resplendent with dress that reflected their military or civil honours, their images historical relevant to the subject and time period. Women on the other hand were depicted as mythological characters enshrouded in allegorical symbolism, and dressed in a non-specific classical dress. Their characters, although partially true in form, are concealed as mythological ‘others’ in a disparate illusion that had little to do with the representation of that person. Reynolds claim that he ‘dresses figure something with the general air of antique for sake of dignity’ (cited in Fawkes Tobin 1999, p209) may only hold true for the painting itself and not so for the subject. This veiling of the subject was referred to by Gainsbough (cited in Perry 1994) as ‘fancy dress’, and he had misgivings about the lack of representation of the true subject. Perry (1994) also points out that these ambiguous portrayals resulted in ‘mock-heroic’ possibilities where sitters were recognised in their fantasy characters, and from there became a discussion topic for the public domain. The resulting discussion was not always complementary and exposed them to ridicule or whim. This would have been especially true for females as they rarely, if ever, held status above the fact that they were somebody’s wife. This gap between their real role in society and that projected by Reynolds ‘Grand Style Portraits’ could only increase the disparity and therefore the level of potential ridicule. Pointon (1994) picks up the fact that the issue of women’s lack of status was a perfect subject for allegorical painting.

It must be remembered that female subjects of paintings had little say or control in their development. The contract for ‘The Mongomery Sisters’ for example was between the patron and the artist, the subject to be allegorical in depiction and the three sisters to be the medium through which this was explored. Although the sisters may have enjoyed the role play involved: dressing up, enacting parts, and engaging Mr Reynolds, they were subservient to the man who organised the event and for Pointon (1994) the whole process culminates in an act of ‘possession’ and objectification. Pointon (ibid) further argues that as the sitters are not portrayed as themselves, this betrays the fact that they are prescribed the roles as objects for the gratification of men, or ‘Mans’ other possession’ (p82). This observation is consolidated when considering what David Solkin had argued ‘for a ruling class which depended more on culture than on force as means of control’(cited in Perry, 1994, p18). It may be assumed that the Montgomery sisters would not have been so elated to be the subjects of a painting that itself was part of a convention that subjugated women in a patriarchal society, had they understood the full ramifications in the light of more modern thinking.

6 Issues raised from Reynolds’ approach

Despite the success enjoyed by portraiture painters, the genre was clouded with critical disapproval throughout the eighteenth century (Manning, 1985). Some of these arguments were raised due to the approach which Reynolds used, in transforming the female sitters giving them a dual role of both social order and fantasy, and by the use of allegory and mythology in transforming the female imagery (Pointon, 1997). From this perspective sitters were objectified and taken advantage of, and as a case in point the major features in these controversial portraits were mainly young ladies who were to be married, recently married or divorced. This gives the impression that females were merely object or items to be easily exchanged or bartered (Pointon, 1994). When regarded from this perspective, it can be argued that Reynolds portrait painting did not confer the grace and status it may have been though to, but rather encouraged disorder, unruly passion and disequilibrium. Speaking of the portraits Pointon (1994) suggests:

‘They invite viewers, while beholding fashionable ladies, glimpse Graces which, while they may at one level symbolise harmony, also threaten disorder, offer choice, incite sexual envy and desire for gratification.’ ( p4)

It is in this regard that, Reynolds portraits especially those of females were subjected to public scrutiny and viewers looked at the implications of their aesthetics from different perspectives. They did not look just at Reynolds successful career, or his unique approach, but also at the sitter and her private and public sphere as important. Jones (1995) looks at the portrait of Duchess of Hamilton, Elizabeth Gunning as one of Reynolds’ works which prompted a heated debate in a theoretical analysis of Reynolds’ aesthetics intentions. When exhibited, it attracted a large audience and was subjected to a lot of criticism and prompted the issue of perception of female public cultural representation. Eighteenth century women had a multifaceted relationship with public, as they were expected to ‘moderate the excesses of male social practice’ and on the other hand were perceived as the ‘the occasion of society’s disruption and decline into lasciviousness and scandal’(Jones, 1995, p30).

This was the case with Elizabeth Gunning. She was perceived as a‘Beauty’a complex term that at the time also alluded to both her physical qualities and the fact that this was well known, yet this term also carried with it an aspect of ‘commodification’ for which she may have been venerated, but also condemned. This double standard is also detectable in the female portraiture of Reynolds. Reynolds has been highly accused of objectifying women making them spectacle for ‘highly sexualised gaze’ (pg 30). When painting Elizabeth Gunning, Reynolds deliberately illuminated the side of her face and according to Jones (1995) this was suggestive, as it directs the viewer’s eyes to a partially exposed breast. It could be said that her slightly averted gaze and loose clothing invite the potential voyeur who would not expect to be challenged due to her lack of attention to the viewer. Furthermore dressing her with loose and elegant clothes, in a relaxed leaning pose is also highly inviting. While in many portraits a flowing skirt might be used to distract attention from the form underneath, this particular instance her elevated left knee with red shoe upon stone serves to tantalisingly remind the viewer of her natural form, hinting at it, but not revealing. This portrait in particular would appear to give evidence for the view that Reynold’s work was voyeuristic and may have framed her as a kind of Marilyn Monroe of the time. As this essay has described through examples, such as the portrait of Miss Carnac, and Elizabeth Gunning, it does seem likely that Reynold's was aware of the effect of the strategies he employed and pushed them to the limit.

7 Conclusion

This essay has described the historical background of the portraiture at time, and compared it with the genre of Historic painting which was highly esteemed. It has also looked at how Reynolds attempted to elevate the status of the portraiture genre by alluding to the historic themes. Reynolds use of ‘emblematic or historical subjects’ together with his use of hybrid dress, poses that emulated those of male portraiture, and luxurious natural landscapes, can be seen as having dignified the female sitters, raising their social status and public acclaim.

However, the works of Reynolds were also viewed from another less complementary perspective, where the approach Reynolds used was seen as taking advantage of the female sitters, by objectifying them, concealing their peculiarities, highlighting their marital status or expected social roles, and indeed in some cases, subjecting them to the ‘highly sexualised’ public gaze due to the suggestive ways in which female sitters were sometimes presented, the portrait of Elizabeth Gunning being a prime example.

While from one perspective, the techniques Reynolds employed could be seen as imbuing them with dignity and social status, from another perspective Reynolds’ work was exploitative, subjecting women to a thinly veiled form of sexual manipulation and commodification, for the consumption of male patrons and a mostly male audience, and this with hindsight seems most likely to be the case. Reynolds use of pose for female sitters often drew attention to their form, emphasising aspects such as breasts, legs and hips shape, as well as giving invitation to the voyeur through the use of averted gaze, and seeming unawareness of the viewer.

In terms of dress, while his classical dressing style may have added to a heightened sense of grandeur, this was also at the expense of historical accuracy, and this may have diminished the representational value sitter, and had the effect of homogenising the sitters, as if they were of true value in the first place, their clothing and ‘peculiarities’ would not need to be altered. Changing the image of the sitter to one that seems more important and dignified, would seem suggest the sitter is not worthy in her own right. Similarly taking sitters from their original form, and portraying them in a historical, mythological or allegorical setting portrays them not as they are, but as an ideal that reality cannot approach. This can hardly be said to elevate their status, but is more likely in real terms to have had the opposite approach, as the further from reality sitters were presented the more likely they were to be subjects of ridicule. For these reasons, when viewing the issue form a modern perspective, although Reynolds’ work may have elevated the genre, it cannot be said to have elevated women’s status. Rather it contributed to a more modern culture where women are seen as public objects, for the consumption, trade, and pleasure of men.

Picturing Imperial Power: 

Colonial Subjects in Eighteenth-Century British Painting

Front Cover

Beth Fowkes Tobin

0 Reviews

Duke University Press, 1999 - Art - 306 pages

More »

The affect was heightened by his brush work that tended to be loose and fluid; the rustic setting would also play a part providing a rich ambience to spur the imagination.

Seven Discourses on Art

Front Cover

Sir Joshua Reynolds

0 Reviews

The Floating Press, 2009 - Literary Collections - 163 pages