Home Forums The Rarity of Smiles in Art History

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 20 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #477749
    stlukesguild
    Default

        https://www.artsy.net/article/artsy-editorial-smiles-rare-art-history?fbclid=IwAR3_Yp1OIaOevOAexYlayoHpSP5Ovo0lvhGbaPKJ6lBwNUhkj5O31vrbZqw

        Hmmm…? :confused:

        Saintlukesguild-http://stlukesguild.tumblr.com/
        "Beauty is truth, truth beauty—that is all ye know on earth and all ye need to know." - John Keats
        "Modern art is what happens when painters stop looking at girls and persuade themselves that they have a better idea."- John Ciardi

        #876376
        brianvds
        Default

            [url]https://www.artsy.net/article/artsy-editorial-smiles-rare-art-history?fbclid=IwAR3_Yp1OIaOevOAexYlayoHpSP5Ovo0lvhGbaPKJ6lBwNUhkj5O31vrbZqw[/url]

            Hmmm…? :confused:

            I am quite in awe of those masters of old who could do laughing faces; as the article notes, it is not a pose someone can hold. Nowadays we have reference photos, but toothy grins in a drawing or painting tend to have that done-from-a-photo look, and what looks charming and spontaneous in a photo can easily look kind of fake in a drawing.

            __________________________
            http://brianvds.blogspot.co.za/

            #876375
            Snow_tabby
            Default

                Could be other reasons too. Could be many were suffering with tooth decay and other painful things to smile. Some people mostly artists have personal emotional pains as well to deal with.

                #876379
                DaveCrow
                Default

                    I have sat as a portrait model. No way I could hold a smile for the duration.

                    "Let the paint be paint" --John Marin

                    #876387
                    bongo
                    Default

                        The most intriguing pose for me to catch is when someone is:
                        about to smile
                        about to laugh
                        about to cry
                        about to get mad
                        about to panic

                        it’s that moment just before when the face telegraphs what’s about to come.

                        http://s3.amazonaws.com/wetcanvas-hdc/Community/images/18-Sep-2019/1999899-sigsmall.jpg
                        STUDIOBONGO

                        #876378
                        thevaliantx
                        Default

                            The most intriguing pose for me to catch is when someone is:
                            about to smile
                            about to laugh
                            about to cry
                            about to get mad
                            about to panic

                            it’s that moment just before when the face telegraphs what’s about to come.

                            Okay, so constipation or RBF? :)

                            In all seriousness, it would be neat if someone did a study of each subject and revealed how many teeth each person had.

                            #876380

                            My guess would be that for most of history:

                            1. portraits had to depict powerful, serious people who couldn’t afford to risk looking light-hearted and light-headed;
                            2. religious art depicted generally sombre tales (crucifixions, martyrdoms, last judgements, floods, Judiths beheading Holofernes etc) or events that couldn’t be made to look anything but serious and meaningful;
                            3. allegorical or mythological art often depicted scenes that related to the lives of the gods who were themselves usually engaged in serious matters; and
                            4. historical painting focused on serious events (like wars, revolutions, massacres and Rafts of the Medusa etc)

                            Life was often nasty, brutish and short. That didn’t leave much room for smiley happy people just out larking on a summer afternoon, mugging for for the painter. At least not until the rise of the middle classes who had a little bit of leisure time and social license to express humour some of the time.

                            The wonder is how many smiles actually made it into Western art, given the deck was stacked so heavily in favour of serious subjects and weighty themes.

                            "None are so old as those who have outlived enthusiasm." - Henry David Thoreau

                            Moderator Acrylics Forum~~~Reference Image Library

                            #876381

                            A lot of the art that depicted ordinary people (as opposed to the rich and famous) did show people smiling. Peasants in taverns, children playing and young people flirting etc.

                            "None are so old as those who have outlived enthusiasm." - Henry David Thoreau

                            Moderator Acrylics Forum~~~Reference Image Library

                            #876369
                            stlukesguild
                            Default

                                1. portraits had to depict powerful, serious people who couldn’t afford to risk looking light-hearted and light-headed…

                                Life was often nasty, brutish and short. That didn’t leave much room for smiley happy people just out larking on a summer afternoon, mugging for for the painter. At least not until the rise of the middle classes who had a little bit of leisure time and social license to express humour some of the time.

                                The wonder is how many smiles actually made it into Western art, given the deck was stacked so heavily in favour of serious subjects and weighty themes.

                                I took an art history course in art school that explored some of these issues. You might be surprised that for much of art history it was the exact reverse of what you think. The art historian teaching the class had us look at photography. Early portrait photographs… and photographs of individuals of a poorer status or third-world culture are often posed in a somber, serious manner, decked out in their finest ware. Compare this to our wealthy culture where a photograph is no big deal. We mug for the camera or take silly “selfies”.

                                You see something similar in the history of portraiture. If we look at portraits from the Northern Renaissance we find something similar to the poor sitters who brought out their best clothing and sat still… in formal poses… with a somber visage:

                                In Italy, Baldassare Castiglione coined the term, Sprezzatura in The Book of the Courtier (1528), where it is defined by the author as “a certain nonchalance, so as to conceal all art and make whatever one does or says appear to be without effort and almost without any thought about it”.

                                This was not unlike our current culture where Third World leaders and autocrats… uncertain of their hold on power… dress like this:

                                Yet leaders of real power… the presidents and prime ministers of the US, France, Germany, Japan, etc… dress in the basic business attire. They don’t need to work hard to impress.

                                Baldassare Castiglione was an Italian courtier, diplomat, soldier and a prominent Renaissance author… but in his portrait, by Raphael, the artist underplays his wealth and connections… showing him dressed simply… yet elegantly… painted with true Sprezzatura… in loose, gestural brush-strokes.

                                This becomes even more pronounced in the Baroque and Rococo eras. Look at Van Dyck’s portrait of the King:

                                Rather than a formal pose, he struts about looking at us over his shoulder. His clothes are certainly expensive… but not ostentatious… like this portrait:

                                His is a mastery of artifice… studied… yet apparently nonchalant and effortless. This concept was echoed in Robert Herrick’s poem from the period: Delight in Disorder

                                A sweet disorder in the dress
                                Kindles in clothes a wantonness;
                                A lawn about the shoulders thrown
                                Into a fine distraction;
                                An erring lace, which here and there
                                Enthrals the crimson stomacher;
                                A cuff neglectful, and thereby
                                Ribands to flow confusedly;
                                A winning wave, deserving note,
                                In the tempestuous petticoat;
                                A careless shoe-string, in whose tie
                                I see a wild civility:
                                Do more bewitch me, than when art
                                Is too precise in every part.

                                Saintlukesguild-http://stlukesguild.tumblr.com/
                                "Beauty is truth, truth beauty—that is all ye know on earth and all ye need to know." - John Keats
                                "Modern art is what happens when painters stop looking at girls and persuade themselves that they have a better idea."- John Ciardi

                                #876370
                                stlukesguild
                                Default

                                    The Protestant Dutch were far more reserved, conservative, and rigid than the Flemish Van Dyck (or Rubens). There are few smiles in the formal portraiture of the Dutch…

                                    … not counting the self-portraits by artists such as Rembrandt…

                                    … or genre paintings… painting of everyday peasant life… by artists such as those of Jan Steen:

                                    Perhaps the greatest exception in Holland to the conservative Dutch sensibility was the work of Frans Hals… whose bravura style and broad humor would seem better suited to Flemish (or French and English) painters of the aristocracy… than to the dour, Puritan Dutch:

                                    One of the best contrasts I remember from this art history course was between two portraits of early Americans… both by Gilbert Stuart:

                                    Stuart’s portrait of Catherine Brass Yates, the wife of a nouveau riche colonial importer shows a dour angular woman dressed in her Sunday finest appraising the artist.

                                    Contrast that to the painting he created in England of William Grant:

                                    Grant is portrayed with the nonchalance of the aristocracy. He looks away from the viewer… a slight smile on his lips… unconcerned. His portrayal as a skater is brilliant and suggests that he doesn’t take his portrait at all seriously.

                                    I’m not certain how much impact the Middle Class had on painting and portraiture. Outside of friends, family, and lovers of the artists… or genre scenes… such as those in Impressionism… the subjects and patrons of fine art tend to remain the upper-middle class and the wealthy.

                                    Saintlukesguild-http://stlukesguild.tumblr.com/
                                    "Beauty is truth, truth beauty—that is all ye know on earth and all ye need to know." - John Keats
                                    "Modern art is what happens when painters stop looking at girls and persuade themselves that they have a better idea."- John Ciardi

                                    #876371
                                    stlukesguild
                                    Default

                                        A lot of the art that depicted ordinary people (as opposed to the rich and famous) did show people smiling. Peasants in taverns, children playing and young people flirting etc.

                                        You do see this a lot in Dutch paintings of the “lower classes”… whereas the new Dutch burgher class tend to be portrayed in a far more reserved manner.

                                        At the same time, you get the aristocratic classes portrayed in the most nonchalant, playful manner… especially in France and England:

                                        This carries over into 20th-century portraits:

                                        Saintlukesguild-http://stlukesguild.tumblr.com/
                                        "Beauty is truth, truth beauty—that is all ye know on earth and all ye need to know." - John Keats
                                        "Modern art is what happens when painters stop looking at girls and persuade themselves that they have a better idea."- John Ciardi

                                        #876373
                                        ianuk
                                        Default

                                            That’s the reason I have such admiration of Da Vinci. He could create a mood on a face with the simplest of line. He seemed to have the exact balance when it came to facial expression.


                                            #876382

                                            [COLOR=DarkRed]1. portraits had to depict powerful, serious people who couldn’t afford to risk looking light-hearted and light-headed…

                                            Life was often nasty, brutish and short. That didn’t leave much room for smiley happy people just out larking on a summer afternoon, mugging for for the painter. At least not until the rise of the middle classes who had a little bit of leisure time and social license to express humour some of the time.

                                            The wonder is how many smiles actually made it into Western art, given the deck was stacked so heavily in favour of serious subjects and weighty themes.[/COLOR]

                                            I took an art history course in art school that explored some of these issues. You might be surprised that for much of art history it was the exact reverse of what you think. The art historian teaching the class had us look at photography. Early portrait photographs… and photographs of individuals of a poorer status or third-world culture are often posed in a somber, serious manner, decked out in their finest ware. Compare this to our wealthy culture where a photograph is no big deal. We mug for the camera or take silly “selfies”.

                                            Oh absolutely. Many early photographs of sitters were treated like formal “portraits”. The pictures of many people’s grandparents on their wedding day shows a very serious couple. In the early days, people had to stay very still for the camera anyway to get the clearest image.

                                            Later, they needed to be told “say cheese” to get them to smile. Eventually they loosened up to the point we are at today.

                                            You see something similar in the history of portraiture. If we look at portraits from the Northern Renaissance we find something similar to the poor sitters who brought out their best clothing and sat still… in formal poses… with a somber visage:

                                            In Italy, Baldassare Castiglione coined the term, [I]Sprezzatura[/I] in [I]The Book of the Courtier[/I] (1528), where it is defined by the author as “a certain nonchalance, so as to conceal all art and make whatever one does or says appear to be without effort and almost without any thought about it”.

                                            This was not unlike our current culture where Third World leaders and autocrats… uncertain of their hold on power… dress like this:

                                            Yet leaders of real power… the presidents and prime ministers of the US, France, Germany, Japan, etc… dress in the basic business attire.

                                            Well, in truth, not everyone’s leader dresses in business attire…

                                            :lol:

                                            They don’t need to work hard to impress.

                                            Some of them could try a little harder. :)

                                            Baldassare Castiglione was an Italian courtier, diplomat, soldier and a prominent Renaissance author… but in his portrait, by Raphael, the artist underplays his wealth and connections… showing him dressed simply… yet elegantly… painted with true [I]Sprezzatura[/I]… in loose, gestural brush-strokes.

                                            Loose, yes, but still no real smile in Castiglione’s face.

                                            This becomes even more pronounced in the Baroque and Rococo eras. Look at Van Dyck’s portrait of the King:

                                            [IMG]http://s3.amazonaws.com/wetcanvas-hdc/Community/images/09-Sep-2019/39499-BeFunky_22-311311036821027.700.jpg[/IMG]

                                            Rather than a formal pose, he struts about looking at us over his shoulder. His clothes are certainly expensive… but not ostentatious…

                                            But there is a hint of a smile, so we are making “progress”. :D

                                            like this portrait:

                                            [IMG]http://s3.amazonaws.com/wetcanvas-hdc/Community/images/09-Sep-2019/39499-20110723-073050.med.jpg[/IMG]

                                            His is a mastery of artifice… studied… yet apparently nonchalant and effortless.

                                            The look achieved in the Van Dyck definitely has a loose and effortless feel to it. Louis XIV’s portrait looks heavily orchestrated.

                                            This concept was echoed in Robert Herrick’s poem from the period: [I]Delight in Disorder[/I]

                                            [I]A sweet disorder in the dress
                                            Kindles in clothes a wantonness;
                                            A lawn about the shoulders thrown
                                            Into a fine distraction;
                                            An erring lace, which here and there
                                            Enthrals the crimson stomacher;
                                            A cuff neglectful, and thereby
                                            Ribands to flow confusedly;
                                            A winning wave, deserving note,
                                            In the tempestuous petticoat;
                                            A careless shoe-string, in whose tie
                                            I see a wild civility:
                                            Do more bewitch me, than when art
                                            [/I][I] Is too precise in every part.[/I]

                                            "None are so old as those who have outlived enthusiasm." - Henry David Thoreau

                                            Moderator Acrylics Forum~~~Reference Image Library

                                            #876383

                                            The Protestant Dutch were far more reserved, conservative, and rigid than the Flemish Van Dyck (or Rubens). There are few smiles in the formal portraiture of the Dutch…

                                            … not counting the self-portraits by artists such as Rembrandt…

                                            I also like this one tucked away in a Vermeer:

                                            There are a couple of elusive smiles in Vermeer’s work. Woman in Yellow, for one, and this one, Woman with a Wine Glass:

                                            … or genre paintings… painting of everyday peasant life… by artists such as those of Jan Steen:

                                            Exactly, which goes to the point I was making in my original comments.

                                            Perhaps the greatest exception in Holland to the conservative Dutch sensibility was the work of Frans Hals… whose bravura style and broad humor would seem better suited to Flemish (or French and English) painters of the aristocracy… than to the dour, Puritan Dutch:

                                            Hals is pretty smiley.

                                            One of the best contrasts I remember from this art history course was between two portraits of early Americans… both by Gilbert Stuart:

                                            Stuart’s portrait of Catherine Brass Yates, the wife of a [I]nouveau riche[/I] colonial importer shows a dour angular woman dressed in her Sunday finest appraising the artist.

                                            Contrast that to the painting he created in England of William Grant:

                                            Grant is portrayed with the nonchalance of the aristocracy. He looks away from the viewer… a slight smile on his lips… unconcerned. His portrayal as a skater is brilliant and suggests that he doesn’t take his portrait at all seriously.

                                            I’m not certain how much impact the Middle Class had on painting and portraiture. Outside of friends, family, and lovers of the artists… or genre scenes… such as those in Impressionism… the subjects and patrons of fine art tend to remain the upper-middle class and the wealthy.

                                            Exactly what I was thinking, considering the great shift in subject matter away from portraits of the powerful, religious themes and Greek mythology. I was thinking in particular of the Impressionists who really began to paint the working and lower middle classes.

                                            Like Renoir

                                            Or Sorolla:

                                            But I overlooked the Baroque, during which time the focus was on the artistocracy having fun. Can’t post any examples of what I am thinking, but you will know them better than I anyway.

                                            "None are so old as those who have outlived enthusiasm." - Henry David Thoreau

                                            Moderator Acrylics Forum~~~Reference Image Library

                                            #876384

                                            Here are a few of my favourite “smile” faces from the Spanish Baroque:

                                            Velazquez:

                                            Murillo:

                                            Here is a religious painting with what I think is a rare smile on everyone’s face:

                                            I don’t like Murillo’s religious paintings all that much, but this one is an exception because it is a very human scene.

                                            Goya painted a number of light-hearted scenes that include smiling people.

                                            And his Majas are smiling too:

                                            "None are so old as those who have outlived enthusiasm." - Henry David Thoreau

                                            Moderator Acrylics Forum~~~Reference Image Library

                                          Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 20 total)
                                          • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.