gLi8yALg

1Lecture Week 2 Lecture
2
3SLIDE 1: Week 2: The Beginnings: Politics and Patriotism in American Art (Part I)
4
5Week 2: The Beginnings: Politics and Patriotism in American Art (Part I) – a discussion of colonial architecture and portraiture.
6
7This week we are discussing the art of colonial America.  Notice that in this PowerPoint lecture, as will be the case in subsequent lectures, I included the corresponding image number for the images that are also included in the Craven textbook. 
8
9SLIDE 2: We are beginning with a discussion of the art and architecture of 17th century colonial America.  Now this discussion will mainly concern Massachusetts (Bay Colony) and Virginia because these were the first settlements in America.  And even though it is still early in American history, a lot happened in the 1600s, especially in Massachusetts.  Colleges were formed, for example, such as Harvard in 1636.  And we will consider the paintings of the period, a lot of which cannot actually be linked to an artist (meaning, we haven’t yet been able to figure out who painted them).  And we will also look at the architecture of the time and consider how it changes over the course of the century.  Houses, for example, as we will see, become larger, and a bit more complex over time.
10
11SLIDE 3: 2.1  Adam Thoroughgood House, Norfolk, Virginia, c. 1685
12
13This is an example of a house that survives from 17th century Virginia.  It is made of local brick.  The house was built in the late 17th century and it was the home of a man who moved to Virginia from England in the 1620s in the hopes of finding economic opportunities.  And this was very typical – people typically came over from Europe in the hopes of escaping religious persecution or in the hopes of securing a better future for themselves and their families.  Adam Thoroughgood arrived as an indentured servant, but he ended up doing quite well over here on the other side of the ocean.  He became a successful farmer, and by the time he died he had a lot of land. Now, Adam Thoroughgood actually died in about 1640 so it seems this house was actually built by his descendants.  But it is still generally referred to as the Adam Thoroughgood House. 
14
15Now what do you notice about the house?  How would you describe it?  Well, the house is rather simple.  In fact, this is important because it reflects the style of modest houses in England – and of course Adam Thoroughgood was from the lower class in England so these are the houses that he would have been familiar with – and he would have told his descendants about.  It is a simple, medieval-looking house and it shows his social status before doing so well in America.  The simplicity can be seen in the lack of decorations, and of course, it is small.  There is an attempt at symmetry.  The door is almost in the center, windows are almost center, and there are chimneys on either side.  It is low to the ground – only two stories.  And it is small -there are only two rooms on each floor.  Now, houses at the time would have all been similar to this – they would have had a rather simple plan in other words.  They would not have all been brick as this house is, but, of course those tend to be the structures that survive over time.
16
17SLIDE 4: 2.2  Bacon’s Castle, Surrey County, Virginia, c. 1665
18
19Now, whereas the Adam Thoroughgood House is rather simple - it is a basic home from the 17th century, this house is much bigger and much grander.  It was built by a planter by the name of Arthur Allen in the mid-1600s.  Now this house still has a relatively basic plan – two rooms on each floor, a roughly symmetrical plan.  However, it is certainly bigger, and certainly taller.  This is because the house was expanded several times by different families, so the portion Allen originally built was much smaller.  The biggest difference, however, is that this house actually has some decorative elements, including the gables and the chimneys.  Unlike the chimneys that lay flat against the house on the Adam Thoroughgood House, these chimneys are turned at an angle so that they create a diamond shape.  The gables also add a decorative element.  The gable is the area at the end of the roof – it is the triangular portion of a wall between the edges of a sloping roof.  However, here the gables are not really triangular.  They have all sorts of curves and angles.  Now, again – these are elements that these settlers would have seen in Europe – and now they are bringing these architectural ideas over to America.
20
21SLIDE 5: Now, one more note about this house.  It is obviously not named after the owner – Arthur Allen.  Well, it got its name from Bacon’s Rebellion (in 1676) – this was a revolt in Virginia led by Nathaniel Bacon against the governor of Jamestown, Virginia (Gov. Berkeley).  The rebels were upset because they wanted a more aggressive Native American policy – they wanted defense against Native American attacks.  Nathaniel Bacon’s followers used this house as a support structure/fort during the rebellion- so it took on the name Bacon’s Castle.
22
23SLIDE 6: 2.5  Parson Capen House, Topsfield, MA, 1683
24
25This house is a more typical house of the 17th century, although it is not as modest as the Adam Thoroughgood House.  This house is in Topsfield, Massachusetts so we have moved from Virginia to the Massachusetts Bay Colony.  It is a typical New England upper middle-class home from the 17th Century, although it was considered among the best in that town at the time.  It was the home of the local reverend.  It was made out of wood— it is a timber structure covered in clapboards.  Clapboards are overlapping boards that are placed horizontally.  This house actually consists of two houses stuck together.  Usually very early New England dwellings consisted of one room – but as families grew and were able to start making money, they would often add another “cottage” or single-room structure to their house.  So, you can imagine this as a one room cottage, another one was tacked on so the chimney is in the center when it originally would have been at the end.  And now the doorway is off-center.  There are two rooms on each floor, so four rooms total.  You would enter through the front door and the stairway would be directly ahead of you.  
26This overhang that you see is typical.  It separates the two floors.  It’s there for structural purposes, but it is also decorative and provides some protection from the rain.  You can see little pendants hanging from it if you look closely.
27This home is relatively simple in that there is no decoration, except for those pendants.  The door is barely defined and the house is very box-like overall.  Again, the basic appearance of the structure would have come from Europe.  Colonists built homes in the style they knew and that reminded them of home.
28
29SLIDE 7: 2.7  John Ward House, Salem, MA, 1684.
30
31The John Ward house is pretty similar to the Parson Capen House.  This house is in Salem, Massachusetts which was an early and important port town that is close to Boston and Topsfield (where the previous house is located).  It is another timber-frame house covered in clapboards.  Again, there are two rooms on each floor and it has the same basic layout as the Parson Capen House.
32
33SLIDE 8: Comparison: Paron Capen House vs. John Ward House
34
35We have a lot of similarities between these two homes, including the overhang again dividing the two floors, the steep pitch of the roof, the central chimney.  We also have these small diamond-shaped panes of glass in the windows that would have been attached together with lead.  These panes would have been in the Parson Capen House originally as well – they are a medieval element just like the overhang and steep roof.  The doors and windows are not laid out symmetrically.  This has been true of all of the houses we have looked at, and this is another medieval element as well.
36
37Now, the two important additions to note in this house are the extra gables added to the roof which makes the house look a little more complex and a little less box-like.  Again, a gable is the triangular portion of a wall between the edges of a sloping roof.  The other important addition is the lean-to on the back of the house.  The lean-to is just a section of a house added on that would have the kitchen, maybe a bedroom, a pantry area as well. It provided a bit more space.  The addition of this lean-to creates what is referred to as the saltbox form.
38
39SLIDE 9: Drawing of roof types
40
41You can see the saltbox form at the very bottom in this (really bad) diagram.  Don’t judge me – I’m an art historian, not an artist!
42
43SLIDE 10: 2.8  Old Ship Meeting House, Hingham, MA, 1681
44
45Now, the last 17th century structure I want to show you is the Old Ship Meeting House in Hingham, Massachusetts.  The Old Ship Meeting House actually got its name because people believed the roof looked like the body of a ship upside down.  Now, of course other structures were built besides houses, and in New England one of these structures was the meeting house.  In Massachusetts, Congregationalism was the main religion.  It was carried over from England to Plymouth Rock.  The Congregationalists believe that each church or congregation has control over its own affairs, and Congregationalists often met in meeting houses then where the Congregation – the people – would decide on things important to them.  Religious and secular matters were both discussed – so there was little separation of Church and State.
46Now, like the houses we have seen, this meeting house is relatively simple and unornamented.  In the case of the houses this was largely because medieval styles of architecture were brought over from England.  And it also largely reflected the social class of the owner of the house – they were usually lower or middle class.  But in this case, the lack of ornamentation really follows the beliefs of the Congregationalists who did not approve of the religious decoration that cover Catholic churches or many other churches.  There is no stained glass and no large altarpieces.  There would have been no real ornamentation inside either –no altar, just plain pews.  It looks as much like a house as a church.  The Congregationalists believed that these elements distracted from a person’s relationship with God.  They thought that a more austere environment was more appropriate for worship.  Now, there was no real European or English precedent for this structure.  This is a typical New England meeting house – it is very specific to this area.  Another important thing to note about it is that it has a hipped roof rather than a gabled roof like we saw on all of the houses we just looked at.
47
48SLIDE 11: Drawing of roof types.
49
50If we go back to this horrible diagram, you can see the difference b/w the hipped and the gabled roof.
51
52SLIDE 12: 3.1  Anonymous, John Freake, c. 1671-4.  Oil on canvas.  Worcester Art Museum, Worcester, Massachusetts. (42”x36”)
53
54Now I want to move on from architecture for a moment to show you a few examples of 17th-century painting.  Now, in the beginning American painting consisted pretty much entirely of portraits.  We will actually see that throughout the colonial period
55
56Why do you think that was? 
57
58Well, art was practical and commemorative at this point.  It was used to show status; it was more about documentation and less about expression or decoration.  Portraits serve this practical purpose as we will see.  And most of these portraits tend to survive from New England.  There was not as much painting in other areas at this point.  Painting, and portraiture specifically, was especially popular in New England because it tended to be a well-educated area and a region very much devoted to hard work.  The people in New England were largely Puritans.  Puritans in England had broken from the Church of England and they often headed to America seeking religious freedom.  They also tended to support Congregationalism – a type of Protestantism—which we were just talking about a minute ago.  And for the Puritans and the Congregationalists – hard work was key.  And this emphasis on work, and an interest in material goods that expressed monetary success and achievements through hard work ---were generally expressed in New England portraiture in the 17th century.  This was particularly important since colonial elites did not inherit titles.  Instead, they earned their status through hard work and they needed to demonstrate that power and wealth through their material goods.
59
60Now portraits were usually supposed to indicate the status of the sitter, but of course, they were never supposed to go overboard and be overly showy or ostentatious.  A lot of times people view Puritans as overly restrictive and never wanting to reveal too much of themselves, but this isn’t entirely true.  One art historian argued just that by using this portrait as an example.  People who commissioned an artist to paint their portrait of course had money, and they wanted to demonstrate this, but in a tasteful way.  And the best way to do this was by painting the sitter in their nice clothes, or maybe by including a few material possessions that most other colonists would never be able to afford.
61
62Now, you can see that in the first 17th-century portrait I want to show you.  This is a portrait of John Freake – a prominent Boston merchant and lawyer.  How can we tell he is prominent?  Well, John has a stylish haircut and moustache.  He wears an expensive coat and you can see that it is embellished with embroidery.  He even holds a pair of gloves which is another clear indicator of his high status in society.  Now, this portrait, along with the next one we will see, take their inspiration from English portraiture (again, always looking back home!).  Portraits in England at this time were known for their overall flatness.  There was an emphasis on using harsh lines, rather than using shading and subtle gradation of color to make more realistic figures of mass and volume.  There was also a Dutch Baroque influence as well.  For those of you who have taken other art history courses, you might recognize the dark background as the Dutch Baroque component.
63
64The artist of this work is still unknown, but about 6 of his works painted in Boston survive from the 1670s.
65
66SLIDE 13: 3.2  Anonymous, Elizabeth Freake and Baby Mary, c. 1671-4.  Oil on canvas.  Worcester Art Museum, Worcester, MA. (42”x36”)
67
68This is another work by the same artist.  This portrait is of John Freake’s wife and their youngest child.  Elizabeth is equally as stylish.  She wears a nice dress (satin) with embroidery.  She also has a lace collar which is a sign of her wealth.  In addition, she wears jewelry – she has a bracelet on, a ring, and a string of pearls around her neck.  You can tell that a lot of her possessions were probably imported by her merchant husband.  Even the chair in this portrait indicates the wealth of the family.  It is in fact, one of the most expensive, well-crafted chairs available at the time.  But, of course Elizabeth covers most of it – they would have been careful to indicate their wealth without being too showy.
69
70Now, what do you notice about these two portraits?  Do we really get a sense of who these people are?
71
72Not really.  The artist does not seem all that interested in capturing the personalities of the sitters.  He seems pretty much entirely devoted to demonstrating their social and economic status through a depiction of material goods.  Now, when you look at a portrait like this it is important to think about the formal qualities that we discussed last week. 
73
74So, first let’s consider light.  You can see some attempts at light in the face, a little on the clothes.  But overall, there is no real interest in portraying light and shadow.
75
76Let’s consider space.  The darker background indicates there is a back area.  So you can look into the picture plane to some extent, but space is not an overall interest either.  There is no clear recession into space.
77
78Texture: There is no real sense of implied texture here either.  The cloth does not appear soft.
79
80Shape and form:  Overall there is a flatness of form.  The baby is stiff as a board -- not fleshy at all.  There is an overall flatness through the lack of modelling or chiaroscuro (two terms that refer to a subtle transition from light to dark to create the illusion of 3 dimensions on a 2D surface). 
81
82SLIDE 14: 3.8 Thomas Smith, Selfportrait, c. 1690. Oil on canvas.  Worcester Art Museum, Worcester, MA  (24”x23”)
83
84This is the last 17th-century portrait that I want to show you.  This is a self-portrait by the artist Thomas Smith.  It is an extremely important painting because it is in fact the only 17th-century New England painting that is firmly linked to a known painter.  And it is also the earliest American self-portrait that exists.
85
86Smith depicted himself in this half-length representation.  He is turned slightly so that he is in this three-quarter pose.  And he is looking straight at us.  And his face seems to have a bit more personality than the Freakes.  This portrait also has a lot more detail than the other two we have seen.  The composition is a bit more complicated as a result.  The details tell a lot about the sitter, so we get to know more about him than just his social and economic status.  We have the window in the background.  It is a scene at sea to indicate that Smith was a mariner – he may have even been a naval officer.  There seems to be three ships in the water – one may have been hit or is sinking.  Now this battle may actually refer to a specific event in the artist’s life, or it may refer to something more symbolic such as “the trials of life.”  Whatever the meaning of this scene, the idea of combining a portrait with a hint of landscape in the corner will be adopted by later colonial artists.
87
88What would the skull symbolize? Well, the skull is a traditional sign of death.  What might it suggest here?  Well, it indicates that Smith may be thinking about the end of his life.  He also includes a letter in the painting that is tipped forward unrealistically so that we can read it:
89“Why why should I the World be minding
90therein a World of Evils, Finding
91Then Farwell World…..”
92This emphasizes that Smith is thinking about death.  And it suggests Puritan attitudes towards death – namely that they did not fear it.  For them it was an escape from an imperfect earthly life.  This poem also suggests that Smith was a poet and intellectual in addition to being a painter and a mariner.  Now besides the fact that Smith seems more interested in thinking about death, and reminding his viewer of the inevitable mortality of all humans, he also still manages to make references to his current life and his economic success.  The lace on his coat for instance, indicates he is wealthy and the chair he sits on has large brass studs indicating his wealth as well. (Craven)
93
94SLIDE 15: Comparison
95
96Exploring the formal elements of this work is important.  How does the use of light compare to the Portrait of Elizabeth Freake and Baby Mary for example?
97
98There is more of an interest in portraying light and shadow.  You can see that on his face especially.  And as a result, his face looks fleshier – more realistic (he even has wrinkles!)
99
100What about texture?  His hair looks more like hair, you almost feel like you could reach out and touch it.  It looks rather soft
101
102Space?  There is still no strong sense of space.  Where is the window in relation to Smith?  Is it in the background?  But the scene in the window does seem to portray some sense of recession into space.  We can tell there is some sort of structure in the foreground – and then the water is beyond that.
103
104Overall this work is much more detailed—you get a greater sense of who the sitter is through the details (his prominent nose, various objects in the room, etc.).  This work definitely has more of a Dutch Baroque influence than the portraits of the Freakes.  The Baroque style became very popular in England around this time and therefore in the Colonies as well.  In the Baroque style there is more of an interest in light and shadow, looser brushstrokes (a painterly style) are used as we can see in the hair here, and there is an interest in portraying form
105
106Now, this really is important – because it shows how Colonial artists wanted desperately to follow the fashions of England.  The Colonialists thought of themselves as Englishmen after all, and using the Baroque style demonstrates Smith’s attention to English tastes.  So – to review – this painting is significant in that it shows how closely the Colonists followed English styles.  It tells a lot about Puritan attitudes toward death.  And it may actually be one of the earliest American paintings to deal with the subject of death.  It is certainly the earliest surviving American self-portrait.  It is the earliest painting from New England that can be linked to a known artist.  And it tells so much about the artist – his profession, his thoughts, his religious beliefs.  In fact, it tells us virtually everything we know about the artist because art historians are still trying to sort through all of the Thomas Smiths in Boston at the time to learn more details about the man.
107
108So, paintings can be a tremendous source of information!
109
110SLIDE 16: 4.1  Wren Building, College of William and Mary, Williamsburg, Virginia, 1695-8 (restored 1931, 1968).
111
112We are moving now to a discussion of art and architecture of 18th century colonial America.  Now, in the 18th century things started to change a bit in the colonies.  This is mostly because the population grew considerably.  There were a lot of other changes as well.  The printing press was already being used in New England, but it now began to be used in other areas as well and newspapers began to proliferate.  In addition, in an effort to become more highly cultured, colonists tended to abandon the medieval style we have been talking about for a more refined and aristocratic style.  But despite all of these changes, it is important to note that Colonists still looked to England.  They still saw themselves as English.  And they looked to the Colonial power (”their mother country”) culturally – for styles in fashion and architecture and painting.
113
114
115I want to start our discussion of the 18th century by looking at the architecture of the period.  Now, as I mentioned, the Colonists were still largely looking to England for cultural guidance.  And this can be seen clearly in their architecture.  The Wren Building was built at the very end of the 17th century as part of the newly founded William and Mary College in Williamsburg, Virginia.  Although this building was not designed by the great English architect Sir Christopher Wren, it certainly looks to his buildings for inspiration – and therefore that’s how it got its name.  Now, Wren was known for designing brick buildings with white trim.  And he looked to Classical architecture for inspiration – the architecture of ancient Greece and Rome
116
117What are some characteristics of classical architecture that we can see here since I know some of you have studied Greece and Rome before?
118
119Well, I know that some of you have studied ancient art before, but some of you may not.  So, let’s do a quick review of ancient architecture.  It tended to be symmetrical –just like what we see here.  We also see the use of a pediment, which is the triangular element above the doorway. 
120
121SLIDE 17: Example of a Wren Building, Chelsea Hospital, London completed 1692   vs. Wren Building
122
123Here is an example of a building actually built by Sir Christopher Wren.  The Wren building at William and Mary is similarly horizontal.  With a low hipped roof to emphasize the horizontality of it.  There is an emphasis on symmetry and both buildings have a doorway with a pediment on top.  There are a lot of other shared features as well such as a cupola on both (which is the domed-shaped or quadrilateral-shaped ornamental structure on a roof).  And, of course, the building is made of brick and it has white details – as is typical of Wren’s buildings.
124
125SLIDE 18: 4.3 Governer’s Palace, Williamsburg, Virginia, 1706-20 (restored 1930). Abby Aldrich Rockefeller Folk Art Center, Williamsburg, Virginia. 
126
127Now, the next building I want to show you is in Williamsburg, Virginia as well.  Williamsburg became the new capital of the colony of Virginia – it replaced Jamestown.  So, it was laid out at the end of the 17th century and the beginning of the 18th century with a great deal of sophistication in mind.  This is a reconstruction of the 18th century Governor’s Palace that is located near the Wren Building.  It had to be reconstructed because it burnt down in 1781.
128
129This house is in fact in the Wren-style as well.  What are some of the characteristics of the Wren style that you see here?
130?	Brick with light-colored details
131?	Symmetry
132?	Horizontality
133?	cornice (which is the horizontal, decorative projection along the roof line)
134?	and the cupola
135
136Now this building is significant in that it served as a model for larger, grander, more sophisticated homes in the colonies.  During the 18th century, small 2 floor, 4 room houses started being replaced by these larger homes.  Wealthier families wanted to live in elegant homes that reflected the styles of England – and many of them looked to the Governor’s Palace as an example.
137
138SLIDE 19: Comparison
139
140The Governor’s Palace is much bigger than the 17th century homes in Virginia we looked at earlier, such as the Adam Thoroughgood House.  It is three stories, and its plan is no longer two cottages stuck together to create the hall and parlor plan as we saw in the Parson-Capen House.  Now we have the double-pile plan.  With this plan there is a central hall- and there are two rooms on either side of it. (While the Governor’s Palace certainly wasn’t the average home like the Parson-Capen House was, it still shows the sophistication that was reached in such a short period of time).
141
142SLIDE 20: 4.12 McPhedris-Warner House, Portsmouth, New Hampshire, 1718-23.
143
144This is another example of the double-pile plan, but this time in New England.  This is actually one of the earliest examples of the double-pile house in New England.  Again, just as in Virginia, colonists in New England were still looking to England for their architectural styles, especially in the ports where merchants were making a lot of money.  Towns like Portsmouth where this house is, Salem (Massachusetts), Boston, and Newburyport (Massachusetts) were all prosperous ports where merchants were able to make a lot of money, and houses like this became the norm.  So, this house looks to the great houses of the English aristocracy, although of course, it is toned down a great deal.  It is large, and it breaks away from the earlier, plain, medieval styles we were looking at earlier.  Here we have some of the same Classical details that were used in Wren-style buildings.  The use of classical details were especially fashionable in the 18th century and would have allowed the owners of the house to demonstrate their fashionable taste and high social standing.  These details and characteristics include the cupola, the symmetry, the pediment, the capitals on either side of the doorway, and more.  The balustrade – the railing along the roof – is another classical element. 
145
146SLIDE 21: 4.13 Royall House, Medford, Massachusetts, east façade, 1733-7.
147
148Another example of a house that looks to Classical architectural elements is the Royall House near Boston.  Isaac Royall was a wealthy man who profited from the rum and sugar business, and the slave trade.  He used his money to remodel his house (his contribution is this East façade; the rest was remodeled later on after Isaac’s death).  Again, the Classical details are a way to show wealth.  Isaac would have been able to look at pattern books that came over from England to get a sense of the architectural elements he liked and wanted to use in his own house.  The overall symmetry of the house is Classical, as is the doorway framed by pilasters (pilasters are engaged rectangular elements used for decoration—essentially flattened columns).  The quoins are the stones on the side edges of the house – these are classical details as well.
149
150SLIDE 22:  6.7  Vassall-Longfellow House, Cambridge, MA, 1759.
151
152The mid-18th century was a time of great wealth in the colonies.  You can see a lot of the same use of classical details on homes and buildings that we were just looking at, but Colonists wanted buildings that were even more elegant.  And now in the mid-18th century we see the influence of the Georgian style that filtered to the colonies in the mid-1700s.  This house – the Vassall-Longfellow House – would be considered Georgian in style because it emphasizes proportion and balance.  There was still an emphasis on Classical elements just as we saw with Wren-style architecture.  We see that it actually looks rather similar to houses we just saw from the earlier part of the century.  There is an emphasis on horizontality, it has wood clapboards – which we have certainly seen before, and we see the same balustrade that we just saw on the McPhedris-Warner House.  It is just a bit more elegant perhaps, and a bit more sophisticated.  On the Vassall-Longfellow House you can of course see a number of classical elements derived from ancient Greece and Rome – which, again, would show the wealth of the owner.  There are the ionic pilasters on either side of the door and on the corners, the pediment, and there is an overall interest in perfect symmetry and balance.
153
154SLIDE 23: 6.1 Peter Harrison, Redwood Library, Newport, RI, 1748-50.
155
156Now architects who were interested in these classical details often looked to the architecture of Andrea Palladio.  Palladio was an Italian architect of the High Renaissance who adhered to the ideas of classical Roman architecture.  One colonial architect who looked to his buildings was Peter Harrison – an amateur architect.  And, actually, all architects in the colonies were basically amateurs at this time because they didn’t have architecture schools yet as we know them today.
157
158As I mentioned, a lot of architects looked to design books for ideas, and Palladio’s designs were filtered to America through these design books.  His ideas were passed through these books and architects in the colonies and elsewhere could decide which elements they wanted to use.  We will see that the influence of Palladio will actually continue into the 19th century in America.
159
160SLIDE 24: Palladio, Church of San Giorgio Maggiore, Venice, plan 1565; construction 1565-80; façade 1597-1610; campanile 1791.
161
162This is an example of one of Palladio’s most famous structures, and one of the most significant aspects of it is the double-temple front.  You can see that this temple front has been fused over what looks like a façade in back with another pediment behind.  Really these are just wings –that seem to form a second pediment.
163
164SLIDE 25: Peter Harrison, Redwood Library, Newport, RI, 1748-50. and Church of San Giorgio Maggiore
165
166And if we turn back to the Redwood Library we can see that it has a similar double-temple front.  So, the influence of Palladio is clear.  Both structures have columns and a pediment.  All of these classical elements are perfect for the structure -- they are reserved and sophisticated, which is, of course, perfect for a library.  The form reflects the function!
167
168The Redwood Library in Rhode Island is actually one of the earliest examples of this Palladian style in the colonies.  And it is a nearly exact replica of an original design by Andrea Palladio.
169
170Now, of course Palladio’s buildings were built out of stone.  What do you think the Redwood Library is made out of?  Well, the Redwood Library was actually built out of wood that was made to look like stone.  The wood used on the exterior was cut to look like rusticated masonry – which just means that it has a rough appearance.  And the entire building was painted brown with a bit of sand added to it to simulate the appearance of stone. (Craven)
171
172SLIDE 26:  Peter Harrison, Touro Synagogue, Newport, Rhode Island, 1759-63.  Exterior.
173
174I wanted to show you a couple of other buildings by Harrison.  This is Touro Synagogue.  It is the oldest synagogue in America.  In 1758, a Dutch Jew by the name of Isaac Touro came to Newport, Rhode Island to serve as a spiritual leader.  He formed a congregation and about a year later they purchased land and hired Peter Harrison to design their temple. Before this, Jews were worshipping in their private homes.  Now, Rhode Island was originally founded on the principle of religious freedom (you may remember Roger Williams from history classes).  So, it makes sense for Isaac Touro to come here to form his congregation.  And this synagogue is especially important because it is now known as a symbol of liberty and religious freedom.
175
176And, of course, we can see the same classical details emphasized that we just saw on the library: proportion, balance, pediment, columns, cornice, central portico with the pediment, and the Ionic columns are typical Palladian elements.
177
178SLIDE 27:  6.4  Peter Harrison, Touro Synagogue, Newport, Rhode Island, 1759-63.  Interior.
179
180The interior of Touro Synagogue is a bit different from the exterior.  The interior demonstrates the wealth of the Jews that they didn’t want to just advertise to the community by using too many decorative elements on the exterior.  On the interior, Peter Harrison again looked to the ideas of Palladio.  He used classical columns and other classical details.  But, the interior is much more complicated than the exterior.  There is a lot of symbolism that ties the structure together.  There are a total of 12 columns for example, and the number 12 refers to the 12 tribes of ancient Israel. (Craven)
181
182SLIDE 28:  6.5  Peter Harrison, Brick Market, Newport, Rhode Island, 1761-1772.
183
184I just wanted to show you one more example of Harrison’s architecture.  The Brick Market is again borrowing from classical elements and Palladio’s architecture: the round arches on the lower level are classical Roman arches, we have Ionic pilasters above, we see pediments (alternating triangular and semicircular ones), and more.
185
186SLIDE 29:  5.1 Pierpont Limner, Mrs. James Pierpont, 1711.  Oil on canvas.  Yale University Art Gallery, New Haven, CT.  (31”x25”)
187
188Our last discussion for the week is 18th-century colonial painting.  As in the 17th century, painting in the colonial 18th century consisted for the most part entirely of portraits.  And as we saw in the 17th century, sitters generally wanted to demonstrate their wealth and status.  The difference is that during the 18th century colonists had more money, they were more interested in material goods, they were better read, and they had greater access to education since more and more colleges were forming.  Yale, for instance, was founded at the very beginning of the 18th century, followed by Columbia in the middle of century.  All of this tends to be expressed in the portraits of the time.
189
190Now, an important thing to note about the portraiture of the 18th century, is that it leaves far behind the medieval qualities of the 17th century, just as we saw with architecture.  Portraitists tend to be more interested in capturing light and shadow and depicting more realistic forms.  There was also a great demand for more sophisticated and elegant portraits.  People wanted their portraits painted in the manner of the aristocrats.
191
192This portrait of Mary Pierpont is an example of this.  It was painted by Pierpont Limner.  Limner isn’t really his name, instead, the term refers specifically to an unidentified portraitist.  So, the artist is referred to as the Pierpont limner because no one knows exactly who the artist is.  Now Mary looks like a member of high society or the royal court, but in reality, she was the wife of a Congregationalist minister.  So, it is supposed to be a very sophisticated portrait
193
194SLIDE 30: Comparison
195
196Now, how would you compare this portrait to that of Elizabeth Freake and Baby Mary?  You can see that compared to the portraits we saw from earlier in the colonial period, Mrs. Pierpont is not as flat.  The artist uses some modeling to give her more form.  Her clothes seem even more realistic.  You get a sense of the textures.  You can also get a better sense of her personality perhaps, and overall, she simply looks more human.
197
198SLIDE 31: Pierpont Limner, Reverend James Pierpont, 1711.  Oil on canvas.  Yale University Art Gallery, New Haven, CT.
199
200Here is the portrait of the minister James Pierpont that is meant to go with his wife’s portrait.  Again, we see more personality in his face and there is more of an interest in implied texture.
201
202SLIDE 32: 5.6 John Smibert, The Bermuda Group-Dean George Berkeley and his Family, 1729. Oil on canvas. Yale University Art Gallery, New Haven, CT.  (6’x8’)
203
204John Smibert is another artist known for his sophisticated, fashionable portraits.  He was in many ways the first professional artist of the colonies.  He was trained in Europe but he had a long successful career on this side of the ocean.  The fact that he was trained was a big deal and really sets him apart because there was basically no art instruction available in the colonies at all.  And this work is among the most important we will discuss this week because it was so influential.	
205
206John Smibert was actually from Scotland originally and he had an established portrait studio in England, but he ended up coming to New England in his 40s where he became the first academy-trained painter to work in the colonies and a very sought-after painter in Boston.  Soon after he arrived in the colonies he finished this large painting (which is about 6’ x 8’) that would demonstrate his talents to the colonists.  The painting is a group portrait of Dean George Berkeley and his family.  Berkeley was an Irish philosopher who worked at Trinity College in Dublin, and we will discuss him again later in the semester for a famous poem that he wrote.  And Smibert included a self-portrait on the left side.  He is the man looking out toward the viewer.
207
208This painting actually depicts how Smibert ended up coming to the colonies.  Dean George Berkeley hired Smibert to be the art teacher at a new college he wanted to open in Bermuda (funded by the British government) where he planned to train ministers and missionaries.  Berkeley and his family - along with Smibert - got as far as New England when they were told that the school was denied funds.  Berkeley left, but Smibert decided to stay in New England because artists faced less competition there than in England.  He painted this group portrait, which was started before they left for America and was completed in Rhode Island a couple years before Berkeley left, which includes the Dean at the far right, his wife holding their son, and next to her is her female companion.  The two standing men behind them were supposed to be administrators for the college.  The man, John Wainwright, seated at the table commissioned the portrait from Smibert.
209
210Going back to the formal elements, it is important to consider a visual analysis of the work so that we can see how art has changed over time.
211
212Light: You can see the play of light and shadow on the figures’ faces.  This creates a clear sense of form.  The light source in background indicates time of day.  Light is also used to draw the viewer’s attention to the figures.  The highlights on their faces make them our focus.
213
214Texture:  You get a sense of the various fabrics that these men and women are wearing.  It looks like the man who commissioned the portrait may be wearing some sort of velveteen type fabric – it looks really soft.
215
216Composition:  The composition is rather organized.  We have three groups of people that sort of line up or correspond to the three columns in the back.  Smibert filled the whole canvas – he leaves no real voids or open spaces.
217
218Space: There is a clear background with a strong recession into space.  A basic method of overlapping figures is used to convey space.  Diminishing size is also used.  If you notice, the trees and other landscape elements are much smaller than the figures.  This tells us that they are farther away.  Atmospheric perspective is also used to convey space.  This method is based on the interaction of objects with the surrounding air so that things that are farther away appear less distinct or clear, and there is no strong contrast of colors.  We can certainly see this in the landscape behind the figures in this scene.
219
220Line: Line is also used in an important way in this work.  There are a lot of implied lines, for instance.  The lines of sight created by the figures’ gazes draw our attention all over the canvas.  Smibert, himself, draws us into the work through his gaze directly at us, and from there we are drawn to the left and back to the right to help create a balanced scene. 
221
222This work is obviously very different from the earlier portraits we saw.  But, remember, Smibert was trained in Europe.  He had the traditional artist’s training in Italy and this is certainly not true of the other portraitists we have considered who did not have the same extensive formal training.  Although, you may notice that even though this portrait is more sophisticated than a lot of the other ones we have looked at so far, the figures all sort of look alike.  They are not that flat – they seem to occupy real bodies, real flesh – but, if you notice, the women look similar.  Smibert seems to use similar eyes for all of the figures.  So, these figures are not incredibly naturalistic or individualized, but there certainly has been quite a development since the Freake portraits or even Thomas Smith’s self-portrait.
223
224SLIDE 33:  7.5  Joseph Blackburn, Isaac Winslow and his Family, 1755.  Oil on canvas.  Museum of Fine Arts, Boston.  (4 ½’ x 7’)
225
226Now, the group portrait was actually very rare in Colonial art, and the Bermuda Group was one of the first.  I just wanted to show you another early group portrait.  This one is by Joseph Blackburn – another European artist who came to America.  He spent about a decade painting in America.  Here, Blackburn depicts the Winslow family – a wealthy merchant family.  This work dates about 26 years after the Bermuda Group, but you can see it is actually really similar.  There is this rather informal arrangement of the figures and there is a hint of landscape in the back.  There is an interest in capturing textures and light effects.  But still, like in the Bermuda Group, the figures still don’t look entirely realistic and individualized.
227
228SLIDE 34: John Smibert, Francis Brinley, 1729.  Oil on canvas.  The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York  (50”x39”)
229
230I just wanted to give you a couple more examples of Smibert’s work.  Here is a portrait he painted of a wealthy man in the Boston area.  You can see, that again, he is interested in capturing the play of light and shadow on the sitter’s face, and even his clothes.  There is a definite sense of space.  We are drawn into the background to the landscape.  And, actually, this, along with the group portrait of the Bermuda Group, are some of the earliest examples of such an extensive landscape in American painting.  This view is also a way of demonstrating Brinley’s (the sitter’s) wealth.
231
232How might it demonstrate wealth?  This is a view of Boston from his country home outside the city – and it suggests that he owns a fair amount of property.
233
234SLIDE 35:   John Smibert, Mrs. Francis Brinley and Her Son Francis, 1729.  Oil on canvas.  The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York  (50x39”)
235
236This is a portrait of Brinley’s wife on the right from the same year.  She, too, was a very wealthy individual who came from a prosperous family before she even married Brinley.  And remember they usually wanted to show off their wealth, although tastefully….
237
238So, which details in the painting might indicate her wealth?  Well, she is in a nicely decorated setting.  There is a thick curtain on the side made of nice fabric and she wears a fashionable dress.  You can see that she holds some sort of plant in her hand.  She actually holds an orange blossom that seems to have come from the orange tree right next to her, and orange trees of course are not native to New England and importing one would have been rather expensive.  This certainly shows off her high social status.
239
240Now this would be an example of when the iconographic approach really helps you in art history.  You could really dig in and figure out the meaning of every item in the painting.  For example, the orange – or, really, fruit in general – also has a traditional meaning of fertility.  So, this seems to emphasize her role as a mother.  And then the white blossoms that she holds would refer to Mrs. Brinley’s purity and her role as a devoted wife.
241
242If we compare this portrait to the one of Elizabeth Freake on the left.  We can see that while the goals of both portraits are the same, so much changed in such a short period of time from 1671 to 1729.  Smibert’s European training really set him apart, and also, through his influence, led to greater colonial painters.
243
244SLIDE 36:  Robert Feke, Thomas Hopkinson, 1746.  Smithsonian American Art Museum, Washington, D.C.  (49”x39”)
245
246Robert Feke, another 18th century colonial painter, sort of supplanted Smibert as the great colonial artist of the time.  But, unlike Smibert, he was actually born and raised in America and he did not have the same professional training.  And this lack of training becomes clear when you see his paintings.
247
248SLIDE 37: Comparison – Smibert vs. Feke
249
250In this comparison, which man do you think is portrayed more naturalistically here? Smibert’s Brinley or Feke’s Thomas Hopkinson?  Thomas Hopkinson looks rather stiff.  He does not have the same fleshy realism that Smibert’s depiction of Brinley has
251
252Why?  Feke’s work still has rather harsh lines and he doesn’t have quite the same interest in light and shadow.  The portrait is very similar to Smibert’s (Feke was clearly influenced by his fellow artist), but his work lacks the sophisticated training.  But, of course, nevertheless, Feke’s portrait is still very sophisticated compared to early colonial portraits, but he still cannot quite measure up to the sophistication of artists who came over from Europe.
253
254SLIDE 38:  John Singleton Copley
255
256The last great Colonial painter I want to talk about is John Singleton Copley.
257
258You’re probably getting really sick of looking at portraits, but even towards the end of the 18th century, portraiture was still virtually the only form of painting in the colonies.  But you’ll see that Copley really became New England’s, and really America’s, premier portraitist at this time, at the end of the colonial period.  He was really quite remarkable so he might lull us out of our portraiture boredom.  Copley was born in Boston.  He was virtually self-taught.  His stepfather, Peter Pelham, was actually a successful engraver in the Boston area so he certainly would have given Copley some artistic training in his early years, but Pelham died when Copley was still just a boy (about 13 years old).  So, Copley really did largely teach himself to paint.  He spent a great deal of time just copying prints.
259
260SLIDE 39: 5.4 Peter Pelham, The Reverend Cotton Mather, 1728.  Mezzotint.
261
262This is a print made by Copley’s stepfather, Peter Pelham.  In addition to copying prints, such as this one, Copley also learned a lot by seeing the paintings of artists like John Smibert and Joseph Blackburn who were also painting in and around the Boston area when Copley was young.  Doing these sorts of things was important because of the lack of art instruction in the colonies.  So, by the time he was in his late teens and early 20s, Copley had become an accomplished artist.  He was especially known and praised for his ability to paint textures and for his ability to capture the emotions and personality of his sitters.
263
264SLIDE 40:   John Singleton Copley, Mrs. Joseph Mann (Bethia Torrey), 1753.  Oil on canvas.  Museum of Fine Arts, Boston.
265
266This is a very early portrait by Copley and one that he painted when he was only 15 years old!  He depicts a woman of relatively high social status against this landscape background.  We have seen this several times before.  He is still very much influenced by artists like Smibert and Blackburn at this point.  At this very early point in his career he is not yet as fascinated with capturing precise details, lush fabrics, and shiny objects as he will be later in his career.  His fascination with material objects has not quite developed.  And his skills are still lacking a bit at this point.  Mrs. Joseph Mann looks a little flat in areas and Copley does not really capture her true likeness or her personality as he does with his sitters later in his career.  You will definitely see the change!
267
268SLIDE 41: John Singleton Copley, Ann Tyng (Mrs. Thomas Smelt), 1756.  Oil on canvas.  Museum of Fine Arts, Boston.  
269
270This portrait – another very early one – that Copley painted when he was just 18 years old is a similar case.  He captured an upper-class woman in a landscape setting.  We have a similar composition and she, here, is a bit stiff and flat.
271
272SLIDE 42: Comparison b/w Copley and Smibert’s Mrs. Francis Brinley from 1729
273
274In this comparison, you can see, in fact, that Copley’s portrait is not all that different from Smibert’s portrait of Mrs. Francis Brinley from 25 years or so earlier.  Copley is clearly looking to this earlier Boston artist.  He has not quite found his own way of doing things.  The composition is very similar: again, there is the sophisticated sitter with trappings of their wealth displayed and all against a landscape in the background.
275
276SLIDE 43:  Detail of Ann Tyng
277
278Although Copley has not quite come into his own yet, and he has not separated himself significantly from earlier traditions, there is one major difference.  Copley’s interest in capturing fabrics starts coming out!  He captures the texture of the lace against the smooth fabric of the dress and he is interested in the way light plays off of the fabric.
279
280SLIDE 44: 7.6  John Singleton Copley, Mary and Elizabeth Royall, c. 1758.  Oil on canvas.  Museum of Fine Arts, Boston. (4+’x4’)
281
282Now Copley’s talent really starts to develop as he heads into his 20s.  You can see that in this double portrait.  Now his sitters really seem to come to life!  Unlike in the last two portraits I showed you, these sitters are not stiff.  Their faces really seem to have some depth and character to them.  They are extremely individualized faces, and although the girls certainly look like well-behaved, proper children of the upper-class, they still look very childlike.  Copley seems to capture their innocence.
283
284SLIDE 45:  Detail
285
286And you can see that in this detail I think.
287
288SLIDE 46:  7.6  John Singleton Copley, Mary and Elizabeth Royall, c. 1758.  Oil on canvas.  Museum of Fine Arts, Boston.
289
290And, of course, Copley’s real trademark is his attention to texture, especially fabrics.  Here, the light plays off the fabric on the girls’ dresses and lush fabric surrounds them.  It seems to shine in the natural light that comes from the upper right corner.  He really captures textures: the smooth satin material of the dresses, the softer drapery surrounding them, and the stiffer quality of the lace on their necklines and cuffs.
291
292Copley also filled the portrait with fascinating details that really make the work incredibly interesting, including the dog, the hummingbird, and the decorated interior space in the background.  Copley was able to depict an elegant setting while also accurately capturing the two young girls and the innocent, humorous scene of them holding their pets.
293
294The other important thing about Copley is that he conveys a lot of information about his sitters through the use of iconography—the meaning and symbolism of the subject matter.  The art historian Paul Staiti wrote on this subject.  He noted, for instance, that the hummingbird on the little girl’s finger shows the skill, grace, and respectful demeanor of the young girl (training birds was considered a way to improve character for girls).  The King Charles Spaniel was associated with the English court and was an emblem of status since it was a pampered animal, not a working one.  Even the fabric used in this work is important since it demonstrates wealth.  Copley carefully constructs his work according to what the sitters wanted—in this case what the wealthy father of these girls wanted.  Staiti argues that Copley was popular because he was good at creating visual fictions that helped to demonstrate his sitter’s status.  Possessions were extremely important in late colonial society; Copley understood that and used them to portray his sitters the way they wanted.  His paintings were not records, not always factual (the girl didn’t really get the hummingbird to land on her finger, for instance!).  They were invented narratives to convey what the sitters wanted to convey. (Staiti, “Character and Class: The Portraits of John Singleton Copley,” 12-37.)
295
296SLIDE 47: John Singleton Copley, Epes Sargent, c. 1760.  Oil on canvas.  National Gallery of Art, Washington, D.C.
297
298This is another portrait by Copley from just two years later.  This is another great example of all of the information you can learn about the sitter by just studying the details of the work for a few minutes.  We know that Epes Sargent is a very wealthy man.  You can tell by his clothes, the marble column (marble wouldn’t have been common in the colonies and therefore suggests prestige and success).  In addition, the landscape probably hints at the land he owns. We know, too, that Epes is fashionable.  He wears fancy clothes and a wig; there is even a little powder on Sargent’s shoulder that fell from his wig to remind us of the fashion.
299
300Sargent owned half the land in Gloucester, Massachusetts.  And after the death of his first wife he married a very rich widow –so he certainly had a lot of money.  The man’s larger physique suggests this as well and would have been considered a sign of wealth and even beauty at the time.
301
302Copley really captured the character of this man.  He is serious.  Sargent looks ahead as though he could not be deterred by anything.  The column, too, is a symbol of strength and determination.  Copley also captured this man’s confidence through his casual pose.  He has one hand in his pocket and he leans against the column base.
303
304Of course, despite all of Copley’s amazing skill, you should notice that he is using the same composition that New England artists had been using since Smibert: the figure with the glimpse of landscape in the corner.
305
306SLIDE 48:  Comparison VII
307
308But, of course, when comparing portraits by these two artists—Smibert and Copley – the difference is clear.  In Copley’s portrait the light isn’t so harsh so the face of the sitter appears more realistic.  The paint is blended so smoothly that the cloth really looks like cloth and skin really looks like skin.
309
310SLIDE 49:  Comparison VIII
311
312Putting these three paintings side by side, one from the 1670s, one from 1729, and one from 1760, we see the changes that took place in American colonial painting in less than a century. 
313
314SLIDE 50:   7.8 John Singleton Copley, Henry Pelham (Boy with a Squirrel), 1765.  Oil on canvas.  Museum of Fine Arts, Boston.  (30”x25”)
315
316This next work is one you might remember from Week 1.  This is one of Copley’s most famous paintings and it is a portrait of his stepbrother.  Now, at this point -- at the age of 27- Copley had created quite a reputation for himself and he was known and admired outside of Boston.  He decided that it was time to start exhibiting his work outside of America altogether, so Copley painted this portrait of Henry Pelham to be exhibited in London in 1766, where it was highly praised.  You can actually tell that this work really marks another development in Copley’s career.  The composition that we just saw a moment ago in Epes Sargent has been abandoned for something a bit more complex.  Henry is now in profile view, and he is seated at a table at an angle to the viewer.  In fact, the corner of the table itself seems to jut out into our/ the viewer’s space.
317
318Another significant thing about this painting – and something that is characteristic of Copley’s mature work – is that he really captures the character of his stepbrother, even more so than he did with the Royall sisters and with Epes Sargent.  He captures something of the character of a young boy – idly playing with a chain, he has a pet squirrel, he is day-dreaming, looking off into space….
319
320And, of course, the thing that Copley continues to do remarkably well is capture implied textures, as I mentioned in Week 1 during our discussion of formal terms when we saw this work.
321
322SLIDE 51: Detail (squirrel)
323
324We see some of that texture in this detail.
325
326Now, why the squirrel on the leash?  Similar to the hummingbird we discussed minutes ago, we can understand that the boy trained him.  It is a sign of his good character that he trained a wild animal. 
327
328SLIDE 52: 7.9 John Singleton Copley, Paul Revere, c. 1769.  Oil on canvas.  Museum of Fine Arts, Boston.  (35”x28”)
329
330This portrait of Paul Revere is another one of Copley’s most famous portraits.  In this case the interesting thing is that he paints Revere before his famous role as a patriot in the American Revolution – before his “midnight ride” in 1775 when he rode from Boston to Lexington to warn people about the approach of the British army.  Here, Copley just captures him as he was 6 years before this famous event, when he was just a successful silversmith.  But in addition to the historical significance of this work, this is another portrait in which Copley really demonstrates his talent of depicting the effects of light and shadow, depicting textures, and capturing the character of his sitter.
331
332Here he emphasizes Revere’s industriousness.  He is surrounded by his tools; he wears work clothes.  He also has a very thoughtful expression -- with his hand held to his face – as if he is contemplating his work, or as if his work has just been interrupted by someone walking in the room.  The other interesting thing is that by depicting Revere looking out toward the viewer, Copley really involves us in the work.  He encourages our participation and he encourages us to look back.
333
334SLIDE 53: John Singleton Copley, Nicholas Boylston, 1767.  Oil on canvas.
335
336Now Copley became so popular and well-known in the colonies that he started painting the wealthiest and most esteemed men of Boston— like the Boylstons.  Again, we learn so much through the details.  The ledger and the ship in the background tell us his profession (he was a merchant).  He is wealthy and wears a turban, vest, and dressing gown made of expensive silk that would only be worn at home.  The fact that he is in leisure, not worn down by work indicates his status.  His overall elegance—like an English aristocrat—is clear. (Staiti)
337
338SLIDE 54: 7.10 John Singleton Copley, Mr. and Mrs. Isaac Winslow (Jemima Debuke), 1774.  Oil on canvas.  Museum of Fine Arts, Boston.  (3’x4’)
339
340This is another portrait that really captures the character of the sitters, and it is another one of Copley’s attempts at a group portrait.  Here, Copley depicts Mr. and Mrs.  Isaac Winslow.  The composition is similar to a lot of the ones we have seen, with the sitter framed by a thick curtain in the background.  But this particular portrait is a bit more relaxed and casual than what we have seen previously.  And this is actually significant considering the political upheaval in Boston at the time with events such as the Boston Tea Party and resistance to British taxes on things such as tea, paper, printed matter, glass, and more.  So, the casual nature of the work certainly contrasts with the chaos of the time.
341
342We have Isaac Winslow who turns to look at us.  He looks friendly; he smiles a slight smile.  And his wife is in a casual pose.  She leans on the table with her arms folded and she looks towards her husband.  It is a rather simple portrait, but it becomes complex when you think about what was going on at the time.  This work is also significant when you compare it to the other portrait of Isaac Winslow and his wife that we saw from about 20 years earlier!
343
344SLIDE 55: Comparison IX
345
346I think this comparison of two portraits of the exact same family is really fascinating.  It shows just how significant Copley was and how skilled he was as a painter.
347
348What are the main differences between these two portraits of the Winslows?  We can see that the work by Blackburn is a lot more posed.  Copley’s work is more informal and in that way, you feel closer to the sitter. With Copley’s work it is as if the viewer is invited to sit with the Winslows, but in Blackburn’s work the subjects are clearly just there to have their portrait painted and there does not really seem to be a way for us to join in the scene
349
350Although Blackburn is certainly interested in the play of light and shadow, Copley definitely has a lot more skill in that area.  The reflections of the Winslows’ hands in the table, for example, are quite remarkable.  And overall the figures seem much more realistic.  Their bodies have more volume, their faces have more personality, and they are much more individualized.  Copley seems to have a real interest in anatomy- capturing muscles, bone structure, veins, whereas Blackburn just doesn’t have that same interest.  And this is all even more remarkable considering Blackburn had European training, and by this time Copley still did not.
351
352SLIDE 56: John Singleton Copley, Mr. and Mrs. Ralph Izard  (Alice Delancey), 1775.  Oil on canvas.  Museum of Fine Arts, Boston.  (68”x88”)
353
354The portrait of the Winslows is one of the last works that Copley painted in America.  He left America for Europe in 1774.   He left during the war partly because he knew he needed to study in Europe and also because the unrest in the colonies made it hard for him to make a living as a painter.  Copley studied in Italy for a year or so, and then he settled in London.  While he was in Europe, Copley continued to paint portraits of both wealthy Europeans and wealthy Americans.  In this portrait he depicted a couple that he traveled with through Italy.  The Izards were from South Carolina, and of course they had heard about Copley and they wanted him to paint their portrait.
355
356In what ways is this work similar to a lot of portraits we have already seen?  Copley shows the wealth of the Izards by depicting them in an extremely opulent room filled with rich fabrics, expensive furniture, and works of art.  He still has the landscape in the background as we saw in earlier portraits, and in this case, he includes it as a way to depict the Colosseum so that he can show that the couple is on their Grand Tour of Europe.  In other words, they are well-traveled, wealthy, and sophisticated.
357
358But this work is set apart in the way that Copley captures the personality of the sitters, adopts a more unusual composition, and demonstrates that he has become a real master of depicting material goods.
359
360SLIDE 57:  Detail (Mrs. Ralph Izard)
361
362Copley captured a variety of textures again as you can see in this detail.  He depicts the thin, sheer material of Mrs. Izard’s dress and contrasts that with the thick, rich blue material.
363
364SLIDE 58: Detail (vase)
365
366In this detail, you can see that Copley depicts details such as this fifth century B.C. Greek vase as a way of showing off the Izard’s wealth and sophisticated taste, and their knowledge of the arts. 
367
368SLIDE 59: John Singleton Copley, Watson and the Shark, 1778.  Oil on canvas. National Gallery of Art, Washington, D.C. 
369
370Our very last work of this week’s lecture is Watson and the Shark.  I wanted to show you an example of how Copley’s work changed once he settled in London.  He began specializing in narrative scenes and history scenes like this one.  This was partly because there was a demand for history paintings in Europe, whereas in colonial America, portraiture was still largely the only genre of painting.  This was Copley’s first large-scale history painting (it is about 72” x 90”).  It caused a sensation when it was exhibited in London because this was a rather violent scene.  People were not used to such gruesome scenes.
371
372Now, part of the reason why Copley left Boston for London is that he felt that Colonial Americans didn’t really appreciate painting as an art form – they really thought of it as more of a trade.  They often thought of portraits only as something that could portray a likeness of someone – something really practical, in other words.  They were not as interested in painting as an art form.
373
374Copley continued to paint portraits as well, but history paintings became one of his specialties.  This work was commissioned by a wealthy merchant, Brook Watson, who asked Copley to paint a traumatic event from his childhood.  Copley depicts a scene of Watson being attacked by a shark when he had been swimming in the waters off of Havana, Cuba as a teenager.  Copley dramatizes the scene.  He has nine men trying to save the boy and they are all in very dramatic poses.  Watson fails to catch a rope that can pull him to safety and a man is about to force a harpoon through the body of the shark.  The shark is huge; his mouth is open and ready to bite.  It is a bloody scene.  The water around Watson’s right foot is bloody, indicating that the shark already bit him.  And it is a suspenseful scene.  Will Watson be saved, or will he be eaten by the shark?
375
376Now, despite the drama, Copley does try to create a realistic scene.  He looked at prints of Cuba so that he could represent the area as accurately as possible.  And he tried to capture the emotions and expressions of the seaman trying to save Watson.  They have expressions of concern, fear, desperation, horror.
377
378This work was exhibited at the Royal Academy in London in 1778.  It caused a sensation at the exhibit because this was a rather violent scene and people were not used to these gruesome scenes.  They also found this work unusual because Copley is not depicting an event in the life of a well-known leader or historical figure.  Instead, he is depicting an event in the life of an ordinary man.
379
380This painting helped Copley earn admission to the prestigious Royal Academy.  And, in addition, Watson and the Shark was made into prints for distribution so Copley made a lot of money from this.  And Copley liked the painting so much that he had made a second, almost exact copy for himself.
381
382This is the end of the lecture for Week 2 on colonial art and architecture.  I hope you enjoyed it!
383
384
385Sources:
386
387In addition to the instructor’s own knowledge, this information comes from the following sources:
388
389Craven, Wayne. American Art: History and Culture. Revised First Ed. Boston: McGraw-
390Hill, 2003, pp. 28-34, 42-60, 68-73, 79-83, 94-102.
391
392“Mr. and Mrs. Ralph Izard.” Museum of Fine Arts, Boston. http://www.mfa.org/collections/object/mr-and-mrs-ralph-izard-alice-delancey-31228
393
394“Mrs. Francis Brinley and Her Son Francis.” The Metropolitan Museum of Art. 
395https://metmuseum.org/art/collection/search/12602
396
397Staiti, Paul. “Character and Class: The Portraits of John Singleton Copley.” In Reading 
398American Art. 12-37.  New Haven: Yale University Press, 1998.
399
400Touro Synagogue. http://www.tourosynagogue.org/history-learning/synagogue-history
401
402“Watson and the Shark.” National Gallery of Art. https://www.nga.gov/Collection/art-object-page.46471.html