Portraits are bland, monotonous, boring, at least, that’s what I used to think before I was exposed to “Every Portrait Tells a Lie” and “How John Singer Sargent Made a Scene”. These pieces highlighted two different, yet profoundly deep interpretations of what a portrait is.
In “Every Portrait Tells a Lie”, Deborah Brehmer draws attention to the way a portrait is made and the contradictions that come with it. It is actually ironic how sometimes the subject of the portrait may be the one that is visually captured in the piece, yet they are not at all actually feeling what is being portrayed. Rather, I feel that on some occasions, the artist’s desires and emotions are what constructs the feelings that are transmitted through the work. The person portrayed is a mere vessel being used to convey the artist’s feelings. For example, Picasso tried to paint a portrait of Gertrude Stein, yet 90 sessions and over a year later, he gave up in frustration and left for an extended vacation. He would go on to complete the painting by memory without the subject there. Only after he put in his own feelings on how she should look, rather than just accepting what reality presented him with, did he feel comfortable with the piece. This goes to show that even though a portrait may depict one thing or evoke one emotional feeling, it does not necessarily represent reality. It just represents what the artist wants to be immortalized. Brehmer points out how a portrait is trying to do the impossible, to capture a perfect still moment and keep it forever, while somehow maintaining the depth of the feeling and the energy of life in a single still shot. It is the narcissism of man realized, the ultimate form of manipulation.
“How John Singer Sargent Made a Scene” brought to light the impact that portraiture had on the scene at the time. Madame X, now viewed as a priceless masterpiece, was viewed as an abomination. Sargent’s entire work was at one point criticized, and his legacy as an artist torn down from being an innovative creator to just being a slick craftsman. His message was misinterpreted and seen as hedonistic rather than groundbreaking or revolutionary. He was trying to change the way portraits were perceived, using both new methods of representing the subject, such as the sharply dark back ground with the models profile brightly lit, as well as deep rooted, almost provocative emotions to try and evoke an emotional and mentally stimulating feeling in the viewer. I feel that this proves the idea that a portrait can preserve the emotion and message that the artist tried to implant. The fact that Madame X still is able to captivate the masses and has only gone up in popularity and value is a testament to that.
I agree with you when you say that his paintings truly evoke a lot of emotion. I also thought it very interesting that you pointed out that the main focuses of his paintings were in bright light and the background or surrounding areas were blurred out or in shadow. I think he learned that from a few of his artist teachers who did the same. I really love the way he almost blurs out the background so that we know exactly what to focus on.