 |
| General Feodor Petrovich Uvarov (1773 - 1824). |
 |
| Alexander Ivanovich Chernyshyov (later count, then prince) (1786 - 1857). |
 |
| Count (later prince) Mikhail Semyonovich Vorontsov (1782 - 1856). |
 |
| Tsar Alexander I (1777 - 1825). |
*
11 years ago
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
The Tsar looks rather "plain Jane" in comparison. Such glitz and drama.
ReplyDeleteThere seems to be no end to the delicious obscurities which find their way to Gods & Foolish Grandeur.
ReplyDeleteAt risk of turning into a Comment Whore (one sees them everywhere and cringes to join their ranks) I wanted to say
that at first glance at these portraits, there was an automatic assumption that they depicted English faces, a kind of
knee-jerk reaction to anything done by Thomas Lawrence. He made everyone look glamorous. Indeed, he has been called
the Cecil Beaton of his age. (best known example being his Duke of Wellington) But it would be unfair to trivialise Thomas Lawrence in that way, because his portraits have great authority, a kind of stylish grandeur; and what is wrong with giving sitters an extra dose of pizzaz? In any event, the formula seems to have worked with 2 out of the 3 Russian aristocrats on this page.
Yes, I think the work of the very suave and prolific Lawrence is greatly under-appreciated. "Authority", indeed, and great dash. And what gentleman among us wouldn't seem at his best be-medaled, epaulettes glistening, a greatcoat flung dramatically round his shoulders, while low-slung, smoky and strategically lit clouds roil behind him; not at all unlikely that so much "atmosphere" would bring on a coughing fit... but, ah, the glamour!
DeleteAnd by the way, your visits have not left the slightest parfum de la putain, and your thoughtful comments are greatly appreciated.
One of the great delights of a newly discovered blog is to spend evenings catching up with what has gone before---and as I browse the various postings I am staggered by the richness of imagery and the thought put into their selection, to say nothing of the briskly written essays which occasionally accompany the picture gallery. The posts on Thomas Lawrence had me taking one of my favourite books from the shelf: The English Face, by David Piper. I assume you know it? If not, do procure a copy (preferably the expanded, full colour version published by the National Portrait Gallery in 1992) where you will find your own sensibilities reflected in the author's text.
ReplyDeleteYou are far too kind, Mr. Worthington, I'm sure. But I do appreciate it. I don't own the book you mention, but I catch some whiff of recollection, so I must have encountered it at some point; I'll seek it out. Thank you.
DeleteHello: I am joining the discussion a bit late but, as an admirer of Sir Thomas Lawrence I could not resist the opportunity to say something positive about him. As Douglas Goldring pointed out in his excellent biography of Lawrence "Regency Portrait Painter" (1951), Lawrence had very bad press since he died. For example; in 1913, Sir Walter Armstrong (1850-1918), a very prestigious late Victorian art historian, wrote a fairly nasty biography of Sir Thomas Lawrence accusing him of corrupting British painting. Douglas Goldring was the first one to set the record straight and in 1979 Sir Michael Levey paid a brilliant and well deserved tribute to the wonder-boy of Bristol in the catalogue to the exhibition dedicated to Sir Thomas Lawrence organized by the National Portrait Gallery. In fact, Levey's last book (published in 2006) was a magnificent and richly illustrated biography of Lawrence.
ReplyDeleteNever too late! Thank you for your comments. I think Lawrence a brilliant painter; I've never understood why he isn't mentioned more, lauded more, by art historians.
DeleteHello Stephen: I have been an admirer of your blog for quite a long time. I agree with you about Lawrence; in fact, yesterday I found more evidence of the contempt in which he was held: "The art of portrait painting on the death of Reynolds fell into a decadence from which it is only now recovering. The period which commenced with Lawrence and ended with Shee has seldom been surpassed for meretricious show or bald incapacity in the annals of the Art in any country." THE ART JOURNAL No. 77 (May 1868, p.95)
ReplyDeleteThank you so much. I appreciate that!
DeleteFunny that the critic mentions Reynolds, an artist whose reputation has slid markedly since the time of the writer's assessment.