Few artists have had a greater influence upon the course of portraiture and history painting than the French Neoclassical painter Jacques-Louis David. His canvasses evoked heavy emotion simply not found in the preceding frivolous Rococo era, a severity the artist gravitated to as various governments traded off. First, the conflicting grandeur and inequity of Louis XVI’s Ancien Régime, then the tumultuous French Revolution, and finally the magnificently short lived rule of Napoleon. Ultimately, not only is David’s work inseparable from its historical context, he shaped his historical context in a way few other artists had done through his active participation in the French revolution. This close connection with the prominent intellectuals of
…show more content…
The most immediately noticeable difference in the presentation of both figures is the depiction of their facial expressions. Marie-Anne immediately attracts the viewer’s attention through her direct, outward gaze. Tiny spots of light in her eyes combine with the light pink tint of her cheeks to produce a radiance that complements her slight smile. Lavoisier himself looks up, seemingly trying to make eye contact with his wife, but she is looking away towards the viewer. Rather than a smile, he appears to be displaying a more neutral expression, with no clear expression of emotion except the slightest sense of expectation conveyed through his sideways glance. While Lavoisier’s face does have a hint of the same pink facial tint shared by his wife, his face is also partially shadowed, helping to contribute to the sense that the portrait’s central figure his wife. Marie-Anne demands direct engagement with the viewer, and her husband is almost reduced to vacancy as he looks up at her expectantly. The contrast of these attributes is only further developed in the color, light and shadow of their attire. Madame Lavoisier’s subtly rendered and welcoming face is framed by her hazily rendered curls of hair, which painstakingly blend together both sharp and soft brushstrokes. These …show more content…
Lavoisier’s chemical instruments are prominently displayed on the right side of the canvas, rendered in the sharply naturalistic style characteristic of many of David’s portraits. In particular, the meticulously constructed interplay of light between the chemical instruments and their surroundings elevates the portrait for the observant viewer. Both the spherical glass chamber at the bottom right and the stand of the gilded glass cylinder reflect an image of a window, perhaps the source of light given Lavoisier’s partial illumination. Additionally, the red tablecloth boldly highlights Lavoisier’s coat and scientific instruments, attracting attention to the couple’s environment after the viewer has observed the central figures. This choice seems particularly choreographed, as an expensive velvet tablecloth would be ill suited for scientific experimentation. The other side of the canvas, however, includes an object of significant importance to many scholars who have studied and analyzed this portrait. The Metropolitan Museum of Art’s Heilbrunn Timeline of Art History claims the object is Marie-Anne’s portfolio of drawings, as David taught her the art of illustration. The portfolio appears on the left side as a nondescript green square sitting on the chair that holds Marie-Anne’s coat. Through this placement, the couple visually link it to
The most immediately noticeable difference in the presentation of both figures is the depiction of their facial expressions. Marie-Anne immediately attracts the viewer’s attention through her direct, outward gaze. Tiny spots of light in her eyes combine with the light pink tint of her cheeks to produce a radiance that complements her slight smile. Lavoisier himself looks up, seemingly trying to make eye contact with his wife, but she is looking away towards the viewer. Rather than a smile, he appears to be displaying a more neutral expression, with no clear expression of emotion except the slightest sense of expectation conveyed through his sideways glance. While Lavoisier’s face does have a hint of the same pink facial tint shared by his wife, his face is also partially shadowed, helping to contribute to the sense that the portrait’s central figure his wife. Marie-Anne demands direct engagement with the viewer, and her husband is almost reduced to vacancy as he looks up at her expectantly. The contrast of these attributes is only further developed in the color, light and shadow of their attire. Madame Lavoisier’s subtly rendered and welcoming face is framed by her hazily rendered curls of hair, which painstakingly blend together both sharp and soft brushstrokes. These …show more content…
Lavoisier’s chemical instruments are prominently displayed on the right side of the canvas, rendered in the sharply naturalistic style characteristic of many of David’s portraits. In particular, the meticulously constructed interplay of light between the chemical instruments and their surroundings elevates the portrait for the observant viewer. Both the spherical glass chamber at the bottom right and the stand of the gilded glass cylinder reflect an image of a window, perhaps the source of light given Lavoisier’s partial illumination. Additionally, the red tablecloth boldly highlights Lavoisier’s coat and scientific instruments, attracting attention to the couple’s environment after the viewer has observed the central figures. This choice seems particularly choreographed, as an expensive velvet tablecloth would be ill suited for scientific experimentation. The other side of the canvas, however, includes an object of significant importance to many scholars who have studied and analyzed this portrait. The Metropolitan Museum of Art’s Heilbrunn Timeline of Art History claims the object is Marie-Anne’s portfolio of drawings, as David taught her the art of illustration. The portfolio appears on the left side as a nondescript green square sitting on the chair that holds Marie-Anne’s coat. Through this placement, the couple visually link it to