Both John Pope-Hennessy's The Portrait in the Renaissance and Patricia Simons's Women in Frames: The Gaze, the Eye, the Profile in Renaissance Portraiture discuss the ways in which portraiture during the Quattrocento was used to inform the public. Portraiture during this time was used to inform and educate the public, establishing both political and social standing. Simons responds to Pope-Hennessy's article with a strong argument: portraits of women had different connotations than those of men. Pope-Hennessy sets the stage for this argument, giving the reader a comprehensive history of portraiture during this time. Although comprehensive, Pope-Hennessy barely skims over women portraiture. Whereas Simons's delves deeper, giving a more critical analysis between the representation of men versus women.
Pope-Hennessy takes the reader through the emergence of portraiture to the height during the Renaissance. In his thesis, he asserts that portraits were a symbol of power, both historically and politically. Portraiture paintings …show more content…
As addressed in the beginning of her argument, Simons acknowledges that art historians have been slow to discuss the differences between men and women during the Renaissance (Simons, 40.) Taking into consideration the gender politics at play during the Renaissance, it gives female portraiture a whole new meaning. When compared to their male counter parts, the gaze of the female subject does not meet that of the viewer, unlike portraits of male. The side profile shifts from simply an artistic choice to one of suppression and isolation. What sold me on Simons's thesis was, not only her understanding of the patriarchal systems in play during the Renaissance, but her comparison of literature and portraiture. Liberally written about, the female gaze had the power to destroy men, piercing them and turning them to stone. Yet, when painted, their eyes are averted, submissive and
Pope-Hennessy takes the reader through the emergence of portraiture to the height during the Renaissance. In his thesis, he asserts that portraits were a symbol of power, both historically and politically. Portraiture paintings …show more content…
As addressed in the beginning of her argument, Simons acknowledges that art historians have been slow to discuss the differences between men and women during the Renaissance (Simons, 40.) Taking into consideration the gender politics at play during the Renaissance, it gives female portraiture a whole new meaning. When compared to their male counter parts, the gaze of the female subject does not meet that of the viewer, unlike portraits of male. The side profile shifts from simply an artistic choice to one of suppression and isolation. What sold me on Simons's thesis was, not only her understanding of the patriarchal systems in play during the Renaissance, but her comparison of literature and portraiture. Liberally written about, the female gaze had the power to destroy men, piercing them and turning them to stone. Yet, when painted, their eyes are averted, submissive and