Five Minutes of British Art

This week’s random blog topic is a bit of an art history lesson!

I’ve only recently taken one art history class, so I’m kind of a poser and can only tell you a little about a little but not a lot about a lot. I’m writing about art history today, though, because I visited the Cincinnati Art Museum this week and began to see the paintings I’ve seen a hundred times through a whole new lens. 

Through this one British art history class in London, my eyes were totally opened to a new way of looking at art that I didn’t understand before. Even more now, I want to be able to learn about all types of art from everywhere — beyond my very narrow understanding of Golden Age British art. I can understand certain thematic elements of pre-Civil War American art, for example, because I know some general history and read a lot of American literature. But I still don’t know certain artists that could make my art-viewing experience that much richer. 

My now-expanded British art knowledge, however, was also aided by my “experiential” learning. In London, my classrooms were some of the most famous art museums in the world. I could physically see what I was learning about. And who knew that a few familiar paintings that aren’t in London are actually in little Cincinnati!   

So when I walked through the British wing of the Cincinnati Art Museum this week, I was geeking out but also frazzled that I was alone and couldn’t explain all these random facts to the helpless person I could’ve dragged along with me. So now it’s going to be you! 

The focal point of the Cincinnati Art Museum’s British wing is of famous British portrait painters Sir Joshua Reynolds and Thomas Gainsborough. They were like the Beyoncés of 18th century aristocratic portraiture. Although mostly equally popular to each other, they have very different styles and backgrounds. Let’s dive into their stories.

Sir Joshua Reynolds

Reynolds was born in 1723 and knighted at age 46 by King George III (ya know, the one we don’t like). He was the first president of the Royal Academy of Arts, which was the institution that promoted art and design, raised the status of artists, and set the standards for organized art.

Reynolds promoted the “Grand Style” of art, which idealized his subjects and was common with the “Old Masters” — that is, da Vinci, Michelangelo, Raphael, etc. of the Italian Renaissance hundreds of years before. 18th century British Art was a bit obsessed with the Old Masters and with copying their style.

This Grand Style Reynolds encouraged can be linked to the fact that he most enjoyed history painting, which is art that is more about historical storytelling than composition. Scenes of Roman history or of mythology are examples of history painting.

Since this style wasn’t very popular by the 18th century, Reynolds mostly painted commissioned portraits for rich or royal people. By painting some subjects in traditional Greco-Roman robes, against ancient backgrounds, with dramatic lighting, or as life-size, Reynolds was able to accomplish his goal of “raising portraiture” to the “intellectual level” of history painting. His paintings were way more metaphorical and dense than someone just sitting in a chair, which is why I think he’s so cool.

  

Thomas Gainsborough

Reynolds’s competitor was Gainsborough, who was born in 1727 and eventually passed Reynolds as the dominant British portraitist of the 18th century.

Like Reynolds, Gainsborough’s preferred type of painting wasn’t portraiture. He was very interested in landscape painting, but unfortunately landscapes wouldn’t become popular until the 19th century. So, Gainsborough also painted commissioned portraits for rich and royal people. His love of landscapes definitely shows up in his paintings as well — most of his subjects are set outdoors. Unlike Reynolds, Gainsborough was super into fashion, so he put his subjects in the most fashionable clothes of the time — think corsets, ballgowns, and powdered wigs.

Gainsborough’s brush strokes are also very distinctive. You can tell a Gainsborough painting right away from his muted color palette and wispy, light brush strokes that create a sense of movement and indicate a very early nod toward Impressionism.

So What?

Although there is a lot more I could talk about in British art, Reynolds and Gainsborough have been on my mind because of the Cincinnati Art Museum’s excellent exhibit of their works. Both artists were very influenced by famous Flemish painter Antony Van Dyck. Van Dyck’s influence brought to Britain their own renaissance, as the status of the artist became celebrity and they started studying the Italian masters. No longer was Britain tied down by two-dimensional Reformation art with anonymous artists. Art began to flourish and eventually transitioned into landscape painting, Victorian “art for art’s sake,” and Impressionism by the beginning of the 20th century.

I used to think that art history might be boring, but I didn’t give it a fair chance until recently. I hope I haven’t bored you too much! Art history can feel a little lofty and unattainable, but I’ve realized that art history combines my love of creativity and storytelling.

It’s also really cool to contextualize art within my knowledge of literary history — the “how” and “why” all kind of fits together somehow. I find this stuff incredibly interesting now, and I can’t wait to get back to London and stroll through the National Gallery once again.

I personally prefer Reynolds’ paintings because they’re very dramatic, symbolic, and tied to history, but Gainsborough’s romanticism can’t be beat. Which do you like best?