Women in Art - 500 years of Female Portraits

[Kabir]

I've never seen this kind of work before. A compilation of 500 Years of Female Portraits in Western Art.

The person who sent me this asked me to watch it with both sound on, and off. Don't know what she meant, coz I just found the compilation part super amazing.

Experts in this area: Can you please explain some of these faces? The only one I know of is Monalisa

[Rabz]

Great compliation indeed.
Thanks Kabir bhai for the video.

Was the first potrait was that of Mary, mother of Jesus?
Not sure but thats what seems to me atleast, with her head tilting on the side, sort of symbolic shot of hers.

One of the potraits was that of Anna Boleyn, one of Henry VIII's wives. She was the second of six wives of the King of England who even though beheaded by the King in charge of witchcraft, incest and adultery in 1536, given birth to the greatest Queen of them all, Queen Elizabeth I.



And offcourse, QE I must be there as well.



Im sure couple of the King's other wives also there.

Other historic names such as Queen Mary Antonneite of France should be present as well. Im guessing the one with the fluffy long medieval hat is her.

Not particuarly an expert on this field, so also expecting some wiser members here would enlighten us with few other names.

[layperson]

Kabir the video you put is eerie !!!! raat e ghum hobe nah amar ekhon

[P.Warner]

This is a fascinating subject and I thank you for posting the video here. My favourite artform is portraiture through the brush and through lens.
The Virgin Mary is not the first portrait but it is perhaps the earliest survived theme within the western tradition that has continued over a process of two thousand years. Before the canvas there would have been murals painted in churches or religious buildings. While I do not wish to lower the tone of discussions, but many a bathhouse in ancient Greece, Anatonia (present day Turkey) and the Near-East (Middle-East) would have had pictures of men and women enjoined in sexual union. These should not be discounted as art just because there appears to be more historial value attached to them.
If figures are to be believed 90-95% of the human population are heterosexual. Since the majority of artists and artisans would have been male (painting would still have been considered a craft until we come to renaissance, when their status is suddenly elevated), their aesthetic gaze would not leave the beautiful female alone. What is so interesting when you look at depictions of women through the ages is how the notions of beauty has changed. Before the advent of television, and for that matter half-tone printing, the general public would only see other cultures through paintings, that would be hung in rich men's private galleries or public galleries. In Europe, the public collection does not really materialise until late into the 18th century.
A point that feminists have raised with regards to representation of the female body is that men through their male gaze have created a specific look of the woman that fellow men find exciting. This gaze, or this way of looking at the world through the man's eyes is called the 'androcentric fallacy'. The post-colonial scholarship extends this fallcy to include the perspective of Anglo-Saxon white men, not all men. I tend to personally agree with this latter position as women are still subjugated in paintings from Japan, China or the Persian/Mughal courts but this subjugation is a reflection of systematic dominance of men over women in these countries.

I must cut short this discussion as it is time to feed my cat!

[Rabz]

Good insight Mr Warner.
Please do carry on.

[Xavier]

I'm ashamed to say that though being italian I have never been much interested (let alone expert) in art. But I found the video to be really nice.
What I can say about Monna Lisa is that I once heard that it is reported to possibly be a sort of Leonardo's self-portrait, as he was maybe homosexual (like many other artists).

[Kabir]

Thanks guys. It wasn't me who made the video, so all credits goes to the person who actually made it. I wonder how many human-hours went into this. It sure looks like an expensive work.

Thanks to Sydney and Mr. Warner for their input. Actually, I have no clue about all these...I was just fascinated by the work.

I would consider myself in the same place as Xavier.

These artwork carry some huge weight in them. I don't know how to analyze them, or can't even tell what they mean at first look. Oh well, my eyes weren't made for that may be.

[Tigers_eye]

Originally Posted by Kabir
.... Oh well, my eyes weren't made for that may be.

Khali dui nombor magazine'er dikay chok? mouj koirey now. kodin por ar parba na. choti boi babubhai'rey diye dao.

[Nasif]

Originally Posted by Tigers_eye
Khali dui nombor magazine'er dikay chok? mouj koirey now. kodin por ar parba na. choti boi babubhai'rey diye dao.

Tigers_eye bhai I thought the word choti was coined by our batch (in reference to your use of the word). It seems it has long history.... hahaha

[Kabir]

Originally Posted by P.Warner
What is so interesting when you look at depictions of women through the ages is how the notions of beauty has changed. Before the advent of television, and for that matter half-tone printing, the general public would only see other cultures through paintings, that would be hung in rich men's private galleries or public galleries.

That's a valid point. I think we've also seen another change in this view with the increase of marketing products using women to display the products?

I don't know whether it's true or not, but I've heard that the notion of "thinner is prettier" got to such a point, that there's now a law in the advertising/fashion industry that do not allow inclusion of models that are painfully thin?

The post-colonial scholarship extends this fallcy to include the perspective of Anglo-Saxon white men, not all men. I tend to personally agree with this latter position as women are still subjugated in paintings from Japan, China or the Persian/Mughal courts but this subjugation is a reflection of systematic dominance of men over women in these countries.

When you say Mughal, do you mean Kamasutra type of representations? I have very little knowledge about the Japanese/Chinese paintings, so would be nice to hear more about that.

This topic is making me interested by the way.

[P.Warner]

Dear Kabir and Sydney,

Thank you for your responses.

When I spoke of Persian influenced Mughal paintings I wasn't referring to pre-islamic art in India. That in itself should form another thread as it is worthy of discussion by its own merit. The representation of men and women are rather more complex in the 'kamasutra' type sculpture and art. In truth, some anthropologists and feminist writers thought of them as rather more egalitarian. My point about Mughal paintings and comparing it to Japanese and Chinese art from their own imperial days was just to make a general point about how women were portrayed. In India, the painters were treated more as artisans than artists like in pre-renaissance Europe. This was quite a major stmbling block for talented artists who would have to look for patronage from major courts and would have to paint in a particular way. This would also desist any intelligent or self-taught artists who wanted to pursue a career in other fields to make more money. This is not an Indian specific problem but the Italian, dutch and French painters had managed to free themselves by the industrial revolution.

Our discussion is about the way the female is portrayed. China and Japan were patriarchal societies. This does not mean there were no powerful women at all exercising political and economic powers as we saw in India throughout the ages, but it was the norm for artistic works to be commissioned by men. The still life was a very popular theme in the far-east and birds, plants, flowers were commonplace. Many famous artists had their work copied for mass consumption as well. The women painted were inevitably very beautiful as it did not make sense to portray the unaesthetic. I don't wish to use the term 'ugly' or unaesthetic as a negetive way here. We see little of the unaesthetic whether it be in the female form or still life until post-second world war paintings from the far east.

As for marketing products using women to sell their products, I am of the belief that men are also used to market products! Many feminists would not agree with me at all but I think that the reason women are portrayed in advertising rather more than men because certain products are for the woman. Women simply buy more so it would be useful to use a female model. As for men's products and expensive electronic or motoring items, men still get paid more and to pander to their needs makes sense for the advertiser. Is there an inherent problem here? Indeed there is but it is nothing more than a reflection of society where women are still perceived as unequal to men in many societies in the world.

Thinner is prettier is a very interesting debate that is going around the western popular magazines like Cosmopolitan and its likes. This issue has been tackled by many contemporary feminists. Feminists such as Susan Bordo, Steinhem, Hanigsberg and even the likes of Catherine Mackinnon had commented on this. If anyone is interested in the two articles by Bordo I seem have here please kindly let me know, I shall scan and reprint them here, however, they are long!

The Italian fashion shows recently banned size zero models from performing. HarveyNichols had recently started to use normal sized women (size 14-16) as their window dressing models. The trend is reversing. However, I personally think that were have a general problem with obesity in the Western World, particularly in USA and UK. We should be adressing that problem far more than the model cases of anorexia-nervosa that seem to be dominate the papers.

[Kabir]

Since Mr. Warner is specially interested in artwork, here's one I just found out on Yahoo.

The video is screen capture of a person drawing Monalisa's portrait using Paint! 2 hours and 30 minutes of work fast tracked to a 5 minute video...Simply amazing!

[Electrequiem]

Originally Posted by Kabir
Since Mr. Warner is specially interested in artwork, here's one I just found out on Yahoo.

The video is screen capture of a person drawing Monalisa's portrait using Paint! 2 hours and 30 minutes of work fast tracked to a 5 minute video...Simply amazing!

Oh.
My.
God.

Simply PHENOMENAL! This guy is INSANELY GOOD!

[ialbd]

the speed painting is just superb, simply brilliant.....

[ammark]

If Only Leo Da Vinci had MS Paint

[Hatebreed]

Originally Posted by Kabir
Since Mr. Warner is specially interested in artwork, here's one I just found out on Yahoo.

The video is screen capture of a person drawing Monalisa's portrait using Paint! 2 hours and 30 minutes of work fast tracked to a 5 minute video...Simply amazing!

Absolute GENIUS! Using MS paint too! Just awesome.

[Kabir]

Not quite relevant to this thread, but it's the weirdest artwork I've ever seen. If you get bored towards the middle, just make sure you check the last 1 minute or so.

[Rabz]

Simply amazing stuff, the video.

[Kabir]

Look at this. If you're not impressed, then tell me.

Mods: Can we have the title changed to something more appropriate, say "Artwork around the world"?

Click To Play

[Anher]

Originally Posted by Kabir
Since Mr. Warner is specially interested in artwork, here's one I just found out on Yahoo.

The video is screen capture of a person drawing Monalisa's portrait using Paint! 2 hours and 30 minutes of work fast tracked to a 5 minute video...Simply amazing!

This guy made da vinci and all peoples who like artworks looks stupid. hahahah. drawing in Microsoft paint!! painting monalisa must be an easy thing.