Stories abound about the artistic frustration arising from the difficulty in capturing an essential quality – one that, profoundly and fundamentally, conveys both the painter and his subject. For example, it is said that after more than two weeks of fruitless and frustrating attempts to paint the portrait of art dealer Ambroise Vollard, Paul Cézanne complained that he is incapable of sitting still, like an apple. Similarly famous is the story of how Picasso inexplicably failed, even after eighty attempts, to capture Gertrude Stein’s portrait as she sat for him. The eventual portrait, which now resides at the Metropolitan Museum in New York, was finally painted by Picasso retroactively, from memory. Picasso brushed off their acquaintances’ criticism of the portrait, saying, “Everybody says that she does not look like it but that does not make any difference, she will.”

According to the conventional hierarchical rankings that prevailed in art academies until the nineteenth century, portraits were seen as an inferior form of painting compared to other genres, such as allegorical or historical painting, on the grounds that they were based on direct observation of the model, and as such did not require the invocation of imagination or in-depth knowledge of writings. From a contemporary viewpoint, which regards portraits as an artistic constructs, it may be viewed as a complex genre that, combining broad mental, social, and cultural perspectives, holds, as it were, a mirror up to our own nature.

Dr. Aya Lurie
Director and Chief Curator

Less Reading...