Art and the Patron - Essay Example

?Art and the patron Art has often been the product of the one paying for the work as much as the one who is creating the imagery. Art is a product, often dictated by the morals of a region, the expressed desires of the patron, or the pressures of a political structure. The work that was first done within the American colonies can be seen to represent the commercial nature of art, the portrait being the prime product and the artist working off of the subject matter expressed by the customer. The evolution of art within the United States to a higher level of culture emerged from the Federalists who had tried to establish an elite class in a nation that was emerging upon the basis of equality. In the dying embers of this world, artists began to come into fashion, creating a refined position within culture. Artists have been subject to the morality, philosophy, and social construction of their time and American artists have had to navigate these frameworks in order to find their place within the cultural context. Art has had to balance a double sided card for most of its existence, the expression of the artist tempered by the desires of the patron or authority over the artist to dictate the theme and representations that the artist uses. It is a rare moment in time when an artist has true control over those things that he or she wishes to depict within his or her art. The hidden elements that are not always obvious to the patron or the controlling party have been one of the joys that artists have been able to use to express their individual point of view within a dictated framework. As time has progressed, the types of hold that patrons have had over the theme and content of the work has changed, but artists are often subjected to control in order to appease those who are willing to support their work. The privilege of total freedom is rare and has been denied to artists even within the expectations placed upon American art. The nature of artistic freedom has been subjected to morality, flattery, and the need to represent themes that suited the national rhetorical discourse. The economic needs of the individual to survive have been in tension with the need to express artistic vision throughout history. In New England in the 17th century, the trend of portraiture followed from England as a form of artistic employment, artists needing the patronage of those who desired their portraits to be done by them in order to create a form of wage for their work. Craven (1998) discusses the idea that the concept of the portrait as a commercial product was dependent upon a sufficient number of elite in the region who were willing to spend money on such a transaction. He goes on to discuss how very talented artists came to American with the realization that their former training and income resource was likely to not be profitable enough in the new land in order to make a living so they were forced to take on other similar work such as painting signs or the interiors of houses. Because of the influx of immigrants that were of Dutch origins, there is evidence of the influences of Dutch portraiture aesthetics in many of the works from the 17th century American artists. Therefore, there is a long history of competent and extensive studies on Dutch art from American scholars (Liedtke, 2000). The influences of Dutch portraiture can be seen in the beginnings of a developing style in early American-European settlements as in evidence by the Freake portraitures. According to Roark (2003) the Freake portraits, done by an unknown artist, is the largest existing collection of artworks from this region and from this time in American history. The paintings share similar characteristics that suggest training in the art of portraiture as well as a defined perspective on how to represent the individual. Craven (1998) discusses the nature of the paintings in reference to the way in which they make social statements about the subjects of the paintings, the hair of the patriarch of the family, John Freake wore his hair naturally and shoulder length which was symbolic of a rejection of the conceits of the aristocracy while also giving evidence of the religion of his class as a merchant. Short hair was a sign of being a Puritan and as well could be taken as a sign of being of a lower class. Therefore, creating a length at his shoulder made it clear that he could not be put into the elitist and highly criticized aristocratic classes that were being criticized for their extravagance, but neither was he in a class that was defined by either poverty of economics or imposed poverty through Puritanical standards. The Dutch aesthetics were being applied to a new philosophical perspective, the social construction of the works having importance in creating a distinction about the subjects. Dutch painting used the commoner as a subject for portraits. In the American framework this was re-defined as a middle class distinction. The Freake portraits represented the economic structure and philosophical American perspective. While there is no established record to prove one way or another the standards through which the length of his hair were dictated, it is likely that this was the choice of the subject, perhaps in concert with the desires of the artist, but serving the desires of the customer in order to establish a social statement about something he felt was relevant to the image he wished portrayed on the portrait. The importance of the philosophical climate that was rising in the American colonies was important as the middle class was emerging with stronger and stronger economic status, turning away from ‘old’ money that represented undeserved extravagance and a disdain for the people from whom most of those in the middle class knew and from whom they had come into existence. Wallach (1998) discusses the need for a reflection of the middle class aesthetics and their philosophical perspective in the art that was emerging in the 18th century. The artist Thomas Cole was placed at the center of the continuation of old aristocratic philosophies which tended to take possession of culture, to “help perpetuate, in a new form, old claims of superiority” (Wallach, 1998, p. 82). Cole, a noted landscape artist, first found popularity with Philip Hone who was lauded as an example of aristocracy had it existed in America. Hone’s obituary defined him as an example of leadership with the ‘ton’, a term for the elite classes that were defined by their fashionable tendencies and presence within the elite (Wallach, 1998). In other time periods they would have been known as ‘old Hollywood, jet setters, or more contemporary terms, victims of the paparazzi. Hone was a man who was watched by others in order to help define what was in fashion and to give value to that which would be considered valuable within the cultural identity of America. Through elevating American artists and making their work fashionable, Hone contributed to creating a sense of finery to the art that was being produced in America. There had been a belief that anything from the new land could not compare to the European culture. Hone contributed in creating a place for American art as refined examples of artistic expression. One of the prices paid, however, for the ambition to be accepted as a notable artist was to bend to the will of others as Cole attempted to create works that would be desired by the American elite. As an example, a patron asked for a painting of ‘Indians’ (Native Americans” and Cole made an attempt to carry out this request, only to have it changed after the painting had been begun. Changing the theme, he offered the painting to another and redefined the work he was doing for the original request as one that was similar to one he had sold to Hone (Cole, Wadsworth, & McNulty, 1983). In making attempts to satisfy his clientele, Cole was put in a position to create work that was dictated by the desires of those paying him to create. According to Wallach (1998), Cole, however, was not violating his own aesthetics when he created works that would appeal to the elite. John Trumbull, considered a part of the Federalist elite, recognized in the work of Cole a sensibility that appealed to those who believed in the elitist. Wallach (1998) states that “Trumbull intuited in Cole’s work something that fulfilled his own artistic aspirations and need, and he guessed, rightly as it turned out, that others with a similar background and outlook would respond in a similar manner” (p. 87). Cole was reaching for a mythic and romanticized version of the rise of the elite and its subsequent descent within the American social landscape. This appealed to those who were wistful and reminiscent of this perspective (Wallach, 1998). One of the ways in which artists contribute to the place and time in which they work is to represent their social and cultural heritage. The work can represent the worst of their time period, acting as cautionary messages to future generations or as honorable representations that create a discourse on the myths and the framed identities of a culture. Goya’s work that depicted the horrors of the Spanish Civil War have served as both historical reminders of those horrors and as cautionary messages about the terror that comes from violent conflicts (Greeley, 2006). These works, however, were not done for a patron or for someone who was directing his work, but most likely as work that was cathartic for Goya, purging his soul of the memories that were haunting him. The work of William Sidney Mount is an example of work that was designed to embody the emergence of the American framework of morality, his images, seemingly simple images of the antebellum era, constructed to be a synthesis of the “Dutch bourgeois tradition and the American vernacular” (Oedel & Gernes, 1998, p. 128). Mount is an example of how the aesthetics of an artist come into harmony with his audience, his work creating the voice that is needed to express what the masses are feeling. While most artists end up struggling against the expectations of patrons, an artist such as Mount finds a voice that allows his message to be a centering force through which a generation speaks. His work expressed the fears about the instability that was being experienced in reference to the American identity, a return to the morality of the type of life pre-industrialization that defined who Americans expected themselves to represent. In modern terms this experience can be compared to the instability of the 1960s as the chaos of social revolution put in jeopardy the image of the 1950’s form of the American Dream. Images of what was considered a simpler time could mollify those fears. For those in the 19th century images that Mount created helped to point to the American identity. The accessibility of Mount’s work was a core principle from which it worked. He painted images that could be understood from multiple levels of understanding. The middle-class aesthetic is founded on the idea that it is accessible by anyone who chooses to look at the work, the interpretation being just as valid from a simple point of view as that from a more complex perspective. The direct influence of the patron as seen coming from the European influence was redefined to include the essential nature of exploring a public discourse in which art reflected something of the contemporary period from which it emerged. The relationship of the elite classes to art was transformed into a relationship with a larger public. This transcendence can be seen to continue into the 20th century when art became less representational and more expressive, the artist finally freed from the structures of even the moralistic constraints that held the 19th century artists in stasis (Cork, 1976). Art became as much a part of the public construction of identity as that of the power that the elite have over the fashion of art. Artists have always worked under the pressure of social expectations, their work being relevant through decisions of fashion and contemporary philosophy. Craven (1998) discusses the idea of the patron as dictating subject matter in order to serve the economic transaction while Wallach (1998) expresses the position of the artist to try to find favor through fashion. Oedel and Gernes (1998) reveal that the change in audience is central to understanding the development of aesthetics as they relate to a contemporary culture. All of them discuss the imposed impressions of the time period upon the act of creation. The nature of art becomes a product of time, intrinsically related to the cultural aesthetics of the period and the economic position of the artist. References Cole, T., Wadsworth, D., & McNulty, J. B. (1983). The correspondence of Thomas Cole and Daniel Wadsworth: Letters in the Watkinson Library, Trinity College, Hartford, and in the New York State Library, Albany, New York. Hartford, Conn: Connecticut Historical Society. Cork, R. (1976). Origins and development. Berkeley, Calif: Univ. of California. Craven, W. (1998). The seventeenth century New England mercantile image: Social content and style in the Freake portraits. In Doezema, M. (Eds.). Reading American art (1-11). New Haven: Yale Univ. Press. Doezema, M. (1998). Reading American art. New Haven: Yale Univ. Press. Greeley, R. A. (2006). Surrealism and the Spanish Civil War. New Haven, Conn: Yale University Press. Liedtke, W. (2000). The study of Dutch art in America. Artibus et Historiae. 21 (41) 207-220. Oedel, W. T. & T. S. Gernes. (1998). The painter’s triumph: William Sidney Mount ad the formation of middle-class art. In Doezema, M. (Eds.). Reading American art (128-149). New Haven: Yale Univ. Press. Roark, E. L. (2003). Artists of colonial America. Westport, Conn.: Greenwood Press. Wallach, A. (1998). Thomas Cole and the aristocracy. In Doezema, M. (Eds.). Reading American art (79-99). New Haven: Yale Univ. Press. Read More