Paintings Worth Looking At

This story starts with an entirely different painting, by an entirely different artist. It arrives at the right answer despite itself. - - - PART I. THE MIX-UP - - - I first encountered this charming double portrait on an online auction site, allegedly sold as the work of Deacon Robert Peckham. It’s a lovely folk depiction of children in an interior, which, in all fairness, was Peckham’s specialty. As is typical for the style and era, they’re bright, alert, and look like they know too much. Notably, the props include a chapbook (a small printed pamphlet book for children) and a rose.

In which “eminently artless” turns into “more than average merit.”  Last time , I wrote about Peckham’s portrait of the famous poet and abolitionist John Greenleaf Whittier, explaining the good Deacon’s ties to the anti-slavery cause. After all, there’s plenty to discuss about the strength of his beliefs, not just his artistic skills. Regrettably, this led to the disappointing finale: Whittier didn’t like Peckham’s portraits, and considered him “eminently artless.”  Or did he?  My post-article follow-up research revealed an astounding revelation: Whittier actually approved of Peckham’s portrait, saying that it captured his youthful image. He may or may not have once called him “eminently artless,” but he liked the picture well enough. 

The art of resemblance is a tricky one. People don’t like being committed to memory in an unflattering likeness (just ask any photographer). Historically, artists often chose to enhance a person’s appearance, smoothing out any blemishes and modifying their features for the better. Most frequently, portraits aspired towards whatever the contemporary ideal of conventional beauty happened to be, which varied widely over time and culture. However, the underlying principle is the same: Don’t make them look bad.