Yo, why are these eyes so weird?!
Yo, I was just thinking about that the other day! The artist Joshua Johnson was self-taught. He tended to use oval-shaped faces that are more simplified than completely realist shapes. Johnson was influenced by portraits by Charles Willson Peale and the Peale family, for whom he initially may have worked as a servant in Philadelphia.
The very act of commissioning and owning a portrait was often more important to clients of the time than having a completely accurate likeness.
Hello. Why do children in paintings from this time period always look so creepy?
Hi there! That's a great question. At that time many American artists were self-taught since formal art schools and institutions hadn't yet been established in the United States. Rather than journey to Europe, many artists instead looked at prints of famous European paintings. Also, many artists also first worked as decorative sign painters, so they learned to paint large simple shapes with strong outlines.
Joshua Johnson's background is a relative mystery. Some scholars believe he learned painting from the Peales, a famous family of American painters. As an African American working in a very different time, he probably learned a great deal on his own. All these factors may add to the flat and "creepy" look of some faces in his art!
I frequently hear the theory that bodies of children were pre-painted and that the faces were added later. I am dubious. Can you comment?
As far as painting bodies first and adding faces later, that was absolutely a real practice. It was used not just for children, but for adults too. Not all artists worked this way, but it was a method to save time and reduce the length of sitting.
That makes sense. Young children are not likely to sit for portraits for long.
I'm sure you're right. Painting toddlers would be a prime reason to paint a body first and add a face from a quick sketch later.
Thanks for the discussion. I like this format!