![](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgx9Mdnb6VeJu0y0D5_zLB5ZS76IaFxu3d3FBkWgUsTA2ofmpitmIU8RjwsCnrWgDpqUqZeE-8S47eTO5q4ackFcao2hSFi2smImU9qCGaC7RKZLUlOaMBrx-v11yj6RtLkJGsMzw/s800/Fantin-Latour.jpg)
Fantin-Latour, Portrait of a Woman, 1885
![](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjPV5G7XTvOPVg9pNcKiSXN__3HL7BHBSCI1CFRc-QEjfG4w0JzBqoBC5LebtKI4PktcX6qrXJaKN9Gun_c1NnaF4SDCx_1pHmmRGPvTi7ZzlAc_m6Fxd1lUldFxkqqXHAJJ6o9Ug/s800/Degas.jpg)
Degas, Portrait of a Woman in Gray, 1865
Fantin-Latour gives us a more interesting woman, but Degas gives us the more interesting painting. Characterization is secondary, that would follow the logic of modernism. Or did Degas give both a richer material experience (and a richer depiction of material experience) and a richer characterization of a duller person?
Both paintings are in the collection of the Met. They hang side by side.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Comment moderation is enabled.