The Martin portrait, painted when he was about sixty years old,
represents him seated, his elbows resting on a table, and holding a
document, which he is reading with deep but composed and serene
attention. It was no doubt intended to represent him in a characteristic
attitude. As showing the calm philosopher and diplomat reading and
thinking, somewhat idealized and yet a more or less true likeness, it is
in many respects the best picture we have of him. But we cannot see the
eyes, and it does not reveal as much character as we could wish.
The Grundmann portrait, an excellent photograph of which hangs in the
Philadelphia Library, was painted by a German artist, after a careful
study of Franklin’s career and of all the portraits of him which had
been painted from life. As an attempt to reproduce his characteristics
and idealize them it is a distinct success and very interesting. He is
seated in a chair, in his court-dress, with long stockings and
knee-breeches, leaning back, his head and shoulders bent forward, while
his gaze is downward. He is musing over something, and there is that
characteristic shrewd smile on the lower part of the rugged face. It is
the smile of a most masterful and cunning intellect; but no one fears
it: it seems as harmless as your mother’s. You try to imagine which one
of his thousand clever strokes and sayings was passing through his mind
that day; and the strong, intensely individualized figure, which
resembles that of an old athlete, is wonderfully suggestive of life,
experience, and contest.
But the Duplessis portrait, which was painted from life in Paris in
1778, when he was seventy-two, reveals more than any of them. The Sumner
portrait is Franklin the youth; the Martin and the Grundmann portraits
are Franklin the philosopher and statesman; the Duplessis portrait is
Franklin the man.
[Illustration: THE MARTIN PORTRAIT OF FRANKLIN]
Unfortunately, it is impossible to get a good reproduction of the
Duplessis portrait, because there is so much detail in it and the
coloring and lights and shadows cannot be successfully copied. But any
one who will examine the original or any good replicas of it in oil
will, I am convinced, see Franklin as he really was. The care in
details, the wrinkles, and the color of the skin give us confidence in
it as a likeness. The round, strong, but crude form of the boy of twenty
has been beaten and changed by time into a hundred qualities and
accomplishments, yet the original form is still discernible, and the
face looks straight at us: we see the eyes and every line close at hand.
In this, the best portrait for studying Franklin’s eye, we see at once
that it is the eye of a very sensuous man, and we also see many details
which mark the self-made man, the man who never had been and never
pretended to be an aristocrat. This is in strong contrast to
Washington’s portraits, which all disclose a man distinctly of the upper
class and conscious of it.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account