Tuesday Open Thread: Lost Portrait of Jane Austen Edition
Alert Janeite Julie T. was visiting her son at the Rhode Island School of Design and visited the school’s Museum of Art, where she spotted a portrait that may just be what Jane Austen scholars have long been looking for.
(click for larger version)
Could this shaky photo, sneakily taken with an iPhone, be…the long-lost, long-sought REAL portrait of Jane Austen??? The hair! The eyes! The topaze cross! Perhaps there has been a conspiracy over two centuries to hide this portrait from public view; hide it in plain sight among the many portraits in the gallery…
The Secret Sisterhood of the Lost Austen Portrait have guarded its secret lo these many years, but AustenBlog has winkled it out! You read it here first, Gentle Readers! And there is no truth to the scurrilous rumor that this will be the subject of Dan Brown’s next book.
*removes tongue from cheek*
(And we must add that having met Julie T. for the first time at the AGM, we are all astonishment that she could possibly have adult children! She looks much too young!)
So what’s new and happening in your corner of Janeiteville? As always with Tuesday Open Threads, feel free to pimp your own websites and projects here.
Comments are closed.
You’re heartily good at winkling.
Lost… in Rhode Island!
Coming soon from ITV!
Ok Julie T., what does the name plaque say? Who is claiming her as their great, great, great granny? Hmm? These things can sometimes be winkled out of genealogy records too!
Laurel Ann (who can boast about finding out a little about nothing)
*Pimp*Pimp*Pimp*
Shameless pimping away here on behalf of Henry Tilney, since no mention has been made elsewhere of his arrival in the building. Poor publicity planning I gather on the part of the event mistress, but I assure you he is there for your edification and delight.
http://austenprose.wordpress.com/2008/10/13/go-gothic-with-northanger-abbey-guest-blogger-margaret-sullivan-chats-about-henry-tilney/
Cheers, LA
After careful perusal of this image of an image of a painting, I must conclude that it is not Ms. Austen. But wait: this may still be a historical find. That shawl, for instance. It’s certainly ample enough to hide something, even something as sizeable as a hunting rifle. And if you’ll notice, there’s a tiny brown blob in the lower left corner that could just possibly be a moose. Finally, look at the subject herself and the vacuity of her expression. In short, I believe this to be a portrait of an ancestress of Sarah Palin.
Doggone it Cynthia, I betcha you’re right!
Off topic: Kate Beaton has another Jane cartoon on her site: http://beatonna.livejournal.com. Here’s one of the comments: “LOL! I love these! Especially the last one, I’m pursuing an MA in English, and LOVED Jayne Eyre.
” Oooops.
Cynthia and Maria-LOL!
Something else completely off the topic. Naomi Wolf has written an article in the New York Times on some of the books targeted towards teens and young adult women where she briefly contrasts them with Austen, Alcott and Bronte. The books include the Gossip Girls series and other similar depressing and scary series. It is just a quick contrast with how the girls in these books so easily adopt shallow, materialistic values compared to young women who hold views opposing the “the great house” in Austen, et al. Here’s the link if you want to check it out and be totally depressed for the rest of the afternoon.
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/12/books/review/12wolf.html?pagewanted=2&em
Sue–I think she was being tongue in cheek! I hope so, anyway!
LA–I was going to post it! But it was open thread day!
I just sent this message to RISD — let’s see if they respond!
Dear RISD museum, a prominent blog focusing on Jane Austen is speculating that one of the paintings displayed in your recently renovated European gallery is of Jane Austen. The painting is captured in one of your website shots of the gallery: it is the lady (a solo bust/head) below a gentleman in a blue sash in a circular frame, which is below an Elizabethan-looking gentleman.
Could someone at the musseum please check the little name plate on the frame of the lady’s painting, or check other records, and post onto the “austenblog” website? I’m sure the folks who read that blog would get a real treat if you did. Here is the site:
http://www.austenblog.com/2008/10/14/tuesday-open-thread-lost-portrait-of-jane-austen-edition/#more-3421
FYI, I’m a big fan of RISD, although I didn’t go there; I got an architecture bachelors at MIT.
Best Wishes, Edward Sisson
Here is the reply from RISD:
The painting whose location you describe is the following:
John Hoppner
English (1758-1810)
Portrait of a Lady, ca. 1795
30 x 25 inches
Oil on canvas
Given in memory of Sophia Vervena by her Friends 76.011
There is no suggestion in our files that the sitter was Jane Austen. I would be very interested to know the basis of this speculation. Thank you for bringing it to my attention.
Sincerely, Maureen C. O’Brien
1. Because it looks like her!
2. Because we dearly love to laugh!
3. Because the Editrix is a wiseacre!
Hmmm, I notice that the RISD Museum DOES NOT say they have no evidence that the sitter WAS NOT Jane Austen … she would have been 20 years old … when exactly did she acquire that topaze cross?
Coincidence? You be the judge … lol …
Well, she certainly doesn’t resemble Anne Hathaway.
That’s because in 1795 she was still in the process of Becoming Jane. I think this portrait may have been done before she started playing baseball…
Here is bio info on the painter. Seems unlikely the Austen family could have afforded him:
John Hoppner (April 4?, 1758 – January 23, 1810), English portrait-painter, was born in Whitechapel. His father was of German extraction, and his mother was one of the German attendants at the royal palace. Hoppner was consequently brought early under the notice and received the patronage of George III… .
He first exhibited at the Royal Academy In 1780. His earliest love was for landscape, but necessity obliged him to turn to the more lucrative business of portrait painting. At once successful, he had throughout life the most fashionable and wealthy sitters, and was the greatest rival of the growing attraction of Lawrence. … . The prince of Wales visited him especially often, and many of his finest portraits are in the state apartments at St. James’s Palace, the best perhaps being those of the prince, the duke and duchess of York, of Lord Rodney and of Lord Nelson, Among his other sitters were Sir Walter Scott, the Duke of Wellington, Frere and Sir George Beaumont.
Competent judges have deemed his most successful works to be his portraits of women and children. A Series of “Portraits of Ladies” was published by him in 1803… . He was confessedly an imitator of Reynolds. When first painted, his works were much admired for the brilliancy and harmony of their colouring, but the injury due to destructive mediums and lapse of time which many of them suffered caused a great depreciation in his reputation. The appearance, however, of some of his pictures in good condition has shown that his fame as a brilliant colourist was well founded. … . Hoppner was a man of great social power, and had the knowledge and accomplishments of a man of the world.
The best account of Hoppner’s life and paintings is the exhaustive work by William McKay and W Roberts (1909). Hoppner married Phoebe Wright, the daughter of American-born sculptor Patience Wright. This article incorporates text from the Encyclopædia Britannica Eleventh Edition, a publication now in the public domain.
Edward, as an artist I can tell you we don’t ONLY do things just for money … sometimes we do things just because we want to. We’re funny that way.
Not that I’m arguing that the portrait IS Jane, but I did already know Hoppner’s history and don’t think that in and of itself necessary precludes it. The thing that I think comes closest to precluding it was that Jane’s own temperament probably meant that she was unlikely to think sitting for a portrait of herself was a very good use of her time, lol.
Thanks for the eruption of hilarity Edward. The bio of Hoppner neglected to mention that in 1815, Sir Walter Scott was so moved after reading Emma that he went through a bathroom time portal in Hammersmith to arrive in the Austen’s attic at Steventon in 1795 to meet Jane Austen and commission the portrait by Hoppner. That explains everything, — at least for me!
The good people at RISD have a lovely portrait, that can now become a shrine. The pilgrimage begins.
See! Portrait of “A Lady”! That was her pen name, so it MUST be her!!!
(Thanks for the laughs, all)
Dear Fine-Eyed, I thought I would acquit myself of the appearance of not knowing that artists often work for the love of doing the work, not for money, by mentioning my undergrad degree is architectural design, and I spent close to 10 years producing avant garde theater based in San Francisco (mid 1978 to Dec. 1987). It’s just that the bio says that Hoppner’s preference was to do landscapes, but the need for money led him to do portraits.
How fun! Alas, Jane didn’t receive her topaz cross from Charles until 1801.