George Washington 1795

Editor: Here we have Adolph Ulrich Wertmuller's "George Washington," painted in 1795. It's oil on canvas and held at the Metropolitan Museum of Art. The figure of Washington feels very…composed. What do you see in this piece that I might be missing? Curator: Ah, yes, composed. Almost too composed, wouldn’t you say? He's got that stern look, sure, but look at the fabric, the powdered wig…all those neoclassical touches almost turn him into a Roman senator rather than a revolutionary. Do you get the sense he’s almost *too* perfect, too idealized to be entirely real? It makes me wonder about the image the artist wanted to create versus who Washington really was. A sort of stage persona! Editor: Definitely. There's a deliberate formality, a clear statement. Is that typical of portraiture of leaders at this time? Curator: Spot on! It's the era, isn't it? Think back to the French Revolution… the American experiment was finding its footing. Artists aimed to convey stability and strength, maybe even borrowing from those revered classical ideals, especially the whole Republic thing, rather than presenting someone warts and all! There is no denying that we should make him perfect. But does it feel truthful, you know? What is your intuition telling you? Editor: It feels strategic, more about solidifying an image. The goal being an everlasting appeal to American ideals rather than capturing a genuine likeness. I’ll start looking for signs in other portraits from the time. Thanks. Curator: My pleasure. Keep following your nose! Every artwork’s a story if you ask the right questions.