In one by Caravaggio, in its instantaneousness and stunning

In what wayshas methodology/theory determined the historiography of Gentileschi’s -“Judithand Holofernes” and Rego’s “Dog Woman”? What theoretical toolscould beused tocontribute further or fresh interpretations of these works and shared theme of”The Body”? Artemisia’smasterpiece, the “Judith andHolofernes” famous in two renditions (Rome, ca.

1612– 13 andUffizi, ca. 1620) delineates two women murdering a defenceless man—a standoutamongst the most chilling shows of female power at any point made—is vulgarlychanged over into a sexual emulate, in which Judith triumphs over Holofernesand crawls into intimacy with him. Artemisia being a rape victim should in someway or another have related to Judith, and however some have tried tolimit Judith’ s obvious viciousness by naming the piece a unimportantreprisal picture, it is for the most part comprehended that the artisticexpressive power was probably going to have been filled by personal emotion.

Best services for writing your paper according to Trustpilot

Premium Partner
From $18.00 per page
4,8 / 5
Writers Experience
Recommended Service
From $13.90 per page
4,6 / 5
Writers Experience
From $20.00 per page
4,5 / 5
Writers Experience
* All Partners were chosen among 50+ writing services by our Customer Satisfaction Team

             Artemisia’s painting is a standout amongst the most wicked and strikingpictures of the scene, outperforming the one by Caravaggio, in itsinstantaneousness and stunning realism. Artemisia was surely acquainted withthe Caravaggio’s version. Artemisia’s dad – Orazio, who was in charge of herart education, was a companion of Caravaggio and a painter. Caravaggio,enlivened, and was maybe even challenged, by youthful Artemisia.  For the canvas, the artist chose the moment when the Israeli Judith,seduced by the Assyrian commander Holofernes, whose army besieged her hometown,kills him. Gentileschi depicts a bloody scene with frightening details: themaid tries to keep distraught Holofernes with fear, and Judith grabs him by thehair and thrusts into the neck the blade of the sword. Painting Caravaggio, who also portrayed Judith and Holofernes, Davidwith Goliath’s head, distinguished dramatic drama. The influence of this masterexplains the complex poses in the painting Gentileschi, and the bright whitelight, like a flash of lightning, snatching out of the darkness of the figure.

Like her correspondence teacher, Gentileschi skilfully depicts a human body,now strong and tense, like the hands of Judith, now soft and almost helpless,like the shoulders and feet of Holofernes.Developing around the invisible axis of the composition, the forcedemotions of the characters, some theatricality inherent in the depicted – theseare the signs of baroque art, in which the artist showed herself. Correlation between the pieces isn’t just her obligation to the painter,yet it is addition of various acute changes that escalate the force of physicalbattle, the measure of blood spilled and the physical and mental quality ofJudith and her damsel. In Artemisia’s version the blood sheets are in thefrontal area, alongside the space of the watcher.

The powerful body ofHolofernes progressively distends into the delineated space, since dauntlessterritories of light and murkiness attract attention to its strong limbs. And most importantly, while Caravaggio joins her delicate Judith with ahaggard servant who just looks at her, her eyes are wide open with disbelief,Artemisia portrays two strong young women working in unison, their sleevesfolded, their views are focused, their pens are solid. Judith of Caravaggiogracefully departs from her terrible task; Judith of Artemesia does not flinch.

Instead, she clings to the bed as she presses Holofernes’s head with one handand pulls the big sword across the neck to the other. The wrinkles on herwrists clearly show physical strength. Holofernes fights in vain, the pull ofhis hands is opposed to the more power movement of Abras, Judith’s accomplicein this terrible act. Uffizi “Judith and Holofernes”is the second story of Artemisia about this narrative. The first, executed inRome c.

1611-12, and now in the museum of Capodimonte in Naples, a dynamiccomposition is presented, focused on traction and oncoming traction of longlimbs. Artemisia specified the composition in the second (Uffizi) version.Small but significant adjustments show her growing technical skills, herunderstanding of the local Florentine taste for luxurious fabrics and herthoughtful consideration of the expressive potential of every detail. Fragmentsof anatomy and proportions have been corrected (for example, the Holofernes),the colors and textures of the tissues are now richer (note the red velvetdraped over the Holofernes and the gold damask of Artemisia’s dress), andJudith’s hair is more closely curled, according to the emphasis on the biblicaltext on her self-esteem.              The most striking, however, is the image of blood. The version of Uffizireduces the blood that was raging from the neck of Holofern.

Like Caravaggio,the Uffizi painting places a special emphasis on this detail and does it witheven greater realism. Rivers of blood are draining down from his neck and spread along the bed.1The sword, here longer and held all the more vertically stretches out fromAbra’s arm to the blood that keeps dripping downwards the edge of the bed. Thisstrong visual enhances the power of women and gore over the case. It is not bychance that the fist that clutches Judith’s sword is at the very center of thecomposition; filled with the divine power, the hand of this widow is now thehand of God, protecting the Israelites from their enemies. The novel picture of Judith and Abra, incited researchers to contendthat Artemisia was related to the primary character of the story as her maleassociates did not. This affiliation is related with their gender, as well aswith her own horrendous experience of Artemisia. Artemisia was assaulted at seventeenyears old by the painter A.

Tassi, a dear companion of her dad. At the pointwhen Tassie did not wed her, as the social totalitariat of that time requested,her dad looked for lawful plan of action. Amid the havoc, Artemisia portraysher battle with Tassi and her endeavour to assault him with a blade. Theprincipal rendition of “Judith andHolofernes” alludes to this troublesome period in the painter’s life. Thememory of this occasion was likely associated with the interest of Artemisiawith the historical backround of Judith.  Most importantly is the depiction of youngAbra trying to aid Judith instead of Particularly critical is the picture oAbra as a youthful, solid and completely engaged with helping Judith. Theportrayal of goddess of chastity and hunting on Artemisias bracelet serves aspillar of support of the relationship between her and Abra In spite of the fact that Judith’s story most likely had an individualcriticalness for Artemisia, it is imperative to take note of its more extensivesocial valence. The historical backdrop of Judith was particularly well knownamid the Baroque time frame in the visual expressions, as well as in writing,theater and music.

A case of the triumph of goodness over indecencies, thesecurity of God from his picked individuals from their adversaries, Judith waslikewise observed as the Old Testament antipode of the Virgin Mary and, as acontinuation, as an image of the Church. This affiliation mostly clarifies theexpansion in Judith’s pictures in the late sixteenth seventeenth hundreds ofyears, when the Catholic Church took an interest in clashes with the twoProtestants and Ottoman Turks, whose eastern starting point encouraged theirrelationship with Holofernes. Artemisia and her peers exploited this fame,frequently portraying the snapshot of execution, as well as the minuteinstantly after her, when Judith and her cleaning specialist leave theadversary camp.

The emotional capability of the story made it a perfect protestfor the solid showiness of the Baroque workmanship.   Artemisia signed the painting in the lower bottom corner and thus showedher appreciation to the painting. In this painting she had showcased her skillset over baroque-realism, emphasising on proximity to the picture plane, strongchiaroscuro and realistic details to create an especially powerful image of thedramatic climax of history. The bold spontaneity of this finely tunedcomposition has succeeded too well, because at the end of the 18th century,disgusted with the horror of the scene, the Duchess of the Medici banished thismasterpiece into a dark corner of the Uffizi where he remained until the end ofthe twentieth century.

To this day, he impresses his audience with both disgustand fear of the art of the artist, who so convincingly turned the paint intoblood. The Capodimente form of the photo was composed by Artemisia amid thoseseven months after a heavy trial of the painter Agostino Tassi of despoilingthe respect of Artemisia, and she was compelled to escape from Rome toFlorence. This scandalous episode ousted Artemisia from the historyof art for a long time. Only in the last century the artist’s work wasthoroughly studied and re-evaluated and she was recognized as one of the mosttalented painters of her generation. Artemisia’s works are a reflection of her bitterexperience. In them we meet various mythical and biblical heroines – women ofstrong, warlike, unhappy and suffering. The story of Judith is often present inthe artist’s work.

So no wonder that under the guise of Holofernes sheportrayed her lover Agostino in the picture, and in the image of Judith – herself. All subsequent life Artemisia will choose for pictures of the plot,where a woman is forced to either tolerate violence, or somehow fight it. TheOld Testament Susanna in her painting suffers the filthy harassment of theBabylonian elders. Jael, a Kenene tribe, drives an iron stake into the body ofthe enemy commander of Sisera. The Roman heroine Lucretia decides to commitsuicide after the experience of violence. Judith and her servant-accomplice,more than once for the career of Gentileschi will keep in hands the severedhead of Holofernes                 Paula Rego’s long effect joined early works from arrangements of the1950th and 60th, and arrangement with wildlife animals of the 80th years andenormous structures, pastels and arrangement of the prints, inscriptions andlithographs.

This blast was constructed onher imagination and children’s memoirs.2Her primary assignment is the visual story of the abnormal and intriguinghistory, with the rest subordinated to this reason. Her photos are base onunderstanding of the adolescence, her relations with individuals around andfamily existence with every one of its challenges. The spouse Victor Villingdetermined its subject of pictures by the words “domination and mutiny,suffocation and escape”. Rego’s invents own stories, freely interprets thetaking place events and emotions. Paula’s childhood furnishes the clue to roots of her graphic art, therewas a loneliness and misunderstanding, fascinating stories told by grandmothersand grandfathers, traditions of a painted Portuguese tile, Cruikshank, Dore andGilroy’s illustration, later opening for themselves Dubuffet and, of course,Goya, art of outsiders. The style of the artist is often compared to comics.

As well as incaricatures, she often represents animals in human shape and everydaysituations. The pictures of Rego’s are often similar to ominous fairy tales inwhich harm of domination of the person over the person is declared. Her laterworks are performed in more realistic style, but sometimes she comes back to asubject of animals, as in The Woman Is the Dog series (the 1990thyears). In this Rego’s series in the equipment of pastel represents women in variousdog poses (on all fours, barking at the moon, etc.). The exhibition of her acrylicpictures “Girls & Dogs” has gone over with success in Edward Tot’s gallery.

After this exhibition, Paula had entered the Marlborough Fine Art Association. Rego’s bravely represents sharp social realities, which cause polemic insociety. Striking example of it is her Triptych (1998) devoted to problems ofabortions, has been written in 2000 in response to the forthcoming referendumin Portugal concerning abortions.

There a feeling of anger of the author and anappeal to hear her voice is expressed, a series carries on the traditions ofpolitical graphics. Clothes of characters play an important role in the picturesRego’s as bright expression of her visual stories. Often she dresses the modelsin those clothes which she wore herself, being still a child in Portugal. Theartist considers that the character of clothes is expressed, if the wornclothes tighten the body, giving feeling of integrity, and the person lives andmakes acts in the clothes. Inspiredby the story, a friend wrote for her, Paula Rego’s draws her dog in the past, referringto the crude physicality of Degas’s drawings.

“To be a dog woman is not necessarily to be downtrodden; that has verylittle to do with it,” She explained, “Inthese pictures every woman’s a dog woman, not downtrodden, but powerful. To bebestial is good. It’s physical. Eating, snarling, all activities to do withsensation are positive. To picture a woman as a dog is utterlybelievable.

“i In her paintings, Rego’s never takes the side of the character.Dichotomies, good and bad, do not attract her. She likes things randomly. Inthe work of Rego’s, as in the stories telling about her life, there is nosearch for rational explanation.

What interests her is exactly what isdistracted from our rational attention. Her look and the look of the charactersin her photographs are completely subjective. In the work of Rego’s, the worldof the imagination becomes a larger reality and we can see things that weusually prefer not to see. And always its subject is, apparently, familiar – bourgeois, domestic,family relations – characters that we must perceive, moms and daughters, youngladies with their pets. Be that as it may, by one means or another now ittransformed into a twisted dream. It is likely reasonable for say that a largeportion of her artistic creations sensationalize want and blame.

Her figuresadhere to these two mental standards.  Gentileschi’s, Uffizi variant of “Judith and Holofernes”requires a passionate, physically dynamic reaction. The figures are arrangedfrom the dull and taboo foundation; dark – outline for the power of the faceand body of the courageous woman; white bed under a basic white canvas forexpressive violence in the dash. Each figure carries a red item in theirdrapery, a premonition of extreme violence that ultimately unites the threefigures, as red blood spills out of the neck of Holofernes to spray the hands,and busts of Judith and her maid. The artistic sphere in which this picture waspresented was solely in the power of men’s ideals about how gender andfemininity should act, making this established scene unexpectedly problematic,as it was done by a woman. However, Butler argued that gender is not fixed: “The sex/gender distinction and the categoryof sex itself appear to presuppose generalization of “the body” that pre –exists the acquisition of its sexed significance”3.

 In comparison Rego’s “Dog Woman” similarly can be seen as a resistanceto the desire of her contemporaries to classify her within a sustainable femaleidentity that is consistent with gender norms. As M.M. Ponty mentions: “Thus the permanence of one’s own body, ifonly classical psychology had analyses it, might have led it to the body nolonger conceived as an object of the world, but as our means of communicationwith it, to the world no longer conceived as a collection of determinateobjects, but as the horizon latent in all our experience and itself ever –present and anterior to every determining thought”.ii  The fulfilment of cultural habits and norms associated with masculinityin the contemporary context of “DogWoman” is an important aspect in the analysis of Rego’s and her art. Thisessay explores how the adoption of these practices, according to JudithButler’s theories on gender indicators, enabled Rego’s to adapt her own personaand to respond to the patriarchal society in which she lived, and to the masculinesociety in which she released her art. Some possible misconceptions amongscholarships about how Rego’s contributed to her own were set out andcritically evaluated in order to reveal a fully implemented gender identity in Rego’sheroines depicted in her paintings. Henceforth she had adopted the artisticlanguage established for the representations of male objects in order to combatthe pressure that she felt compelled to work under her patriarchal environment.

The expression of the figure in the painting is looking violent and extreme yetis able to deliver a message similar to that of a renaissance painting ofJudith. “A body can beanything, it can be an animal, a body of sounds, a mind or idea, it can be alinguistic corpus, a social body, a collectivity”, G. Deleuzeand Guattariiii.The body may have multiple forms and may propose that message of thefeminism may have been carried in a grotesque from of Rego’s “Dog Woman” as well as Judith.Artemisia Gentileschi turned into an allaround regarded female painter amid the Italian Baroque time, when male painterswere the standard. Utilizing a socio philosophical approach this paper turnedto social and cultural standards in the seventeenth century keeping in mind theend goal to examine the Judith pieces in another specific circumstance.

Bytaking a look at the way of life of the seventeenth century, this paperdemonstrated Gentileschi’s procedure of conquering the underlying trial in 1612.Through this examination and portrayal we dissected Gentileschi’s works of arton a straight course of events by interfacing her background, associations withher life, and the contrasts between the male and female portrayals of a similarsubject. Associations were especially made between Judith’s story andGentileschi’s life inside the prisma.

Judith was a solid female character whoconquered a solid male character.  Gentileschi could make her own style,affected by both Mannerism and Caravaggism. She could refine the strategy ofchiaroscuro to feature the zones of the depictions. This examination hasdemonstrated the benefit of interfacing social brain research to the works ofGentileschi suggesting that we may be able to find some new interpretations byexploring routes that were not chosen by previous scholars. Word Count: 2760  Endnotes:1 Leonardo Mann, The Story of Passion (Berkley CA: MizanPress, 1989).2 John McEwen, Paula Rego, (Phaidon Press: 2ndEdition, 1997).

3 Judith Butler, Gender Trouble (Routledge, 2006), 56.i Fiona Bradley,”Paula Rego (Modern Artist Series)”. (TatePublishing: 1st Edition, 2002), 28. ii MauriceMerleau – Ponty, “Phenomenology ofPerception”. (Routledge, 2013), 14.

 iii Gilles Deleuze, RobertGuattari, “Ethology: Spinoza and Us”.(City Lights Publisher, 2001), 92. ­­­­­—————————————- Bibliography: 1.

        Mann,Leonardo. The Story of Passion. BerkleyCA: Mizan Press, 1989. 2.        Garrad,Mary. FemaleHero in Italian Baroque Art.Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1989.

 3.        Christiansen, Chris. Orazio and Artemisia Gentileschi. Metropolitan Museum of Art, 2013. 4.

        McEwen,John. Paula Rego. Phaidon Press: 2ndEdition, 1997.

 5.        Bradley,Fiona. Paula Rego (Modern Artist Series).Tate Publishing: 1st Edition, 2002.

 6.        Butler,Judith. Gender Trouble.

Routledge,2006. 7.        Merleau – Ponty, Maurice. Phenomenology of Perception”.

Routledge, 2013. 8.        Deleuze,Gilles. Ethology: Spinoza and Us.City Lights Publisher, 2001.