Artist: Augustus Vincent Tack
Nationality: American
Birth: 1870
Death: 1949
Medium: Oil on Canvas
Dimensions: 120 x 84.5 cm (47 1/4 x 33 1/4 in)
Current Location: Barker Center Cambridge, MA
Past Location: University Hall Harvard College Cambridge, MA
Owner: Fogg Museum, Harvard University: Bequest of Grenville L. Winthrop 1943
Date of Work: 1941
Included Inscriptions: Signed l.r. Augustus Vincent Tack
Bibliography:
http://www.harvardartmuseums.org/art/311457
Visual Analysis
As you begin to look at the oil on canvas portrait of Helen Keller by Augustus Vincent Tack, you notice overall reverence and honor in this painting. At first glance you are immediately struck by the contrast between the background and foreground of the painting. The foreground is highlighted by a dark, black, almost nothingness of a background out of which the visage of Helen Keller appears. The eye is drawn to a distinguished looking Helen Keller, who sits atop an ornate semi throne like chair, looking off into space and yet at the same time not really looking anywhere. The eye is immediately drawn to Keller's face and eyes, which stare, into the vast unknown to the left off the canvas and beyond the viewer. Helen's body is positioned to a slant in that it is not directly confronting the viewer. This has the general impact of creating a distance and separation between Keller and the viewer. After some time, you will note that the face is not settled on one object, but is seemingly inquisitive with the raised eyebrow and half smirk upon her face. Helen's countenance suggests that she is looking not physically, but more metaphorically into the unknown to derive knowledge or answers of some sort. The next component of the painting that the viewer is drawn to is the book resting upon Keller's lap, which her delicate yet experienced looking hands, which look well used and worn with lines and yet comfortable in this position as if it is their natural position, lay upon the top. The book physically is large almost perfectly square in shape and covers almost the full width of the painting. The diagonal v-neck lines of Keller’s dress, which draws the eye downward directly at the book, overly emphasize the books centrality to the painting. Furthermore, the book lighting wise is the lightest and brightest focal point of the painting from which the rest of the painting seems to be illuminated. The clean crisp whiteness of the pages lights Helen Keller’s face and body up to the viewer, and creates almost a glow upon her face. The lines of this portrait are very crisp and angular as far as the chair and book. However, the image of Helen is painted evoking a sense of tough rigid lines around her shoulders and midsection giving her the appearance of being dignified and powerful while at the same time there are small softer lines that compose her face and hands depicting a soft fragility and kindness. The dark browns, blacks, creams, and whites of the painting help to depict a stark contrast and distinguish Helen Keller in the painting. The only diffusion of color that occurs in the painting can be seen in Keller’s hair. The hair is a multifaceted complication of grays, whites, and blacks. This attention to the different elements of her hair helps along with the soft and aging lines of Keller’s face to depict Keller as an older woman who is distinguished and yet sensitive. The overall affect of the painting is to depict Helen Keller as a distinguished and learned woman, as she increases her knowledge with her tool of the trade a large Braille book. The painting has belong to Harvard University since 1943 only two years after its completion, and has hung in only University Hall and the Barker Center. Both locations are gathering places for Harvard undergraduate students to learn and be educated. It is in this context that this portrait of Helen Keller, a distinguished Radcliffe alumnus who was both deaf and blind, hangs to remind students of the obstacles that she had to defeat to achieve knowledge and inspire them to work with as much determination in their own studies as Helen herself had.
(Photo Credit: Courtesy of Harvard Gazette, http://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/photo-journal/details-details/)
Artistic Process
The
artistic process involved in creating the portrait of Helen Keller is known
only to have been done by Augustus Vincent Tack. The portrait is of a fairly
manageable size so that Tack could have constructed the portrait without any
assistance. The process of making this particular painting is unknown from
history, because a lack of surviving documentation on it. However, by analyzing
the portrait itself including the material it was constructed on and with we
will be able to deduce the general process of creating this type of portrait
artwork created in the 1940s. First, it is significant to study the material,
which makes up the portrait including what it was painted on as well as what
Tack used as his medium to paint with. If we look to the records of the
painting in addition to a glance at the actual painting you can tell that it is
constructed on a canvas with oil paints as the medium. The artist would have
had to either buy the canvas pre-stretched over a wooden frame from an art
supplier or carpenter, depending upon the size of the portrait, or buy the
materials himself and stretch the canvas over the frame to his specifications.
In this instance, I believe that it is most likely Augustus Tack chose to buy
his own materials and stretch the canvas himself to create the exact dimensions
and specifications that he wanted. This is plausible and most likely to have
happened, because the portrait is only 47 1/4 inches long by 33 1/4
inches wide, which means that physically Tack could have actually manipulated a
canvas and frame of that size on his own. After Tack had readied the frame and
canvas to the specifications that he wished he would have then sketched a rough
outline of Helen Keller with either charcoal or oil paints. This initial
outlining of the portrait would have been part of a larger technique of mixed
method painting. Mixed method painting, which is often used with oil paints, is
a process in that an artist creates layers of painting to create the final
portrait. In the case of Tack and his portrait of Helen Keller, he most likely
began by mixing colors of oil paint to create the background dark color and to
cover the canvas first. The traditional way of oil painting in the mixed method
is to paint the darker colors and background first and then eventually build
off of these original layers to then add the lighter colors and more prominent
details. This sort of layering can easily be seen in the painting in that the
background is a very dark black and blue color that seems extremely thick and
shaded. In creating the first layer Tack would have probably used a thick large
tougher bristled brush in order to saturate the whole canvas with the
background and provide the base for the rest of the portrait. Tack in this
manner would have continued painting the portrait layer by layer waiting for
each previous layer to thoroughly dry first. The fine detail of the painting of
Helen's actual image would have been completed with a finer more soft bristled
brush that would have allowed Tack to manipulate the oil paint in a finer and
more controlled way. Tack could have possibly had Helen Keller sit for this
portrait while he painted it live, however I believe that because of the scale
and detail of the painting that Tack most likely sketched Keller previously and
worked from these sketches to create the portrait. However, if Keller had sat
for a live portrait sitting it would have taken extensive hours and Tack
would have completed the preliminary layers first. After Tack had completed the painting he would have let it dry and then most likely applied a varnish to it in order to help perserve it.
Bibliography:
Oil Painting a Handbook, (http://books.google.com/books?id=8hUEAAAAYAAJ&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ViewAPI#v=onepage&q&f=false)
Environmental Context
(Photo Credit: http://hollis.harvard.edu/fullrecordinnerframe.ashx?itemid=|misc/via|olvsite3693&componentid=olvsurrogate53972&embed=false&q=harvard%20union)
Bibliography:
Oil Painting a Handbook, (http://books.google.com/books?id=8hUEAAAAYAAJ&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ViewAPI#v=onepage&q&f=false)
Environmental Context
(Photo Credit: http://hollis.harvard.edu/fullrecordinnerframe.ashx?itemid=|misc/via|olvsite3693&componentid=olvsurrogate53972&embed=false&q=harvard%20union)
http://hollis.harvard.edu/fullrecordinnerframe.ashx?itemid=|misc/via|olvwork625488&imageid=HUL.ARCH:8056795&q=harvard%20union
(Photo Credit: Courtesy of Harvard Fogg Art Museum)
Augustus Vincent Tack's portrait of Helen Keller has been housed in only four total locations. These locations have included an unidentified exhibition within Augustus Tack's studio in Washington, D.C., the American Paintings and Watercolors exhibit in Phillips Memorial Gallery in Washington, D.C., Harvard University Hall, and finally in the Harvard Barker Center. These different locations and environments that the portrait was housed in have a significant effect on the actual painting in that where it is viewed, who sees it and who it was intended to interact with. The portrait only spent a combined two months in the exhibits before it was obtained by the Harvard Fogg Art Museum on bequest of the Grenville L. Winthrop in 1943. The short period that the painting was on exhibit in Washington before it was sold in the scheme of the portraits "life" was extremely short. The portrait was most likely displayed for a general audience during this time period. In 1942, the general population of people would have known Helen Keller as a household name in that she was the first deaf and blind woman to graduate from Radcliffe College and she was an avid humanitarian. The portrait has been housed since March of 1924 within the Harvard Museum Collection. It was hung within University Hall for some years until being transferred to the Barker Center, which was once the Harvard College Student Union. The time that it spent within University Hall the painting would have been on display for the most important educators of the day along with the administration of the college, as well as the occasional student who would go through. The portrait located in this setting would have been a symbol of one of the distinguished graduates of Radcliffe College, who overcame many obstacles and became a world humanitarian. Furthermore, this placement within the administrative center of Harvard College and University instead of within the Radcliffe College is particularly interesting. To have a painting of a distinguished Radcliffe graduate within University Hall amongst other paintings and portraits of male Harvard famous alumni and Presidents depicts just how important and influential Helen Keller was. Helen Keller's portrait in this setting would have served as a reminder of how hard work and dedication could allow even a woman who was blind and deaf to attend the top university for woman at the time and excel. It is unknown when the portrait was moved from University Hall to the Barker Center, which was known as the old Harvard Union. However, I would speculate that the portrait moved to its current location sometime after the Harvard Union was renovated to become the Barker Center. The Harvard Union was formerly the dining commons, as well as study space for Harvard students when Harvard consisted of all males. The Harvard Union has a significant past in that at one time no women or people of color were allowed inside of the building. The Barker Center today stands as the center for humanities and arts, as well as housing the departments for African American Studies, English, and a few others. The portrait of Helen Keller now sits within the predominant Thomson Room that is located on the ground floor and used for major university seminars and conferences. Helen Keller’s portrait is in a modest location that allows the occasional student, faculty, and staff to view it daily. It serves as not only a reminder to us all of the perseverance of Helen Keller herself, but also as a greater historical reminder of the not always wonderful past of Harvard College. The portrait in the Barker Center can now serve to inspire students like it had years before to make use of the opportunities they have, and to overcome their challenges. However, in my opinion the portrait now in context with its placement serves to remind students of Harvard’s past and to question practices today. Helen Keller’s portrait sits in a room that Helen Keller, herself as an undergraduate, would have never been able to enter. The environment of the portrait inherently interacts with the portrait everyday and serves not only as just a passive peace of beautiful art, but rather a reminder to viewers and active part of the Barker Center. Furthermore, I think that the portraits placement within the Barker Center, which was constructed by McKim, Mead, and White Co. is significant in that it is housed an extremely classically constructed building reminding us of a Harvard of old. The general allusion that these elements have together is to create a kind of storied past building that has portraits of famous alumni hanging on its walls that represents the importance of the building to the university.
Augustus Vincent Tack's portrait of Helen Keller has been housed in only four total locations. These locations have included an unidentified exhibition within Augustus Tack's studio in Washington, D.C., the American Paintings and Watercolors exhibit in Phillips Memorial Gallery in Washington, D.C., Harvard University Hall, and finally in the Harvard Barker Center. These different locations and environments that the portrait was housed in have a significant effect on the actual painting in that where it is viewed, who sees it and who it was intended to interact with. The portrait only spent a combined two months in the exhibits before it was obtained by the Harvard Fogg Art Museum on bequest of the Grenville L. Winthrop in 1943. The short period that the painting was on exhibit in Washington before it was sold in the scheme of the portraits "life" was extremely short. The portrait was most likely displayed for a general audience during this time period. In 1942, the general population of people would have known Helen Keller as a household name in that she was the first deaf and blind woman to graduate from Radcliffe College and she was an avid humanitarian. The portrait has been housed since March of 1924 within the Harvard Museum Collection. It was hung within University Hall for some years until being transferred to the Barker Center, which was once the Harvard College Student Union. The time that it spent within University Hall the painting would have been on display for the most important educators of the day along with the administration of the college, as well as the occasional student who would go through. The portrait located in this setting would have been a symbol of one of the distinguished graduates of Radcliffe College, who overcame many obstacles and became a world humanitarian. Furthermore, this placement within the administrative center of Harvard College and University instead of within the Radcliffe College is particularly interesting. To have a painting of a distinguished Radcliffe graduate within University Hall amongst other paintings and portraits of male Harvard famous alumni and Presidents depicts just how important and influential Helen Keller was. Helen Keller's portrait in this setting would have served as a reminder of how hard work and dedication could allow even a woman who was blind and deaf to attend the top university for woman at the time and excel. It is unknown when the portrait was moved from University Hall to the Barker Center, which was known as the old Harvard Union. However, I would speculate that the portrait moved to its current location sometime after the Harvard Union was renovated to become the Barker Center. The Harvard Union was formerly the dining commons, as well as study space for Harvard students when Harvard consisted of all males. The Harvard Union has a significant past in that at one time no women or people of color were allowed inside of the building. The Barker Center today stands as the center for humanities and arts, as well as housing the departments for African American Studies, English, and a few others. The portrait of Helen Keller now sits within the predominant Thomson Room that is located on the ground floor and used for major university seminars and conferences. Helen Keller’s portrait is in a modest location that allows the occasional student, faculty, and staff to view it daily. It serves as not only a reminder to us all of the perseverance of Helen Keller herself, but also as a greater historical reminder of the not always wonderful past of Harvard College. The portrait in the Barker Center can now serve to inspire students like it had years before to make use of the opportunities they have, and to overcome their challenges. However, in my opinion the portrait now in context with its placement serves to remind students of Harvard’s past and to question practices today. Helen Keller’s portrait sits in a room that Helen Keller, herself as an undergraduate, would have never been able to enter. The environment of the portrait inherently interacts with the portrait everyday and serves not only as just a passive peace of beautiful art, but rather a reminder to viewers and active part of the Barker Center. Furthermore, I think that the portraits placement within the Barker Center, which was constructed by McKim, Mead, and White Co. is significant in that it is housed an extremely classically constructed building reminding us of a Harvard of old. The general allusion that these elements have together is to create a kind of storied past building that has portraits of famous alumni hanging on its walls that represents the importance of the building to the university.
Bibliography:
Addresses by Henry Lee Higginson http://books.google.com/booksvid=HARVARD:32044010430650&printsec=titlepage#v=onepage&q&f=false
Harvard Art Museums
http://www.harvardartmuseums.org/art/311457
Barker Center, Harvard University : reaffirmation and renewal, September 12, 1997 / [research and writing, Chinnie Ding].
Historical Newspaper
The portrait of
Helen Keller, if put into the context of the historical context of its day, can
be seen as not only a portrait that exists today in singularity, but rather as a
greater lens through to which to view both the context in which it was created
as well as more about the painter. By viewing two of the historical newspapers
of the time, we are able to better examine the painter and his motivations for
this particular piece. An article written in the Washington Post, Times Herald
from October 29, 1972 entitled Abstracts from Tack: Tack’s ‘Mysterious
Pictures; Mystic Titles’ gives significant insight into the life and
motivations of Augustus Vincent Tack, the painter of the Helen Keller portrait.
This specific excerpt highlights the motivations of Tack to even paint a
portrait of this sort, the author wrote “the harmless portraits that he
painted- of Eisenhower, Truman and many women of good breeding- are now
deservedly neglected. It is for the abstract pictures that he made, but hardly
ever sold, that Tack will be remembered.”[1]
This quote demonstrates that Tack’s work on portraits was not significantly his
most prominent work. Rather it seems as though Tack’s work on portraits were
used to financial support and fund his passion for more abstract paintings,
which he seldom sold to outside collectors. Tacks penchant for portraits helped
provide for his overly excessive and luxurious life. It was even noted in the
article that Tack, “liked important people and they kept him rich. His
portraits of the famous earned him more than $100,000 during one year of the
Depression. He lived among aristocrats and elegant, expensive things. He kept
his wife in furs and Packard cards, thoroughbreds and wolfhounds. His suits
were cut in Saville Row; he was a connoisseur of wines.”[2]
This background depicts a fuller sense of the context in which the portrait of
Helen Keller was commissioned and painted. In a sense, we could extrapolate
that Augustus Tack was commissioned to do this portrait by either Keller
herself or by another wealthy alumnus of Harvard. This portrait was done
expressly for the purpose of being displayed at Harvard rather than as a piece
of art solely made by the artist to fulfill an artistic whim or need to portray
a feeling or moment. Furthermore, in the Washington Post May 23, 1993 article
by Richard Paul entitled “Art in the City: The Visionary and the Hack Painter
Augustus Tack Was… Both” painted a similar picture of “Tack the courtier
flattered those who paid him. Tack the abstractionist sought to evoke God.”[3]
Through both of these sources, we are able to see that Tack’s true calling and
artistic ambition was in natural abstract landscape paintings, which were not
often sellable. It is important to note that Tack used his ability to create
commissioned portraits that would allow him to continue his passion. This
context illuminates the Helen Keller portrait in that we as viewers can
understand that this painting was purposefully commissioned by someone in order
to become part of Harvard’s collection. We are able to extrapolate that Tack
was not compelled by some inner desire to paint Keller rather he used portraits
of this type to make a living. I am not dismayed by the fact that Tack may have just painted this portrait solely for the commission. I think that there is still a lot of value, and a lot to be said for an artist who does this type of work and is very accomplished at what he does while at the same time painting in order to keep up with his expensive life style. Furthermore, I think that Tack still had artistic ability and discretion when he was painting the portrait in order to make his own decisions. Despite the fact that Tack was being paid for the portrait I still think there is inherent value in the portrait as a piece of artwork itself.
[1] Abstracts from Tack: Tack’s ‘Mysterious
Pictures; Mystic Titles’,
http://search.proquest.com.ezp-prod1.hul.harvard.edu/news/docview/148295606/139BBEC59644F8236A8/2?accountid=11311
[2] Abstracts from Tack
[3] Art in the City: The Visionary and the
Hack Painter Augustus Tack Was… Both, http://search.proquest.com.ezp-prod1.hul.harvard.edu/news/docview/140904608/139C6FA949D188C1CFE/5?accountid=11311
Bibliography:
Historical Context
The historical context of the Helen Keller portrait is important to understand the greater background and meaning of the portrait. The most pertinent context is within Harvard College and Radcliffe during 1941 when the portrait was commissioned. The president of Harvard University during this time period was James Bryant Conant. Conant was a harbinger of change and equality within Harvard University. One of his most significant roles was to institute the practice of allowing women to attend classes at Harvard College with men in 1943, whereas before women had been taught in isolated separate classes by the same professors as the men. Conant in some ways can be seen as the President who started the process of merging Radcliffe College and Harvard College together. It is also significant to note that the Dean of Radcliffe College at the time was Ada Comstock. She worked hard to persuade Harvard administration that it would be beneficial for not only the women, but also the men to learn in a co-educational environment. The fact that Keller's portrait was commissioned and displayed at Harvard during this period creates a greater understanding of the portrait's context in that Keller's portrait was chosen to hang perhaps as a symbol of the great accomplishments of women in academia to prove that they deserved on a basic level to be taught and educated in the very same classrooms as men. Furthermore, it is significant of note that during this time period as whole the country was attacked at Pearl Harbor and entered WWII. This depicts that at the time the country was under crisis and fighting a war against a ruthless dictator who sought to discriminate and eradicate the world of people he found unfit. This statement of Harvard providing co-education and having a portrait of Keller commissioned depicts its commitment against this sort of evil. The time period in which the Keller portrait was done was a highly contentious and scary time in the United States. The portrait rests within a smaller context of the Harvard world and its dedication to make improvements within the University for equality. Keller's ability to overcome all of her disabilities especially within the time period when it was even harder to be a woman never mind a woman with disabilities. Her ability to overcome all of these obstacles were not only amazing for her time, but also in any time period!
Bibliography:
http://www.harvard.edu/history/presidents/conant
Other Works
(Photo Credit: http://www.nga.gov/fcgi-bin/timage_f?object=30345&image=5011&c=)
Portrait of Harlan F. Stone, 1944
Gift of Duncan Phillips
By Augustus Vincent Tack
(Photo Credit: http://www.afb.org/section.aspx?FolderID=1&SectionID=1&TopicID=480)
Portrait of Helen Keller, 1956
By Alexander Clayton
Oil on Canvas
(Photo Credit: http://www.afb.org/section.aspx?FolderID=1&SectionID=1&TopicID=194&SubTopicID=7&DocumentID=827)
Photograph of Helen Keller upon her graduation from Radcliffe College, 1904
Photographer Unknown
Bibliography:
Cohn, Marjorie B.
“Turner, Ruskin, Norton, Winthrop".
Harvard
University Art Museums Bulletin, Vol. 2. No. 1 (1993).
Accessed
October 17, 2012. http://www.jstor.org/stable/4301479.
Ding, Chinnie. Barker Center, Harvard University:
Reaffirmation and Renewal.
Cambridge,
MA: Harvard University, 1997.
Fogg Art Museum. Grenville L. Winthrop: Retrospective for a
Collector.
Cambridge,
MA: Fogg Museum of Art, 1969.
Jackson, Robert
Tracy. The Harvard Union, Cambridge,
MA: Harvard Alumni Bulletin.
Vol.
32 No.29, pp.849-850, 1930.
Keller, Helen. The Story of My Life. Boston: Houghton
Mifflin Co., 1905.
Lee, Henry. History of University Hall. Cambridge, MA: Papers of Henry Lee,
1800.
Schwager, Sally. Yards and Gates: Gender in Harvard and
Radcliffe History.
New
York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2004.
Tack, Augustus
Vincent. Augustus Vincent Tack:
1870-1949.
Deerfield,
MA: Deerfield Academy, 1968.
The Phillips
Collection, Leslie Furth, Elizabeth V. Chew, and David W. Scott.
Augustus Vincent Tack: Landscape of the
Spirit.
Washington, D.C.: Phillips Collection, 1993.
Essential Questions:
1. Who was Grenville Winthrop? Why was he the person who commissioned the Helen Keller portrait from Augustus Vincent Tack? What was his relationship to Harvard University? What is the significance and motivations behind Winthrop's commissioning the portrait? I think that all of these questions are in the same vein trying to figure out the reason that the portrait was made, and unveiling the man who took the effort to commission it. The bibliography I have provided includes a few books about Winthrop so I hope to delve further into these questions and solve them.
2. Where was the portrait originally hanging in University Hall? Was the portrait always intended to hang in University Hall? How long did the portrait hang there before being moved to the Barker Center? Why was the portrait moved from University Hall to the Barker Center/ Harvard Student Union? I think that these questions about the housing and location of the portrait will really inform me as to why Harvard would have wanted the portrait, and what purpose it was used for.
3. Did Augustus Vincent Tack do other portraits for Harvard or Grenville Winthrop? At what point in his career did Tack paint this? Did Tack actually have Keller come in for a painting session or was the portrait based off of sketches or a photograph? I think that these questions all allude to the artistic process, and will help to position the portrait in its broader context and meaning.
4. What was Helen Keller doing at this point in her life when the portrait was commissioned? Was the portrait commissioned in honor of a work or good deed that Keller had recently done? What was Keller's relationship to Harvard at this point in time other than being a famous Radcliffe alumnus? These questions will help to answer the relationship between Keller and Harvard, as well as further inform what Keller meant historically at this point in time in history.
5. Why was the portrait constructed the way it was as a full sitting body portrait with Keller holding a book? Was the book meant to highlight her disabilities? Is it significant that Keller herself would have never been able to see her own portrayal in oil? Is the representation of Keller a fitting one and or does the portrait portray another sort of air about Keller? These previous questions will help me to understand why Tack made certain choices about the physicality of actually painting the portrait. Furthermore, I may be able to decipher whether Tack was told what and how to portray Keller or he himself used his own artistic creativity to depict her the way he saw fit.
1. Who was Grenville Winthrop? Why was he the person who commissioned the Helen Keller portrait from Augustus Vincent Tack? What was his relationship to Harvard University? What is the significance and motivations behind Winthrop's commissioning the portrait? I think that all of these questions are in the same vein trying to figure out the reason that the portrait was made, and unveiling the man who took the effort to commission it. The bibliography I have provided includes a few books about Winthrop so I hope to delve further into these questions and solve them.
2. Where was the portrait originally hanging in University Hall? Was the portrait always intended to hang in University Hall? How long did the portrait hang there before being moved to the Barker Center? Why was the portrait moved from University Hall to the Barker Center/ Harvard Student Union? I think that these questions about the housing and location of the portrait will really inform me as to why Harvard would have wanted the portrait, and what purpose it was used for.
3. Did Augustus Vincent Tack do other portraits for Harvard or Grenville Winthrop? At what point in his career did Tack paint this? Did Tack actually have Keller come in for a painting session or was the portrait based off of sketches or a photograph? I think that these questions all allude to the artistic process, and will help to position the portrait in its broader context and meaning.
4. What was Helen Keller doing at this point in her life when the portrait was commissioned? Was the portrait commissioned in honor of a work or good deed that Keller had recently done? What was Keller's relationship to Harvard at this point in time other than being a famous Radcliffe alumnus? These questions will help to answer the relationship between Keller and Harvard, as well as further inform what Keller meant historically at this point in time in history.
5. Why was the portrait constructed the way it was as a full sitting body portrait with Keller holding a book? Was the book meant to highlight her disabilities? Is it significant that Keller herself would have never been able to see her own portrayal in oil? Is the representation of Keller a fitting one and or does the portrait portray another sort of air about Keller? These previous questions will help me to understand why Tack made certain choices about the physicality of actually painting the portrait. Furthermore, I may be able to decipher whether Tack was told what and how to portray Keller or he himself used his own artistic creativity to depict her the way he saw fit.
Historical Context
The historical context of the Helen Keller portrait is important to understand the greater background and meaning of the portrait. The most pertinent context is within Harvard College and Radcliffe during 1941 when the portrait was commissioned. The president of Harvard University during this time period was James Bryant Conant. Conant was a harbinger of change and equality within Harvard University. One of his most significant roles was to institute the practice of allowing women to attend classes at Harvard College with men in 1943, whereas before women had been taught in isolated separate classes by the same professors as the men. Conant in some ways can be seen as the President who started the process of merging Radcliffe College and Harvard College together. It is also significant to note that the Dean of Radcliffe College at the time was Ada Comstock. She worked hard to persuade Harvard administration that it would be beneficial for not only the women, but also the men to learn in a co-educational environment. The fact that Keller's portrait was commissioned and displayed at Harvard during this period creates a greater understanding of the portrait's context in that Keller's portrait was chosen to hang perhaps as a symbol of the great accomplishments of women in academia to prove that they deserved on a basic level to be taught and educated in the very same classrooms as men. Furthermore, it is significant of note that during this time period as whole the country was attacked at Pearl Harbor and entered WWII. This depicts that at the time the country was under crisis and fighting a war against a ruthless dictator who sought to discriminate and eradicate the world of people he found unfit. This statement of Harvard providing co-education and having a portrait of Keller commissioned depicts its commitment against this sort of evil. The time period in which the Keller portrait was done was a highly contentious and scary time in the United States. The portrait rests within a smaller context of the Harvard world and its dedication to make improvements within the University for equality. Keller's ability to overcome all of her disabilities especially within the time period when it was even harder to be a woman never mind a woman with disabilities. Her ability to overcome all of these obstacles were not only amazing for her time, but also in any time period!
Bibliography:
http://www.harvard.edu/history/presidents/conant
Other Works
(Photo Credit: http://www.nga.gov/fcgi-bin/timage_f?object=30345&image=5011&c=)
Portrait of Harlan F. Stone, 1944
Gift of Duncan Phillips
By Augustus Vincent Tack
(Photo Credit: http://www.afb.org/section.aspx?FolderID=1&SectionID=1&TopicID=480)
Portrait of Helen Keller, 1956
By Alexander Clayton
Oil on Canvas
(Photo Credit: http://www.afb.org/section.aspx?FolderID=1&SectionID=1&TopicID=194&SubTopicID=7&DocumentID=827)
Photograph of Helen Keller upon her graduation from Radcliffe College, 1904
Photographer Unknown
The three other works that I see as in
direct conversation and relation to the portrait of Helen Keller by Augustus
Vincent Tack are the portrait of Chief Justice Harlan F. Stone by Augustus
Vincent Tack, the portrait of Helen Keller (1956) by Alexander Clayton, and
finally the famous photograph of Helen Keller after her graduation from
Radcliffe College in 1904. These three pieces of artwork are all related to the
Tack portrait in differing ways. On the surface, the portrait of Harlan Stone
is related to the Keller portrait because they were both by Tack within the
1940s. The other two pieces of work are related in that they both depict images
of Helen Keller. The portrait of Keller by Clayton is done after the Task
portrait, and in relationship can depict how images and portraits of Keller
were usually constructed later in Keller’s life after she had become a world
re-known humanitarian, activist, and inspiration. The photograph of Keller shows the deepest contrast of all
the artworks in that it is not only not done in the medium of oil on canvas,
but also it depicts a young and less well-known Keller.
By
looking at the other Tack painting we can notice the stark similarities between
the portrait of Keller and that of Harlan Stone. The color palate are very
similar in that Tack chose to stay with dark and rich tones in the background
of the painting with the light and more ephemeral colors taking center stage in
the face of the subject. Tack emphasized the faces of his subjects as the focal
point of the paintings in order to draw the importance to them. Furthermore,
both Keller and Stone are seated in their portraits with their bodies facing
directly towards the viewer. However, the positioning of the face and the
expression of Keller and Stone differ vastly in that Keller’s head is titled
toward the left not directly facing the viewer whereas stone confronts the
viewer with his face and stares directly into them. This contrast highlights
question as to why Keller would have been portrayed as not looking directly
towards the viewer. Could it have been that Tack believed it was not proper for
a woman to gaze directly at the audience of the portrait, and that it was
somehow to intimate? Or was this a choice made rather because Keller was blind
and her eyes were not important to her visage? I think that the emphasis of the
Keller painting is felt more acutely in Keller’s face but also more
significantly in her hands. The contrast could be a factor Tacks artistic
vision to portray Stone in a more commanding straightforward way as the Chief
Supreme Court Justice, whereas he may have wanted to portray Keller as subtle
yet knowledgeable academic whose hands were the key to her education and
communication with the world.
The
other portrait of Helen Keller by Alexander Clayton provides an example of
another interpretation and representation of Keller in her older age. This
portrait was painted about a decade after the Tack painting, however it retains
some of the same elements. Both Tack and Clayton chose to have Keller sitting
in their portrait with her eyes and face pointed to the side of the portrait
instead of straight on. However this is where the similarities stop. The
Clayton portrait is drastically different in that the whole color palate is
lighter and more vibrant. The background of the painting is the lightest area
of the portrait and the commanding color of the portrait is the red and purple
academic regalia gown that Keller is wearing. The different use of color
brightens the image as a whole, and along with the pleasant countenance on
Keller’s face helps to portray a happy and content aging Helen Keller. Keller
in this portrait is more distinctly depicted as an academic. The focus of the
painting is Keller’s academic accomplishments, unlike Tack’s focus on the
disabilities that Keller had to overcome. This portrait helps to contrast the different
visions and views of Keller later in life.
Finally, the last piece of artwork
that I chose to relate to the Tack portrait was the iconic photograph of Keller
following her graduation from Radcliffe College. This piece is vastly different
in that it is a photograph of Keller. This is interesting in that the majority
of pieces of artwork of Keller were not portraits on oil canvas like Tack’s
representation of Keller; rather the predominant medium was photography. There
are photographs of all stages of Keller’s life, and it was the main medium that
most people were able to view of Keller. This photograph however does have some
similarities to the Tack’s portrait in the way that Keller is portrayed. This
photograph like the painting chose to depict Keller with her eyes cast downward
and her body turned out of the direct line of the viewer. Again like my
comments with the Stone portrait this may have been a fact of propriety, but it
is significant to note that this happens over and over again in both portraits
and photographs of Keller. Furthermore, the focus of the photograph is also
Keller’s hands and their placement over a large presumably Braille book. This
emphasis of Keller’s hands and the means by which Helen interacted with the
world is important. It begs the question is the reason why faces are so
important in paintings usually is because the face is the location that people
perceive and interact with the world? Did these artists and photographers then
choose to portray Keller by indentify her most emblematic feature and emphasize
the different means that she used to “see” and interact with the entire world
around her?
All
of these portraits and photograph in comparison and contrast help to produce a
fuller picture of other representations of Keller, as well as the general style
of Tack. They open up new ways of viewing
the portrait of Keller and new questions that must be explored in order to
truly understand Tacks portrait of Helen Keller.
Label
Helen Keller, 1941
By Augustus Vincent Tack
Oil on Canvas
Inscription: Signed l.r. Augustus Vincent Tack
On loan from Fogg Art Museum, Harvard University
Abstract
In my paper I hope to delve into Harvard's specific involvement with the portrait of Helen Keller since its creation in 1941 by Augustus Vincent Tack until today. The portrait since its beginnings was always a creation and outgrowth of a need demonstrated by Harvard. The portrait was commissioned directly under the auspices of the Fogg Museum of Art and Harvard graduate Grenville L. Winthrop. It was created with the specific intention in 1941 of being displayed within the Harvard campus, being primarily displayed in the center of the university at University Hall. Harvard has had a say and specific role in every step of the portraits "life" intersecting into it from its style and depiction of Keller to the placement of the portrait over the years. Harvard's unique request and subsequent placement of the portrait of Keller in 1941 is significant in both a larger historical context and artistic context. I will argue that the painting has become product of Harvard as a whole and its mission as a university during the 1940s rather than a piece of artwork created by an artist with the intention of portraying a certain "inner truth", idea, or message to be shared with the viewer. Rather, I will argue that the portrait of Keller became a commodity or an object to be viewed at singularly as more of a representation and manifestation of the college than of "art". The portraits move from the "main stage" and prominent placement in University Hall to its semi- annexation to a meeting room in the Barker Center also suggests a shift in the purpose of the portrait as designated by the university. The University in some sense deemed the portrait less important or integral in its shift. I will argue that throughout the life of the painting Harvard as a university has become the true artist of this portrait. I will primarily focus on three main pieces of evidence to argue my case. The first and one of the most salient points was choice of Augustus Vincent Tack as the artist. Harvard University chose both the subject and the artist of the portrait. The portrait was an outgrowth of the ideas and wishes of the university to display a portrait of Keller. The particular fact that Tack was chosen was also pertinent in that Tack was an artist known for doing commissioned paintings as a side job to pay his bills. The choice of Tack as the artist demonstrates a decision to create a portrait of Keller uninhibited by an artists view. Rather Tack could serve as a passive creator of the portrait who would create whatever the university wanted from him. Second, I will focus on the different placements of the portrait from University Hall to the Barker Center. The changes in locations of the portrait demonstrate a difference in use and portrayal of the portrait. The portraits current location within the Barker Center serves more as a decorative wall piece to add color and distinction to the room rather than a deliberate work that hopes to evoke a reaction from the viewer. Finally, I will use the visual analysis and portrayal of Keller to depict how the university had the creative control over how Keller was portrayed specifically in oil on canvas. My main objective of the paper will be to prove that the portrait has since its beginnings been a product of the university. Along with this I will also explore the reasons behind why Harvard would have done this within the historical context of the times.
Revolutions
Label
Helen Keller, 1941
By Augustus Vincent Tack
Oil on Canvas
Inscription: Signed l.r. Augustus Vincent Tack
On loan from Fogg Art Museum, Harvard University
The portrait was commissioned for the
specific use of Harvard University. In 1904 Helen Keller was the first deaf and
blind woman to ever earn a Bachelor of Arts degree from Radcliffe College part
of Harvard University. Keller was able to graduate from the most prestigious
women’s college of that time period in spite of her disabilities. The artist, Tack,
was an eccentric for hire portrait artist most famous for his portraits, landscapes,
and abstractions.
Possible Exhibits
This portrait of Helen Keller could be exhibited in numerous
ways. The first way that I could see the portrait being displayed differently
than it already is right now in the Barker Center is on display in the Fogg or
Sackler Art Museum. I believe that the portrait actually might go to the Fogg
Museum after its construction is completed in the spring of 2014. I would place
it within an exhibit in the Fogg on the history of Harvard University. I would
display it along with other portraits of famous alumni from both Harvard and
Radcliffe College, as well as paintings of the physical layout and buildings of
Harvard. I think that I would create a timeline of portraits from the beginning
of the university to the foundation of Radcliffe to the integration of Harvard
and Radcliffe all the way up until a painting or even photograph of campus life
today. I think that this exhibit could serve as a great history of Harvard, but
more importantly could show how Harvard’s past was not always perfect in its
treatment of women and minorities. The wall where Radcliffe was created could
be highlighted in a different color accenting its importance. As a whole I
think that Keller would be a main piece in the exhibit. Keller would represent not only women in education, but also a person with significant
disabilities in education.
The other way that I could see the Keller portrait exhibited
would be on loan to the Smithsonian American History Museum in Washington, D.C.
in a special exhibit on famous Americans who overcame diversity and obstacles
in their lives. I could see Keller in this exhibit representing the
significance of a person with severe disabilities proving the world that she
could learn and earn a bachelors of arts degree. Keller would serve to show how
in the past people had often viewed people with disabilities as unintelligent
and incapable of being educated or taking part in regular society. Keller would
highlight that as a disabled woman she was not only able to earn an advanced
degree, but also she was able to have a significant impact in the world with
her humanitarian efforts. In this case, Keller’s portrait would represent a
beacon of understanding and change in the world about people have disabilities
especially those who are deaf or blind. In this exhibit, I would lay out each
portrait on its own special wall. All of the walls with the different portraits
would create a pathway that the audience would have to follow. This pathway
would create stories of famous Americans overcoming diversity. Every portrait
would be on a wall colored to the type of diversity that its person had to
overcome that way themes of colors could also tell a continued story. For
example, Keller’s portrait could be placed on a red wall and every other
portrait that confronts the diversity that comes along with physical or mental
disability could also be on a red wall. I think that in this context viewers
could see not only the significance that individuals made in overcoming
diversity, but also the journey and greater story of this diversity being
confronted by many.
In my paper I hope to delve into Harvard's specific involvement with the portrait of Helen Keller since its creation in 1941 by Augustus Vincent Tack until today. The portrait since its beginnings was always a creation and outgrowth of a need demonstrated by Harvard. The portrait was commissioned directly under the auspices of the Fogg Museum of Art and Harvard graduate Grenville L. Winthrop. It was created with the specific intention in 1941 of being displayed within the Harvard campus, being primarily displayed in the center of the university at University Hall. Harvard has had a say and specific role in every step of the portraits "life" intersecting into it from its style and depiction of Keller to the placement of the portrait over the years. Harvard's unique request and subsequent placement of the portrait of Keller in 1941 is significant in both a larger historical context and artistic context. I will argue that the painting has become product of Harvard as a whole and its mission as a university during the 1940s rather than a piece of artwork created by an artist with the intention of portraying a certain "inner truth", idea, or message to be shared with the viewer. Rather, I will argue that the portrait of Keller became a commodity or an object to be viewed at singularly as more of a representation and manifestation of the college than of "art". The portraits move from the "main stage" and prominent placement in University Hall to its semi- annexation to a meeting room in the Barker Center also suggests a shift in the purpose of the portrait as designated by the university. The University in some sense deemed the portrait less important or integral in its shift. I will argue that throughout the life of the painting Harvard as a university has become the true artist of this portrait. I will primarily focus on three main pieces of evidence to argue my case. The first and one of the most salient points was choice of Augustus Vincent Tack as the artist. Harvard University chose both the subject and the artist of the portrait. The portrait was an outgrowth of the ideas and wishes of the university to display a portrait of Keller. The particular fact that Tack was chosen was also pertinent in that Tack was an artist known for doing commissioned paintings as a side job to pay his bills. The choice of Tack as the artist demonstrates a decision to create a portrait of Keller uninhibited by an artists view. Rather Tack could serve as a passive creator of the portrait who would create whatever the university wanted from him. Second, I will focus on the different placements of the portrait from University Hall to the Barker Center. The changes in locations of the portrait demonstrate a difference in use and portrayal of the portrait. The portraits current location within the Barker Center serves more as a decorative wall piece to add color and distinction to the room rather than a deliberate work that hopes to evoke a reaction from the viewer. Finally, I will use the visual analysis and portrayal of Keller to depict how the university had the creative control over how Keller was portrayed specifically in oil on canvas. My main objective of the paper will be to prove that the portrait has since its beginnings been a product of the university. Along with this I will also explore the reasons behind why Harvard would have done this within the historical context of the times.
In the year 1941, the United States
entered into the Second World War against Germany and Japan. During this time
period there were multiple revolutionary movements happening within the United
States. The most prominent movements were the feminist movement (women began
working in the factories which had lost men to the war), the civil rights
movement, and of course the war itself. All of these movements confound to
create a monumental time period in which the Helen Keller portrait was
commissioned by Harvard University. The fact that WWII was being waged while
this portrait was commissioned is significant in the fact that the ideological
terms behind the war were the United States was battling against the Nazis who
wanted to create a perfect Aryan race through eugenics and killings. The United
States served as a beacon of virtue for all who were different either because
of their religion, race, gender, or physical characteristics. Helen Keller more
importantly was a significant figure because despite having the extreme
disabilities deafness and blindness she was able to attain a high degree of
education and make her own unique contribution to the world. In a world run by
Nazi Germany, Keller would not have been prized. It is this value distinction
that is particularly important to our understanding the context of the
painting. The portrait may have been in conversation with the times in that
Harvard decided to commission it perhaps as a symbol of its dedication to
difference and to furthering education for both women and individuals with
disabilities. Keller in the context of WWII could have served as a prime
example of why Nazi Germany was wrong in that a woman deemed at first sight to
be completely unable of communication and intelligent thought could actually
communicate and achieve the distinction of a Radcliffe College bachelors
degree. Furthermore, the portrait can also be viewed in context with the
feminist movement in that during the 1940s women were increasingly entering the
work force in order to take provide for their families as well as keep the work
force going while the majority of men were serving in the war. Women were
entering into new areas of the work force as well as education, and
increasingly women were fighting for their right to be equal to men in all
areas of life. The Keller portrait during this time period could have also been
a sign of Harvard's commitment and support of women in education. The portrait
of Keller could have served as a sign of good faith that Harvard was moving
towards a more equal view of higher education, and opening barriers that were
set against women from achieving a bachelor’s degree. Only two short years
after the painting was commissioned women were officially integrated into
Harvard's classrooms. The revolutions of feminism and WWIII inherently were a
major part of the historical background of the painting, and may have indicated
deeper connections between the commissioning of the portrait and Harvard's
goals in having the portrait created.
