Paintings

Tughra of Sultan Suleiman the Magnificent, ca. 1550–1560; ink, opaque watercolor, and gold on paper, 20 12 inches × 25 3/8 inches, is the first image on the left. It appears that between the 14th and 16th centuries, strong kingdoms of the time occupied wide swaths of the globe. Some of these empires endured for decades, while others were destroyed within a few generations. Evidently, the superpowers that prevailed in physical conflicts did so while simultaneously maintaining strong bureaucracies that could endure both good and bad times. Furthermore, after taking Constantinople, the Ottoman Empire confidently transitioned from being a military to an administrative empire. Therefore, to rule over such an empire ensuring that power was at the center and appropriately deployed throughout its boarders, one needed a government ruled through bureaucracy. Further, every administrator in the empire were required to demonstrate the authority of the leader and hence they were issued with a visible crest that would be carried around and shown to all subjects. Clearly, the emblem was the tughra. Moreover, the tughra would be attached to all important formal documents. Clearly, it is very evident that the tughra, whenever presented, had an enormous impact on the subjects of Sultan Suleiman since it was a representation of power.

On the other hand, on the right is a painting of Hyacinthe Rigaud, Louis XIV, 1701. Oil on canvas, 9’2” x 2’2”. During the time of Louis XIV, France was an absolute monarchy meaning that the king had the full power. Therefore, Louis as the monarch was not limited to any constitutional powers. Clearly, Hyacinthe Rigaud used color, light, and dark to emphasize on the wasteful nature of Louis XIV. Rigaud uses, for example, red, gold and dark blue to symbolize Louis’s extravagant life. Further, in the painting Louis XIV possesses a sword to symbolize his military power, and his power over the Kingdom is symbolized by his crown while the scepter shows his power over France. Moreover, Louis XIV looks brighter compared to the rest of the piece of art with light shining on him showing that he is the point of reference. Unlike in the case of the tughra for the Sultan of Ottoman which is a symbol of power, Louis’s portrait, on the other hand, represents a ruler who is abusive of his powers. Regardless of the fact that France’s economy was collapsing and poverty was all over the place, Louis XIV went ahead to have a lavish depiction of himself painted. Clearly, this portrait is a representation of a leader who believed of himself as omnipotent over France.





The painting on the left is Jean-Honore Fragonard, The Swing, 1766. Oil on canvas, 2’8” x 2’2”, Rococo. Clearly, the Rococo style of art was characterized by lightness, grace, playfulness, and intimacy. The painting depicts a woman on a swing which is hanging from a tree. Clearly, she is swinging as the sunlight beams down on her. Clearly, she is at the apex of her arc, and as seen from the painting her shoe has suddenly flown off. While, at this position, there is a man concealed in the foliage who watches as she swings. Arguably, the swing in this painting is a conventional symbol for infidelity. The old man in the background pushes the young woman and has no idea of the young man’s presence. Moreover, as the woman rises higher, she allows the young man to see up her dress. Clearly, this image is, without a doubt, erotic but does not cross the line to be vulgar.

The second image is Shen Zhou’s, Poet on a Mountaintop. The predominantly image shows a person who is evidently a poet on a mountain top with some text in Chinese on the left. Clearly, this painting is a perfect example of Chinese literati art. Further, it is apparent that in this piece of art, Shen Zhou uses only one color. Unlike the swing which is filled with so much color and has very little blank space, this painting contains blank spaces all over. Arguably, the audience views nature as an integral constituent of humanity, a partner in humankind’s intellectual and spiritual evolution, and not as an object for human conquest or exploitation. Therefore, this painting tries to show that humanity was not at the center of the universe, but it forms an integral part.