Main content
Europe 1300 - 1800
Course: Europe 1300 - 1800 > Unit 10
Lesson 1: Rococo- A beginner's guide to the Age of Enlightenment
- A beginner's guide to Rococo art
- The Formation of a French School: the Royal Academy of Painting and Sculpture
- Antoine Watteau, Pilgrimage to Cythera
- Watteau, Pilgrimage to Cythera
- Boucher, Madame de Pompadour
- The Tiepolo Family
- Vigée Le Brun, Self-Portrait with her Daughter, Julie
- Vigée Le Brun, Self-Portrait with her Daughter
- Vigée Le Brun, Self-Portrait
- Vigée Le Brun, Madame Perregaux
- Unlocking an 18th-century French mechanical table
- Bernard II van Risenburgh, Writing table
- Construction of an 18th-century French mechanical table
- The inlay technique of marquetry
- Fragonard, The Swing
- Fragonard, The Swing
- Fragonard, The Swing
- Fragonard, The Meeting
- Greuze, The Village Bride
- Architecture in 18th-century Germany
- Joachim Michael Salecker, Cup with cover with Hebrew inscriptions
- Maria Sibylla Merian, an introduction
- Maria Sybilla Merian's Metamorphosis of a Small Emperor Moth on a Damson Plum: Getty Conversations
- Rococo Art
© 2023 Khan AcademyTerms of usePrivacy PolicyCookie Notice
Boucher, Madame de Pompadour
François Boucher, Madame de Pompadour, oil on canvas, 1750 (extention of canvas and additional painting likely added by Boucher later, Fogg Museum. Created by Beth Harris and Steven Zucker.
Want to join the conversation?
- Were the mistresses actually members of the court? Did they get official recognition? If so I think it would be a bit awkward for all concerned.(8 votes)
- "The maîtresse-en-titre [or maîtresse déclarée] was the chief mistress of the king of France. It was a semi-official position which came with its own apartments. The title really came into use during the reign of Henry IV and continued until the reign of Louis XV.
From the reign of Louis XIV, the term has been applied, both in ranslation "official mistress") and in the original French, to refer to the main mistress of any monarch or prominent man when his relationship with her is not clandestine." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ma%C3%AEtresse-en-titre(13 votes)
- why does she look so pale? she looks almost white.(4 votes)
- The most likely reason for Boucher's creating her as such a pale individual was that in the 1700's, pale was the height of beauty. To have perfect alabaster skin was considered the mark of nobility and fashion. Boucher, always one to try and please the nobles, probably painted her as such to make her "attractive."(9 votes)
- The critics discuss the painting in terms of surfaces, of a deliberate portrayal of artifice. Yet nowhere do we here of a critique of the expense that Mme. de P represents. What does she represent in terms of cost? Cost to the kingdom, cost to the King's prestige, cost to the legitimacy of rule by divine right?(3 votes)
- I don't think that Mme. de P cost the king anything in terms of prestige or legitimacy. Royal marriages were in many ways business transactions or political moves, and thus they were allowed certain indescretions within the boundaries of how we see marriage today. Louis married the daughter of the King of Poland (she was 22, he was 15), but later had Mme. de P as his girlfriend.(5 votes)
- Why was this painted? Who paid for it? Did the King order a portrait of his mistress? If he did, where did it hang?(5 votes)
- Why are the colors all so light?(1 vote)
- A light color palette is one of the elements of the Rococo style: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rococo. If you mean 'why' as in 'to what purpose', I believe it is meant to make paintings more lively, 'fresh' feeling, fun, and upbeat (as opposed to Baroque moodiness). But I'm getting that all from the wiki, so please look there for more details. :)(3 votes)
- isn't this painting called marquis de pompadour not marie de pompadour?(1 vote)
- Was Boucher in general and was this painting reubenist or possintist( I think reubenist)?(1 vote)
- I was wondering if frames from older painting are given with the original painting or if they were made later? Who made the frame for this painting?(1 vote)
- Fun fact! Anime, as it is known today, was pioneered by Osamu Tezuka (of Astro Boy fame), and was inspired by Disney. I read her eyes as very "Bambi," myself, so I see more Disney than "anime."(1 vote)
- Why is she represented in this worldly way?(0 votes)
Video transcript
SPEAKER 1: We're looking at
Francois Boucher's The Marquise de Pompadour. SPEAKER 2: So and I have
to, before we go into this, just say that I don't really
like rococo paintings, but I really like this one. There's something really
beautiful about it. SPEAKER 1: So what is it? SPEAKER 2: I'm taken in by the
pink ruffles, and the lace, and the cameo on her
wrist, and the pouf that she's using
to powder herself, and the flowers on the bottom,
and the pink of her cheeks, and the blue bow in her
hair, and the little pink at the end of the
brush that she's using to put on her blush. I mean, it's just really yummy. SPEAKER 1: OK, so let's talk
about those things for just a moment, because they
really do catch the eye. The lace and the pink
ribbons have a kind of almost architectural
quality to them that's really extraordinary. SPEAKER 2: Yeah, they have a
kind of real volume to them. SPEAKER 1: They have
volume and structure. And you can feel the weight and
the stiffness of the fabric. And the pouf is the
opposite of that. And there's tremendous
focus, of course, on the cameo on her
wrist, because it's a portrait of her lover. SPEAKER 2: King Louis the XV. SPEAKER 1: That's
right, of France. But then contrast that with
the rendering of her face, of her head, which is sort
of impossibly soft and sort of re-formed. Look at the size of
the eyes in comparison to the size of the mouth. She's become a child. SPEAKER 2: That's true. I hadn't thought of that. SPEAKER 1: It's
almost as if we're looking at Japanese cartoons. What are those called? SPEAKER 2: Anime. I mean, it's certainly
not about her personality, and who she was, and her
humanity in any real way. SPEAKER 1: No, it's
her persona, right? SPEAKER 2: Yes,
it's her persona. And that's, to me, that's what
the whole painting is about. It's just about artifice. It's like the artifice
of the French court in the 18th Century,
in the rococo period. It's about the artifice of
the clothing, of the makeup. It's just about surface. SPEAKER 1: It's true. But this is a very intimate
kind of surface, isn't it? And so-- SPEAKER 2: Well, that it's the
king's lover-- in that way? SPEAKER 1: Yeah, and also
just the sense of proximity. We feel-- SPEAKER 2: That's true. We're very close to her. SPEAKER 1: Yeah, we feel
as if we can reach out. SPEAKER 2: We're
her best friend, and she's about to share
an intimate secret. SPEAKER 1: That's exactly right. But then her eye rises
up across her wrist, over the portrait of her
lover, across her breast, up to her neck. And then finally
we get to her face, which seems sort
of almost remote. SPEAKER 2: The
first thing that I noticed was all of those
accessories of artifice. And then I looked at her face. I read the label. OK, this is the
mistress to Louis XV. And then I thought,
who is this woman? I looked at her face for clues. And I didn't get anything. SPEAKER 1: Yeah,
the sense of clarity with which the
artifice, as you put it, is painted against the
softness and the indeterminacy of her individuality is, I
think, clearest in the collar. Look how incredibly
crisp, almost frozen, that collar is, and then
look at the softness. But there is this wild sense
of indeterminacy and mystery, I think.