Shantelle Williams Art History 112, Section: 006 Paper 1 As their titles clearly state, both John Brewster

Jr.s Mother with Son and John Flannagans Mother and Son I are works that portray the relationship between a mother and her son. Although they share the same subject matter, they are very different in how they set about representing that relationship previously mentioned. When I viewed the two works on my multiple visits to the museum, I received a feeling from Brewsters piece that was almost entirely different than how I felt toward Flannagans. This difference in my responses has very much to do with the difference in the mediums of the works, as well as the difference in the artists approach to them. However, their differences also help to feed into my understanding of the other in ways I had not realized before during my casual trips to the museum. Mother with Son and Mother and Son I are entirely different in terms of their mediums. Brewsters Mother with Son is a painting done on canvas using oil paints, while Flannagans Mother and Son I is a sculpture made from wood. When looking at Flannagans work, I instantly get an earthy, tranquil sensation similar to how one may feel when looking at a forest. These feelings are entirely due to the fact that this work is wholly wooden; and since it appears as though Flannagan did not paint over or color the piece in any way it remains the same medium-brown color as the block of wood he carved it from. The people who usually favor wooden pieces, whether it be art or furniture, tend to do so because they feel that it puts them closer with the earth. Though I do not find myself often attracted to wooden sculptures, I can say that this piece came off in a way that felt personal

2 and pleasantly homely. I did not get a similar feeling when looking at Brewsters painting. Unlike mediums of the wooden form, oil paints do not come directly from the earth; they are more of a man-made creation. Therefore, that homely sensation I received from Flannagans work was not present in Brewsters. The simplicity in style of Flannagans sculpture also allows it to come off as more personal to the viewer. There are no precise details to distinguish that this is any specific person; just the very basic characteristics of the human figure: Heads, arms, legs, hands, and feet. A face, fingers, and toes are carved, but they are still very basic. This lack of distinct features makes it easy for the viewers to see themselves, or others, in the work. I was able to relate it to an image in my head of my own mother holding my youngest brother. By making this piece easily relatable, Flannagan has also made it so that there is the possibility that the viewer can form an emotional attachment to it. Brewsters painting is the opposite, in that the two figures portrayed have very distinguishable features that suggest that this is a portrait of an actual woman and her son. Because this is a portrait of two particular people, it becomes a lot harder for me to relate to than Brewsters. There is also the detail that the two figures in the painting are wearing clothing tied to a specific century of the past, making it increasingly harder for a viewer of present day to relate. This is unlike Brewsters sculpture, in which the figures are nude and have no clothing that would associate them with a certain time in history, which makes it easier for a person to relate to it no matter what time they are living in. As stated before, both works represent the relationship between mother and son. However, the relationship portrayed in Flannagans sculpture is different than that of Brewsters painting. Mother and Son I shows a figure, which we can rightly assume is the

3 mother, holding the smaller figure of her son with his arms wrapped around her head and his face buried in her neck. Her arms encase the length of his body to support his weight by holding his feet. In this positioning, I see the relationship between mother and son represented as being very intimate. I believe it also signifies how much boys depend on their mothers for protection, despite how often people say that a boy needs a male figure in his life. I see this in the way that the boy has his arms tightly wrapped around his mothers head, as if holding on for his life. The dependency is also shown in how the mother is supporting the boys weight, and framing his body with her arms. Having his face hidden in her neck signifies the safety a son, or child in general, finds with his mother who will shield him from the dangers of the world. Most fascinating is the fact that Flannagan carved this entire sculpture from the same block of wood. A son is born from his mother, so in a way it can be said that a mother and son are one. In carving both figures from the same wood block, I see the symbolization of mother and son being one. When I came to see this symbolism, the work became even more remarkable to me. Mother with Son seems to lack this same intimacy, but because this is a portrait of specific people, I look at it as being the portrayal of the kind of relationship they had. In this painting, the son is standing slightly behind his mother, who is sitting. The boys right arm is gently outstretched toward his mother, and he has his fingers lightly placed atop of her upward facing hand. Besides this gentle touch, no other contact is made between mother and son. At first, I thought it was a bit strange that this was a portrait of a mother and son who seemed to lack the closeness one usually sees between a mother and her child. However, upon further thought, I came to understand that the lack of intimacy shown between family members in portraits of this time was common. The way both of the

4 subjects eyes are looking forward and out of the painting makes it easy to tell that they were looking toward the artist. When taking it into consideration that the subjects were actually put into these positions for the artist to paint, it made more sense that it lacked the same amount of intimacy as Flannagans sculpture. The two figures in Brewsters painting probably stood there for hours, almost in the same way that families these days go to take family portraits at photography studios and have to keep positions until the photographer gets the right shot. Because holding a position for a long time can become uncomfortable, the simpler the poses the better the portrait comes out. This is how I look at this painting. It is very similar to many of the family portraits I have seen from this time period. It was painted simply to be hung in the family home, not to evoke a strong response from the viewer. While Brewsters painting style is very impressive (as exemplified in the detailing of the faces, clothing, and scenery seen out the window) his Mother with Son does not affect me as strongly as Flannagans Mother and Son I. I am usually not very fond of wooden sculptures, or art that is very simplistic in detail, but Flannagan succeeded in creating a wooden sculpture that impresses me with all of the meaning that it holds. It is a work that so strongly represents the love and relationship between a mother and son in a way that I have not seen in any other works of its kind. Flannagans Mother and Son I is a great example that sometimes less is truly more.