French sculptor Albert-Ernest Carrier-Belleuse was known for sculpting busts, especially of historical and mythical figures, primarily earlier in his career. Belleuse was hailed as giving “carried and winsome life to historical figures and fantasy busts” and carving “extraordinary likeness and psychological life within richly tactile, modeled work”(Butler 80). All of these elements of Belleuse can be seen in his bust, Shakespeare (fig. 1). This bronze depiction of Shakespeare is a departure from previous portrayals of the English bard because of the way in which Belleuse approaches his representation of Shakespeare. Carrier-Belleuse’s bust of Shakespeare embodies the struggle of sculptors to modernize within the strict confines of 19th-century expectations of sculpture. This struggle is illustrated through the depiction of Shakespeare as a philosopher and parallels the struggles of 19th-century playwrights to create modern works.

This bust of Shakespeare by Carrier-Belleuse is a powerful and focused work. The proportions of the bust are slightly smaller than life sized but realistic. The intensity of the bust is especially palpable through the gaze of Shakespeare because at a particular angle his eyes interlock with the viewer. His gaze is concentrated as if the sculpture’s eyes are looking into the interior of the viewer rather and therefore engage the viewer as opposed to an indifference to the viewer’s presence. The narrowness of the nose coupled with the protruding cheek bones and winkled brow stresses the gaze of Shakespeare. The face narrows to a point at Shakespeare’s chin which just grazes the right side of his robe. The facial hair on the bust is extremely detailed as Belleuse makes it appear as if each individual strand of hair is naturally growing forth from the face of the sculpture. Belleuse is able to create the same effect with the hair producing from the bust’s head as each hair is seemingly deeply rooted into the scalp of the statue. This feature can be seen most prominently at the hairline where Belleuse took the time to sculpt individual pieces of hair before culminating into the hair as a whole. The ears are another prominent feature on this bust as they are well defined and assist in creating the illusion of narrowness. This is accomplished by the slanted angle at which the ears are positioned helping to outline the edges of Shakespeare’s face.

However, the features which are most emphasized on Shakespeare are the forehead and brow. The forehead extends beyond the width of the rest of Shakespeare’s face drawing immediate attention to it. The largeness of the forehead is especially seen from the profile view as his hairline starts far back on his head attracting a more focused gaze to the forehead. The forehead of this bust is especially reflective underneath the light as the bronze surface creates a sheen of light which is continuously cast and actively projects on Shakespeare. There are also small indentations on the scalp which allow for varied areas of shadow and light on the forehead. The brow is an extremely detailed area on this bust with intertwining and tensed wrinkles giving the appearance that Shakespeare is concentrating on something intently. The deep creases in the brow allow for light to be dispersed at varied angles and highlight the folds concentrated at the center of the brow. The profile perspective, on either side of the bust, depicts protruding veins sprouting from the brow to the back of the head (view 2 of fig. 1). The emphasis on the features of the forehead and the brow not only create the illusion of thought but that the brain, and Shakespeare’s capacity to think, is beyond what his own skull can contain. This particular way of depicting genius by emphasizing the forehead derives from the Northern Renaissance specifically in the works of Albrecht Dürer. For instance, in Dürer’s Self Portrait, Dürer utilizes light casting onto his head and the large size of his forehead to signify his own genius (fig. 3). Therefore, Belleuse is calling upon these ideas and utilizing them within Shakespeare to refer to Shakespeare’s status as a genius.

Another interesting facet to Shakespeare is the clothing that Belleuse chose to depict Shakespeare in. Extending from Shakespeare’s right shoulder and crossing diagonally over Shakespeare’s body is a robe that is stiffly draped. On the left side, where the draped robe disappears, the striated tunic with two tassels emerges. The collar of the shirt props up broadly suspended above the tunic. The left side shows dress typical of the 16th century while the portion of robe on the right side harkens back to the traditional depiction of busts of “great men”, such as politicians, philosophers, scientists, authors and other men who could be considered as intellectuals. The image of philosophers being portrayed in long flowing robes was cultivated in Italian Renaissance art such as in Raphael’s School of Athens (fig. 4). This image of philosophers in robes was carried on by sculptors in their portrayal of philosophers. Louis-François Roubiliac’s bust Plato exemplifies this interpretation of philosophers as he crafted Plato wearing robes (fig. 5). However, the ‘robe-ing’ of busts soon continued beyond strictly philosophers to encompass other “great men” such as Roubiliac’s bust of Isaac Newton who is also depicted in a robe (fig. 6).

But what makes Carrier-Belleuse’s interpretation of Shakespeare unique in comparison to previous depictions of Shakespeare in sculpture? Louis-François Roubiliac actually tried his hand at creating a sculpture of Shakespeare. Roubiliac was commissioned by the actor David Garrick to create a monumental sculpture of Shakespeare. Roubiliac first created a terra-cotta bust of Shakespeare as a model for the monumental marble piece (fig. 7). This bust is rather a traditional interpretation of the bard in the sense that there is no real emotion in the piece. Roubiliac’s Portrait Bust of William Shakespeare is a rather conventional presentation of Shakespeare and a traditional approach to crafting a bust. Busts were essentially meant to function as a preserved, immortal image of a person, nothing more. Therefore what is missing in Roubiliac’s Portrait Bust of William Shakespeare is the illusion of thought or any emotion, and instead the bust simply greets the viewer with a blank stare. Roubiliac’s bust is not nearly as engaging as Belleuse’s interpretation of Shakespeare and the only element that is similar between the two is that the robe is present yet again. In many ways Belleuse’s Shakespeare builds upon Roubiliac’s interpretation of Shakespeare as Belleuse takes this conventional representation of Shakespeare and adds the illusion of internalized thought. By giving his bust the appearance that it is thinking of its own accord, Belleuse goes beyond traditional representations of “great men” and makes the bust an active work of art by engaging the viewer in the work.

But why did Belleuse decide to represent Shakespeare and why did Belleuse want to depict Shakespeare in such a philosophical manner? Belleuse might have picked Shakespeare as a subject for one of his busts because Shakespeare, during the 19th century, represented a form of artistic liberation for the French. This was due to the fact that 19th-century playwrights were enduring the same struggles of 19th-century sculptors (Haines 100). The struggle for both 19th-century sculptors and playwrights was that they had to contend with critics who did not want sculptors or playwrights to craft works that broke out of the traditional mold and in fact critical “reaction against reforming ideas was…violent”(Haines 100). Sculpture during this period was forced to “develop within the confines of the new classicizing aesthetic” meaning that most sculpture at the time was presented as “variations on some well-known antique figures”(Potts 38-9). Therefore, many 19th-century sculptors and playwrights were faced with the question of how to modernize their works while still adhering to the strict expectations of what sculpture and plays, respectively, were supposed to do and how sculpture and plays were supposed to be structured. Charles Molin Haines muses in his book, Shakespeare in France: criticism: Voltaire to Victor Hugo, about the difficulties that French writers had to deal with leading up to the 19th century stating that, “young authors made their début as ardent devotees of the rules, and, when encouraged by success, emancipated themselves as far as their audiences would allow them from the strict canon” (Haines 111). However, through the rise of popularity in Shakespeare’s plays in the early 19th century, French playwrights were able to find a new icon to inspire them in their works and were able to stage new productions of Shakespeare’s plays freeing themselves to produce works that broke away from the strict rules which were imposed upon them. In the article Shakespeare in Europe: Introduction, MIT Global Shakespeares, Aneta Mancewicz comments on the influence Shakespeare had on French writers by affirming that the writers of the early 19th century “praised Shakespeare for his masterful poetry and characterization, drawing on his works in their critical and creative writings”. This is why Belleuse chose to depict Shakespeare: to represent the way in which other artists in French society were able to break free of established artistic tradition.

Although, it is important to note that Shakespeare’s influence over French playwrights did not occur easily. At some of the first stagings of Shakespearean plays in France, such as Othello in Porte-Saint-Matin during July of 1822, the reaction by French audiences to Shakespeare was volatile. During this particular attempt it was said that at the play “not a word could be heard, violent altercations took place, apples and oranges were thrown” and additionally the audience shouted “Parlez Français” at the actors (Jusserand 451). This reaction was mostly due to the perception of Shakespeare as a “barbarous” because French audiences did not enjoy Shakespeare’s scenes showcasing low humor (Haines 74). However, once Napoleon fell out of power this opened up opportunities for artists of all sorts and “the Romantic revolution began”(Haines 108). Once leaders of the Romantic movement in France began to endorse Shakespeare’s works they, along with Shakespeare, became immensely popular. Victor Hugo even gave Shakespeare a ringing endorsement proclaiming that, “‘the poetic summit of modern times: Shakespeare is the drama…the form proper to the third state of civilization, the literature of reality’”(Haines 132). This catapulted Shakespeare into “the Pantheon of the literary gods” in France which lead to “French painters, poets, and musicians (being)…of one mind” and beginning to take a real interest in portraying Shakespeare as an esteemed playwright and poet (Jusserand 459). This idea of Shakespeare as an enlightened thinker is what Belleuse was attempting to depict in his bust of Shakespeare.

By depicting Shakespeare as a genius Belleuse not only cements Shakespeare’s popularity in France, but demonstrates that artistic tradition can be modernized. This is achieved not just by Shakespeare as the subject of the bust but by the way in which Shakespeare is represented in the sculpture. Belleuse purposely presents Shakespeare as a genius philosopher by crafting a forehead and brow littered with wrinkles giving the illusion that Shakespeare is intently concentrating. The forehead representing genius is based on iconography developed during the Northern Renaissance, exemplified in Dürer’s Self Portrait. To make this image of Shakespeare even more powerful Belleuse utilizes sculptural tradition of busts, the robe which he drapes across the upper body of the bust, to signify and equate Shakespeare to philosophers and other “great men”. Belleuse presents all of this imagery to the viewer to make an overt counter to the previous doubt of Shakespeare’s genius but also to point out to other sculptors of the time that if 19th-century playwrights were able to break from the confining nature and dictates of stage drama through Shakespeare then sculptors too could break free from the neoclassical expectations of critics. Shakespeare is evidence that sculpture in the 19th century could be modern and that a bust could inspire a reaction in the viewer and engage them while looking at a bust.

Bibliography

Butler, Ruth, Suzanne G. Lindsay, and Alison Luchs. European Sculpture of the Nineteenth Century. Washington: National Gallery of Art, 2000. Print.

Haines, Charles Moline. Shakespeare in France; criticism : Voltaire to Victor Hugo. London: Pub. for the Shakespeare association, by H. Milford, Oxford university press, 1925.

Potts, Alex. “I. Classical Figures. Surface Values: Canova,” The Sculptural Imagination: Figurative, Modernist, Minimalist, pp.38-59.

Jusserand, Jean Jules. Shakespeare in France under the ancien régime. New York : American Scholar Publications, 1966.

Mancewicz, Aneta. “Shakespeare in Europe: Introduction, MIT Global Shakespeares.” MIT Global Shakespeares. MIT, 7 Feb. 2012. Web. 27 Nov. 2014.

M. Caygill, Treasures of the British Museum, 2nd edition. London: The British Museum Press, 1992.

A. Dawson, Portrait sculpture, a catalogue of the British Museum collection c. 1675-1975. British Museum Press, 1999.

Schoenbaum, S. Shakespeare’s Lives. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1970. Print.

Baker, Malcolm. The Making of Portrait Busts in the Mid-Eighteenth Century: Roubiliac, Scheemakers and Trinity College, Dublin. The Burlington Magazine, Vol. 137, No. 1113 (Dec., 1995), pp. 821-831.