Abstract
This essay aims to examine theories of painting presented by André Félibien (1619-1695) and Roger de Piles (1635-1709) through the concepts of “author,” “nature,” and “portrait.” First, I describe the concept of “author” in Félibien’s theory of painting. He regarded the “ordonnance” in a canvas painted by a painter as the order of the universe created by God. Félibien’s considered that the painter is both a “craftsman” and an “author” who can invent the new “ordonnance” from nothing. In other words, he had the tendency to exalt the painter as the “creator.” Second, I describe the concept of “nature” in de Piles’ painting theory. For him, “nature” is “ugly” in itself; de Piles also highlighted the importance of “artifice” to retouch imperfection. In particular, de Piles’ account of Rubens shows that he valued painting as “makeup” which deceives the beholder’s eyes. Third, I analyze the concept of “portrait” in Félibien and de Piles’ theories. Félibien and de Piles appreciated “expression” rather than “resemblance” in relation to their models. In short, these two thinkers’ theories did not intend to construct “resemblance” but to emphasize “expression” of their models’ temperament and intelligence. Through these considerations, this essay shows that these two thinkers’ theories of painting deviate from the classical age while connected to the context of the Age of Enlightenment.
