Amy Freund
I am an associate professor and The Kleinheinz Family Endowment for the Arts and Education Endowed Chair in Art History at SMU. Try saying that five times fast.
I received my Ph.D. from the University of California, Berkeley, and began my teaching career in the SMU art history department in 2005 as a Haakon Predoctoral Fellow. I subsequently held an Andrew W. Mellon Postdoctoral Fellowship at the National Gallery of Art’s Center for Advanced Study in the Visual Arts. Before joining the SMU faculty in 2014, I was an assistant professor at Texas Christian University in Fort Worth.
I am a specialist in 18th-century European art. My first book, Portraiture and Politics in Revolutionary France (Penn State University Press, 2014), examines the ways in which sitters and artists used portraiture to reformulate personal and political identity during the French Revolution. Articles related to this project have been published in Eighteenth-Century Studies, The Art Bulletin and in Interior Portraiture and Masculine Identity in France, 1789–1914 (Ashgate, 2010). I am currently working on a second book on the representation of the hunt in late seventeenth- and eighteenth-century France.
Address: Department of Art History
Southern Methodist University
Dallas, Texas, United States
I received my Ph.D. from the University of California, Berkeley, and began my teaching career in the SMU art history department in 2005 as a Haakon Predoctoral Fellow. I subsequently held an Andrew W. Mellon Postdoctoral Fellowship at the National Gallery of Art’s Center for Advanced Study in the Visual Arts. Before joining the SMU faculty in 2014, I was an assistant professor at Texas Christian University in Fort Worth.
I am a specialist in 18th-century European art. My first book, Portraiture and Politics in Revolutionary France (Penn State University Press, 2014), examines the ways in which sitters and artists used portraiture to reformulate personal and political identity during the French Revolution. Articles related to this project have been published in Eighteenth-Century Studies, The Art Bulletin and in Interior Portraiture and Masculine Identity in France, 1789–1914 (Ashgate, 2010). I am currently working on a second book on the representation of the hunt in late seventeenth- and eighteenth-century France.
Address: Department of Art History
Southern Methodist University
Dallas, Texas, United States
less
InterestsView All (15)
Uploads
Books by Amy Freund
Articles and Book Reviews by Amy Freund
One of the largest and most striking submissions to the 1791 Salon, The Harp Lesson by Jean-Antoine-Théodore Giroust was an ambitious but spectacularly ill-timed intervention in revolutionary politics. It emerged from Félicité de Genlis’ remarkable educational project for the children of the duc d’Orléans, especially Princess Adélaïde, which mixed bold ideas about gender and civic virtue with specific political ambition. This article situates the painting within the experimental politics and sentimental crises of the Orléans household. It argues that Giroust, an intimate of this household, sought to exemplify some of Genlis’ boldest claims for the capacities and potential of the royal children in her care, especially at the expense of their biological mother. It demonstrates how Giroust engaged with the visual languages of recent Salon painting to create a domestic scene of female accomplishment that was also freighted with national purpose. The failure of the painting to resonate with the public illuminates the desperate gamble of different figures in the Orléanist camp as well as the unfulfilled possibilities of summer 1791.
One of the largest and most striking submissions to the 1791 Salon, The Harp Lesson by Jean-Antoine-Théodore Giroust was an ambitious but spectacularly ill-timed intervention in revolutionary politics. It emerged from Félicité de Genlis’ remarkable educational project for the children of the duc d’Orléans, especially Princess Adélaïde, which mixed bold ideas about gender and civic virtue with specific political ambition. This article situates the painting within the experimental politics and sentimental crises of the Orléans household. It argues that Giroust, an intimate of this household, sought to exemplify some of Genlis’ boldest claims for the capacities and potential of the royal children in her care, especially at the expense of their biological mother. It demonstrates how Giroust engaged with the visual languages of recent Salon painting to create a domestic scene of female accomplishment that was also freighted with national purpose. The failure of the painting to resonate with the public illuminates the desperate gamble of different figures in the Orléanist camp as well as the unfulfilled possibilities of summer 1791.