Artyfacts - online journal of film, painting and architectural events in London

The First Actresses: Nell Gwyn to Sarah Siddons

by Mary Phelan

The First Actresses: Nell Gwyn to Sarah Siddons
22 October - 8 January, 2012
Admission Charge
The National Portrait Gallery

The First Actresses: Nell Gwyn to Sarah Siddons, now at the National Portrait Gallery, would not win any prizes for political correctness. With an increasing number of female actors calling themselves, er, actors, the very title is anomalous. Then, there is the twinning of the relatively new craft of female acting – post 1660s – with that of the Oldest Profession. This is unavoidable, since bona fide actresses and old-time Women of the Night caught the public eye in the same way; by being vivacious, attractive but not necessarily conventionally beautiful, together with an ability to dress up, and paint up, and perform.


		Eleanor ("Nell") Gwyn by Simon Vereist, C. 1680 © National Portrait Gallery, London

A fourteen year-old Nell Gywn appeared at theTheatre Royal, Covent Garden, in 1664. A celebrity culture arose within a surprisingly short time, parallel to the one we know today. The best, most beautiful actresses attracted handsome fees, noble patronage, the attention of an insatiable public – and the artists of the day took a hand in the PR that helped along their own fortunes. Witness the two versions of Eleanor “Nell” Gwyn, by Simon Vereist. In the earlier painting, c. 1680, the actress is covered by a modest, low-cut bodice. In the later painting, the actress has dropped her bodice to reveal an attractive, girlish figure and milky-white skin, then a requisite for beauty.

The Actress Muse

These ambitious portraits served as forms of advertising for both art and theatre, and were engraved for circulation by print sellers. Press Copy By the 1700s, portraying the actress in character had become fashionable. The earthy portraits of the 1600s had given way to lush depictions of the women posing as figures from mythology, redolent of the classicism of the eighteenth century. What I find puzzling is their addiction to their clothing. With the exception of the afore-mentioned painting of Nell Gwyn, there is no nudity in the exhibition. Given the significance of the body in classicism, I would expect to see ‘natural’ flowing hairstyles, and clothing that at least revealed the outline of the body, if not explicit nudity. But this type of art had died along with Poussin, Nell Gwyn, and the 1600s. However, layered draperies and voluminous hats did not put off the audiences of the day. Dorothy Jordan as Thalia, the Comic Muse (1786), by John Hoppner, triggered off ‘Jordan-mania’, a public desire for likenesses of her, and a rise in stature for both her, and the painter.

Caught In The Act

The paintings in this area are the equivalent of movie stills. Do look out for William Smith as Hamlet and Elizabeth Hopkins as Gertrude in Hamlet, (1777 – 1778) by James Robert, and the sumptuous Frances Abingdon as Widow Belmour in The Way To Keep Him by John Joseph Zoffany. At this point in time, the public appetite for theatricals had reached such a pitch that non-professionals were getting in on the act. At the forefront was the aristocracy, who had both the leisure and the money to build their own theatres. The Three Witches from Macbeth (Elizabeth Lamb, Viscountess Melbourne, Georgiana, Duchess of Devonshire, Anne Seymour Damer), 1778, by Daniel Gardner, is what it says on the box; a depiction of the three noble ladies in full hex gear, surrounded by symbols of their dark craft and dancing around a cauldron. The scene is actually quite ‘realistic’, with only their structured hairdos contrasting oddly with the pointed hats. The depiction is allegorical, also. The three women were Whig-leaning, political activists in a time when women didn’t have the vote.

Divas and Dancers

Many actresses were also singers and dancers. In this area, we see a selection of portraits by Thomas Gainsborough, the top portraitist of his day. Giovanna Bacelli (1782), is his portrait of an Italian dancer who caught the eye of the Duke of Dorset. The painting is beautiful in that way that Gainsborough paintings are; a pastoral setting, the subject against a broad sweep of sky, and all rendered gorgeously in those characteristic, soft brushstrokes. Nevertheless, something jars. Curator Gill Perry explains how the heavily made-up face of the actress and the elaborate drapery of her clothing are at odds with the naturalistic setting that she is seemingly dancing lightly through. Indeed, the painting could be a metaphor of the many contradictions in the lives of these performing women.

Their success depended on their looking pastorally fresh and natural at a time when foot-high hairstyles, panniered skirts and pantomimic faces were fashionable. The often tawdry nature of their craft was ever at odds with the succession of high-born husbands they attracted. Whether today’s actresses get a better deal, I don’t have the experience to say. First Actresses is accompanied by The Actress Now, a free exhibition of portraits of contemporary actresses, and is open until January 8, 2012.