Artemisia Gentileschi: Studios of Their Own
An excerpt from my forthcoming book for International Women's Day
Artemisia Gentileschi is the earliest female painter I’ve included in ‘Studios of Their Own’, published this autumn by Quarto as a kind of follow-up to my ‘Rooms of Their Own’. Here’s the section on her in the book (it might change a bit in the final proof stage, this is only the final draft), the probable cover of which you’ll find at the bottom of this newsletter - as before the image is by the very talented Jim Oses. Pictured above is Gentileschi’s ‘Self-portrait as the Allegory of Painting’, produced in 1638-39 when she was living at the court of Charles I in England, accompanying her father who was working as his court painter and working alongside him. The King was a big fan of her work.
Virginia Woolf wrote about how important it was for creative women to have a “room of their own”. Though Artemisia Gentileschi (1593 – c.1656) was subject to the restrictive conditions of being a female artist in the 17th century – ineligible to join guilds, unable to become an apprentice, limited access to certain buildings, legal and business restrictions – one thing she did have access to was a studio.
As the daughter of a successful painter, Artemisia grew up within the working environment of her father Orazio’s workshop. Indeed he recognised her ability from an early age and told his patron the Grand Duchess of Tuscany in 1612, that (even allowing for proud parent bias) she “has in three years become so skilled that I can venture to say that today she has no peer.”
Artemisia was obviously strongminded. She put fearless women centrestage in her paintings, giving the subject matter a stronger female perspective. This is seen in probably her best known work ‘Judith Slaying Holofernes’ (1614-20) and the story of ‘Susanna and the Elders’ (1610) which depicts the story of sexual violence from Susanna’s point of view, particularly significant for Artemisia who as a young woman was raped by one of the painters in her father’s workshop team.
Very little is known about her own workspaces. She married another painter, Pierantonio Stiattesi, soon after her rapist was found guilty, and the couple moved to Florence where her dowry arrangements allowed her to set up her own working studio. It appears that this first workplace was in her father-in-law’s house on via Santa Reparata where he worked as a tailor. An invoice from a carpenter in 1614 shows her studio was up and running, ordering painting stretchers. By 1616 she had moved out and established her own independent workshop in via Borgo Ognissanti.
Although it’s hard to pin down exactly how her studio looked, Artemisa was always keen on making a good impression and appears to have used some of her own fine gowns as props for paintings. Similarly, letters from the time indicate the decoration of her house was impressive, important when conducting business with potential buyers – luxury possessions included copper kitchenware and gold-embossed leather wall coverings. She described her home as fit for a gentleman to be seen in.
Her business certainly thrived, not least because she was excellent at selling her abilities. “You will find the spirit of Caesar in the soul of a woman,” she once assured a patron about her quality, and did not shy away from her gender. “A woman’s name raises doubts until her work is seen,” she told her patron Antonio Ruffo, “I will show Your Illustrious Lordship what a woman can do.”
Artemisia became the first woman to become a member of the Accademia di Arte del Disegno in Florence, developing an impressive spread of patrons across Europe including the ruling Medici. She later relocated to Naples where again she built up a thriving workshop, which included her own painter daughter Palmira/Prudentia. So collaborative was she that it has made attributing her name to works a problematic job centuries later.
Her letters from her time there give an insight into the day-to-day issues involved in studio work. In another letter to Ruffo, she points out in reference to a commission that nude female models are expensive “which is a big headache” and that they rip her off and are annoyingly petty.