Reflection 3 - National Portrait Gallery

I'll admit...when I saw that we were going to the National Portrait Gallery this week, I was less than excited. Sure I may find an art gallery interesting...but for about ten minutes. These were my expectations going into the experience; I was pleasantly surprised at the experience we had. Looking at the identities presented in the portraits through various symbols was more enlightening than I suspected.

While writing my reflection this week, I thought about if I were to be portrayed in a portrait what style would I want to be portrayed in. Would I want to be portrayed in a glorified manner like George Washington or a down-to-earth manner like George Bush? Would I want to be portrayed in an abstract manner like Marily Monroe or through an exact representation like Toni Morrison? I think I would most like to be portrayed more along the lines of Kennedy. In our times, photographs are so common so though photograph like portraits are amazing, I feel they more showcase the artist rather than the subject. If I contributed enough to society to where people would want my portrait, I would want them to know theres a story, something interesting to my life. I don't want, "That's a sweet portrait" to be their reaction. This in turn connects with the whole idea of perminance. Your earthly perminance is what you're remembered by...I want to be remembered for doing something interesting, not just doing something -- so I'd want my portrait interesting...not just there.

This whole idea of your portrait clearly representing your identity I certainly believed, but I don't know if I completely bought it. After going to the portrait gallery, I completely see how true that statement is. It made me not only question what identities were presented in their portraits, but what identity I would want presented in mine.