What do Victorian paintings of religious subjects and themes reveal about Victorian attitudes and values.

Authors Avatar

What do Victorian paintings of religious subjects and themes reveal about Victorian attitudes and values.

Victorian values and attitudes to such painting must be considered in the light of their times as it will undoubtedly affect or alter their beliefs causing controversy over certain images and approval or acceptance of others.  Queen Victoria’s reign was extremely long from 1837 to1901, and saw many social and technological changes, the population changed from being primarily agrarian to industrial and urbanised. A succession of bad harvests in the 1840’s had brought starvation and 1848 was a year of revolutions across Europe, reverberating social unease between the rich and the poor, and to add to this period of tension there was serious division within the Church of England.

   The Victorian age was predominately Christian but Protestantism which many felt was central to national identity, and had up until recent times been the dominant religion was now seen as under “threat”, by the growth of Catholicism.  The cause of this was two-fold, firstly the Catholic Emancipation Act of 1829 had given the Catholics citizenship rights previously denied and a huge influx of Irish catholic immigrants had led to a growth in Catholicism which many people held with suspicion and even fear.

 In 1850 the Pope Pius 1X had re-established the Roman Catholic hierarchy in England, a move so unpopular to cause civil unrest in the form of the so called “No popery riots”.  To compound the anti-Catholic feeling amongst many Protestants particularly amongst the fast growing branch of Nonconformists, namely the Methodists, Unitarians and Baptists, Anglicanism was becoming divided by Oxford academics that wished to reinstate the church of England into a universal Catholicism adopting some of the rituals of  the pre Reformation particularly Holy communion . The Oxford movement as it was known, by aligning itself with many catholic practices became know as  ‘High Church’, whereas the Nonconformist/Evangelistic movement were regarded as ‘Low Church’ who emphasised the importance of Bible reading rather than the more visual experience of the Catholic or High Church.

|It worth noting that the nonconformist churches were largely based in the industrial cities of the north and among them were an ever increasing number of new middle class entrepreneurs, money buying respectability and large houses to decorate with suitable works of Art.

It can of little surprise that members of the Pre –Raphaelite Brotherhood, formed in 1848, received mixed if not hostile criticism when they first exhibited some of their paintings, particularly as there was a widespread belief that during their early years they were a quasi monastic group who were sympathetic towards Catholicism or the Oxford movement..

Certainly Millais had connections to the Oxford movement, his friend Thomas Combe who was a major Pre-Raphaelite patron was friends with the movement’s leading theologians.  It is also interesting to note that the famous Art critic of the day John Ruskin before defending the Pre-Raphaelite’s work distanced himself from any association with the Oxford movement.  

One of the most controversial Pre-Raphaelite pictures of the day was first shown at the Royal Academy in 1850.  Painted by Millais it originally had no title just accompanied by a biblical quotation it was later known by the image it portrayed: Christ in the House of His Parents (The Carpenter’s Shop’).  In keeping with the Pre –Raphaelite doctrine it attempted to regain the purity of vision of the early Italian period unaffected by later academic teaching.  The early work of the Pre-Raphaelites was, archaic in appearance making it distinctive from the contemporary narrative painting.  The unpopularity of this work was due not only to it unconventional representation of the Holy family but also slated by the critics who declared it unfinished and crude.  The Times described the painting as ‘revolting’ and ‘with no omission of misery, of dirt, of even disease, all finished with loathsome minuteness’. Charles Dickens in the publication ‘Household Words’, 1850 was shocked by the appearance of the young Christ and described him ‘as hideous, wry-necked, blubbering, red-headed boy, in a bed gown.’ Ruskin coming to Millais’s defence quoting ‘truth to nature’ or nature is truth and therefore rightly belongs in religious painting. Ruskin was an extremely influential art critic and if it had not been for him coming to the defence of the Pre-Raphaelites work they may have not achieved the success they did.  Millais’s  painting was deeply unpopular because it did not fit in with the stereotype classical derived pictures of the time, and its symbolism may not have been obvious viewers.   The painting was bought by the non-conformist stockbroker, Thomas Plint.‘  We can speculate that he saw the painting as enshrining the idea of Christ as a working man, implying an active ministry, a very acceptable notion in Broad Church, Evangelical and and Nonconformist circles’ Barringer, Yale publications 1988.  The unfavourable ‘High Church symbolism had probably been ignored or mis- understood by its purchaser.

Join now!

In later works Millais steered towards main stream subject matter, and achieved wealth and respectability by painting stirring historical scenes, society portraits, and sentimental pictures of children and lovers.  He continued to paint pictures on religious themes but fitting in with the mind frame of the time.  This abandonment of Pre-Raphaelite principles angered some of its members who thought Millais had sold out to public opinion and profitability.

  One of  Millais’s most popular works was ‘A Huguenot on St Bartholomew’s Day, refusing to shield Himself from Danger by Wearing the Roman Catholic Badge,’ inscribed by the artist ...

This is a preview of the whole essay