After viewing the Leader Portraits I am reminded of the values that leaders want to portray. Art is a way to show things without using words. When studying history, photographs and paintings are brought up to show things symbolically. For example, in at least one of all of the leader’s portraits we looked at, they are either wearing red or there is some kind of red in the background. Red is known to be a color of power and royalty. Obviously in the painting or photograph the person cannot say “I am royalty and I am powerful”, but the colors (and other things can). I find the study of art history very interesting (especially when looking at paintings) because something one of my past history teachers told me is that every single thing in a painting is there for a reason. Whether it be who is in the painting, what colors are used, what the weather is like, and so on, all of it plays a key role in what the image is trying to depict and what message it is trying to tell. You are able to tell a lot about a person and what they want to portray about themselves in art.
Something I also found interesting was that up until recently, in their portraits, leaders did not smile and if they did it was very subtle. This makes me wonder if there was a switch in how citizens see and want to see their leaders. Perhaps leaders used to be “all powerful” and more commanding, but now the type of leader that people want is someone that they can relate to and feel on a human level, instead of feeling like they are above everyone. I personally feel that a leader that is less of a god like figure and more of a regular person with authoritative qualities is someone I would vote for and feel comfortable with.