Mr and Mrs Andrews - Critical Reception

Critical Reception

Mr and Mrs Andrews has been used in human geography and culture analysis. In both cases, it is often the reflection of social status which is analysed. The medium itself, oil-on-canvas, is seen as a symbol of high social class, prestigious, and out of the range of the majority. The choice to commission Gainsborough to produce the work has been seen as explicitly intended to secure and reproduce the Andrews' social position through the artwork itself. It is possible to examine the painting in the context of the relationship of the Andrews to their land, from which they derived their income, and their political power, since suffrage was linked to land ownership. Mr and Mrs Andrews is often put into this legal context. There is a distinct lack of land-workers in the painting, and it is often commented that some of the happiness of the Andrews that is derived from the work is from seeing themselves as landowners. Marxist art critic John Berger once commented that Mr and Mrs Andrews, were "not a couple in nature as Rousseau imagined nature. They are landowners and their proprietary attitude towards what surrounds them is visible in their stance and expressions." (He is referring to the beliefs of Jean Jacques Rousseau.)

Far from stressing the links between the sitters and their setting, some critics believe that Mr and Mrs Andrews are set against the natural world in which they appear. For them, the choice of Mrs Andrews' clothing is at odds with the natural scene, and inappropriate. Mr Andrews is harsh, and complete with shotgun, brutal. Similarly, Gainsborough's positioning of the couple is an indication that they are not at home with the scene. They see Gainsborough's early work as satirical. Gainsborough's dislike of the upper classes was well known. For them, the large amount of canvas set aside for the landscape was a way for him to spend time painting what he liked.