Regrets are a universal experience, and even the most talented artists often find themselves compelled to obliterate their own creations. While society may condemn certain works of art, there are instances where creators act as their own censors, either reevaluating their perspectives or fearing damage to their reputation. It’s particularly intriguing when provocative artworks fail to hinder an artist’s career amid the apprehensive and repressive atmosphere of conventional communities. Matthew William Peters (1742-1814), an English portrait and genre painter renowned for his provocative depictions of courtesans, provides a compelling example. Despite his sensual portraits, Peters later transitioned to a career in the clergy, and ironically, these controversial works turned out to be his most celebrated masterpieces.
Fig. 1. The Sisters, са. 1790s (gallery.са)
Fig. 2. Sleeping Girl, attrib. to Peters (Artory on Twitter)
The іпfɩᴜeпсe of Society
Peters was born into a family of a civil engineer in Freshwater, Isle of Wight. During his youth, the family relocated from England to Dublin, following an invitation for Peters Sr. to contribute his expertise in improving loughs and rivers for navigation. In Dublin, the budding artist received his education under the guidance of Robert West, the founder of the local drawing school.
Displaying remarkable talent during his studies, Peters caught the attention of the Dublin Society, which sponsored his journey to London. There, he apprenticed under the English portrait painter Thomas Hudson and earned a premium from the Society of Arts. Subsequently, the Dublin Society supported his travels to Italy, where he immersed himself in artistic studies from 1761 to 1765. His time in Italy culminated in his membership in the Accademia del Disegno in Florence.
Upon returning to England, Peters showcased his artistic prowess by exhibiting works at prestigious venues such as the Society of Artists and the Royal Academy. In recognition of his contributions to the artistic realm, he was elected an academician in 1777.
Fig. 3. Antony and Cleopatra, act 1, scene 2, print made after Peters (britishmuseum.org)
Fig. 4. Portrait of a lady as a bacchante, attrib. to Peters (artnet.com)
Fig. 5. Portrait of Miss Morᴛι̇ɱer as Hebe (artnet.com)
Freemason and Clergyɱaп
As early as the 1760s, the artist’s recognition extended into society as he became a freemason, a testament to the value placed on his talent. Assuming the role of the grand portrait painter for the Freemasons, he unveiled portraits of the Duke of Manchester and Lord Petre, both serving as Grand Masters, at the Royal Academy exhibition in 1785. Additionally, Peters took on the role of chaplain at the Royal Academy for a four-year period, spanning from 1784 to 1788, gradually allowing this position to overshadow his academic aspirations. In his own words, Peters resigned from the Royal Academy with the intention to “relinquish his art as a profession and take up a clerical career.”
During the zenith of his success in both academic and clerical pursuits, Peters secured two livings—Scalford in Leicestershire and Knipton. In 1795, upon becoming the prebendary of Lincoln Cathedral, he also acquired a living at Eaton. Embracing his role as a clergyman, Peters shifted his focus predominantly to religious works. Notable creations from this period include a ten-by-five foot Annunciation for Lincoln Cathedral and “The Resurrection of a Pious Family.”
Fig. 6. Young Lady In Bed (britishmuseum.org)
Fig. 7. Sleeping Woɱaп (wikimedia.org)
Sylvia, Lydia and Others
Comparing portraits of courtesans Sylvia, Lydia, Belinda, to other depictions of females with bare breasts
In the realm of Matthew William Peters’ artistry, a more seasoned couple, a husband and his pregnant wife, engage in a fervent foreplay. The woman, with a playful demeanor, urges her amorous partner to expedite the impending climax, providing explicit guidance on every intimate detail. Peters, through his meticulous depiction, imbues these scenes with a distinctive character. What sets these paintings apart is their proximity to the realm of pornography rather than traditional erotic art. Interestingly, it’s not the anatomical details, such as the exposed breasts, that stand out as the primary source of ‘vulgarity.’ Instead, it’s the provocative smiles and liberated gazes the subjects cast upon the viewer. Upon close examination, one might observe that this esteemed English painter has, in a peculiar way, managed to craft portraits akin to those found on the risqué decks of playing cards for adults— a testament to his artistic prowess despite the unconventional subject matter.
Fig. 8. Country Girl, print made after Peters (britishmuseum.org)
Fig. 9. Belinda, print made after Peters (britishmuseum.org)
Fig. 10. Lydia (artnet.com)
Fig. 11. Lydia (Tate on Twitter)
Fig. 12. Lydia. Print made after Peters (britishmuseum.org)
Fig. 13. Sylvia, 1778 (Wikimedia.org)
Fig. 14. Sylvia, print made after Peters (britishmuseum.org)
Fig. 15. Print made after Peters (britishmuseum.org)