A member of the 1914 Generation, Hikmet Onat studied under Salvatore Valeri and Joseph Warnia-Zarzecki at the Academy of Fine Arts in Istanbul. After passing the examination to study in Europe, he continued his training at the École des Beaux-Arts in Paris, where he attended the studio of Fernand Cormon. In his early career, Onat gravitated towards large figure compositions, though he turned increasingly to landscape over time, and figure work came to occupy a limited place in his practice. ‘Seated Woman’ is, in this respect, a distinctive work.
The canvas is double-sided: both faces were painted by Onat, though at different points in his career. The front face, signed in the lower right hand corner and dated 1928, depicts a short-haired woman in a black dress, half-seated on an armchair set against a floral-patterned wallpaper, directing her gaze at the viewer. Her dress and posture evoke the image of the ‘New Woman’ that took shape in the early years of the Republic. The figure on the reverse, by contrast, reclines in a folding chair set in an open garden; her light coloured dress and dark belt reflect the fashions of the Second Constitutional period and her gaze, though directed again at the viewer, is more inward. This face remained unexhibited for many years. When the canvas suffered a serious tear, the restoration was carried out on this surface, with patches applied directly over the composition beneath. The traces visible today make clear that, at the time of the intervention, this face was regarded as a reverse side not intended for display.
During the transition from the Ottoman Empire to the Turkish Republic, the female figure became a vehicle in Turkish painting for the depiction of social transformation and new trends in fashion. The artists of the 1914 Generation were among the first to bring this transformation to the canvas. In ‘Seated Woman’, Onat differentiates the two figures not only through their clothing but through their facial expressions and body language.
The continuity in facial features, the placement of the eyes, and the posture of the body suggest that the figures on both sides of the canvas are most likely depictions of the same person at different ages. The close resemblance between the figure on the reverse, and a portrait in the artist’s family collection dated to 1917, suggests that this composition may have been produced around the same time, a conclusion supported by scientific analysis. The presence of two portraits on a single canvas cannot be explained by any deliberate intention to compare them; yet the double-sided work that now confronts us constructs its own historical reading, independently of the artist’s intentions: an extraordinary painting that carries, on its two faces, the evolving representations of a single woman across time.
