ingres’ grande odalisque was a departure from which style
-depicted the lives of ordinary people engaged in everyday activities (Realist principle)
-portrayed the life of the working people he had been raised among as a minister’s son in Pennsylvania
-an American artist who moved to Paris
-her subjects were primarily women and children, whom she presented with a combination of objectivity and genuine sentiment
“Make copies, young man, many copies. You can only become a good artist by copying the masters.”
“Grande Odalisque” by Jean-Auguste-Dominique Ingres depicts an odalisque. An odalisque was a chambermaid in the sequestered living quarters used by wives and concubines in the Ottoman sultan’s household.
He was admitted to the painting department of the École des Beaux-Arts in October 1799. In 1800 and 1801, he won the grand prize for figure painting for his paintings of male torsos.  In 1800 and 1801 he also competed for the Prix de Rome, the highest prize of the Academy, which entitled the winner to four years of residence at the Académie de France in Rome. He came in second in his first attempt, but in 1801 he took the top prize with The Ambassadors of Agamemnon in the tent of Achilles. The figures of the envoys, in the right of the painting, are muscular and solid as statues, in the style taught by David, but the two main figures on the left, Achilles and Patroclus, are mobile, vivid and graceful, like figures in a delicate bas-relief. 
In 1811 Ingres completed his final student exercise, the immense Jupiter and Thetis, a scene from the Iliad of Homer: the goddess of the Sea, Thetis, pleads with Zeus to act in favor of her son Achilles. The face of the water nymph Salmacis he had drawn years earlier reappeared as Thetis. Ingres wrote with enthusiasm that he had been planning to paint this subject since 1806, and he intended to “deploy all of the luxury of art in its beauty”.  However, once again, the critics were hostile, finding fault with the exaggerated proportions of the figures and the painting’s flat, airless quality. 
Perhaps now the most iconic portrait of Emperor NapolГ©on I, Ingres’s painting was originally dismissed as overly gothic, archaic, and even “barbaric.” Opulently adorned, the newly crowned emperor is represented among a hodgepodge of Roman, Byzantine, and Carolingian symbols. The intention, to legitimize his claim to authority, is overshadowed by the strangeness of this imposing frontality; his pallid face emerges from layers of ostentatiously regal garb to look past the viewer with a stony gaze.
For the sake of propriety, respectable depictions of the female nude had always been removed from the everyday by labeling them Venus, Diana, Suzannah, or some similar mythological or religious narrative that justified their nakedness. Further distancing Ingres from his Neoclassical roots, La Grande Odalisque‘s setting creates that necessary difference, not by referring to the ancient past, but through Orientalism. During Napoleon’s empire, France consolidated its colonial possessions, beginning a highly politicized and problematic fascination with “the other.” Ingres’s odalisque, a term that refers to a concubine in a harem, is festooned with the trappings of what was then considered “the Orient,” namely, Turkey and the Near East. Her peacock feather fan and bejeweled turban, as well as the delicate hookah pipe at far right, are markers of exoticism that allow for her nudity without offending the viewer (this painting was commissioned by Caroline Murat, Queen of Naples and sister to the Emperor Napoleon). To compare, when Г‰douard Manet painted his 1863 Olympia as a modern, French nude woman who gazed directly at the viewer, it was considered an immoral outrage.
15. Drawings of Ingres (Master Draughtsman Series) by Stephen Longstreet. Borden Publishing 1991. More nudes than portraits, but attractively priced.
9.’ Ingres and the Studio: Women, Painting, History’ by Sarah Betzer. Google Books. University of Pennsylvania Press 2012. Includes the mixed response to M. Bertin’s portrait.