Using evaluative criticism, compare the perfection, insight, and inexhaustibility of Hyacinthe Rigaud’s Louis XIV, King of France and Gilbert Stuart’s Lansdowne Portrait of George Washington.

Provide a detailed, succinct, and well-written response to the following prompt, which focuses on works from the M4 – Online Learning Resources page. Your response should be 150–200 words long—no less, no more—which is basically the length of these instructions. You may review any course material before writing your response, including the provided Khan Academy articles, though it must be completely your own work and should not include any ideas or wording from this material. Absolutely no outside research is permitted for this assignment! Introduce your chosen work for this response by using the artist’s name and properly-punctuated work title, as modeled in the prompt. After doing so the first time, you may simply refer to your chosen work as “the work” or “the painting” for the remainder of your response. Finally, you are encouraged to review the grading rubric before beginning work on this assignment in order to be as successful as possible.
PROMPT
Using evaluative criticism, compare the perfection, insight, and inexhaustibility of Hyacinthe Rigaud’s Louis XIV, King of France and Gilbert Stuart’s Lansdowne Portrait of George Washington. Specifically, which of these two works do you believe demonstrates the clearest form, strongest content, and greatest demand for participation? Why? What is it about your chosen work that makes it superior to the other in your opinion? After providing your detailed evaluative criticism of these two works, close your analysis with a single sentence stating which work you believe better expresses values, including which value(s), based on its perfection, insight, and inexhaustibility. Please note that you should avoid using such colloquialisms as “the color really popped” in your analysis as they are not academically meaningful.