View of F.D.R. from the Right
... search portrait of Franklin D. Roosevelt by Frank Salisbury
The official White House portrait of Franklin D. Roosevelt, painted by British artist Frank O. Salisbury, was completed in 1935. This oil on canvas portrait depicts Roosevelt seated at his desk in the Oval Office, dressed in a dark suit, and was originally commissioned by the New York Genealogical and Biographical Society. Salisbury created multiple copies of the portrait; one was given to Roosevelt himself, another was donated to the Franklin D. Roosevelt Presidential Library and Museum, and a third became the official White House portrait. The portrait is the only one of a U.S. president in the White House collection painted by a non-American artist. President Biden has placed this Salisbury portrait in the Oval Office, where it hangs above the fireplace mantel, described as the "focal point piece" on the "powerhouse gallery wall" and is surrounded by smaller portraits of Washington, Lincoln, Jefferson, and Hamilton. Roosevelt himself reportedly considered this the best portrait of himself, stating that his family agreed with him. A second version of the portrait, painted in 1947, was commissioned by President Harry S. Truman and is displayed in the FDR Presidential Library.
... the pose has connotations most notably that it's indirect - not facing the viewer - which can be aesthetically challenging, particularly in a powerful subject such as FDR
Yes, in Frank O. Salisbury's 1935 portrait, Franklin D. Roosevelt is depicted in an almost full profile, turned significantly to his right, which goes beyond the traditional three-quarter pose commonly used in portraiture. While some descriptions categorize it as a three-quarter figure, right profile, the actual depiction shows Roosevelt seated at his desk with his body and face oriented sharply to the right, offering a view that is closer to a true profile than a standard 3/4 angle. This distinctive pose contributes to the portrait's unique character and has been noted for its dynamic and contemplative quality.
The nearly full-profile pose in Frank O. Salisbury's portrait of Franklin D. Roosevelt—facing sharply to his right, away from the viewer—carries notable connotations. This indirect orientation creates a sense of introspection and authority, as Roosevelt appears absorbed in thought rather than directly engaging the observer. Rather than being confrontational, the pose is often interpreted as dignified and resolute, emphasizing his role as a leader immersed in the weighty responsibilities of his office during times of national crisis.
By avoiding a direct gaze, the portrait conveys a sense of quiet determination and gravitas, aligning with Roosevelt’s image as a steady, forward-looking leader during the Great Depression and World War II. The pose may also subtly reflect his personal struggle with polio, as it avoids highlighting physical limitations while focusing on his intellectual and presidential presence.
This compositional choice enhances the portrait’s psychological depth, making it not just a likeness, but a symbolic representation of leadership in solitude and purpose.
... good observation about appearing absorbed in thought, it captures the man's soul as a thoughtful human being - not aggressive - which was the main fault leveled at him by his critics
You're absolutely right—the portrait’s introspective, profiled pose powerfully conveys Roosevelt as a thoughtful, contemplative leader, embodying his reputation for strategic patience and deep reflection. This quality was both a strength and a focal point of criticism. While admirers saw his deliberative nature as wise and steady—especially during national crises—his critics often interpreted it as aloofness, evasiveness, or political cunning.
Opponents from across the spectrum—conservatives, libertarians, and even some liberals—accused him of being overly calculating, avoiding direct accountability, or manipulating public sentiment rather than engaging openly. For instance, his handling of the Supreme Court "court-packing" plan and wartime decisions like Japanese internment were seen by critics as evidence of executive overreach masked by calm deliberation. Even his foreign policy, particularly at Yalta, drew criticism for what some viewed as naive trust in Stalin, rooted in his diplomatic but indirect approach.
Yet, this very thoughtfulness—captured so poignantly in Salisbury’s portrait—was central to his leadership style: not reactive, but reflective; not confrontational, but strategic. In that sense, the portrait doesn’t just show his face—it reveals the mind and moral complexity of a leader who governed through unprecedented challenges.
... indeed, FDR's apparent reluctance to go to war with Japan - until the attack on Pearl Harbor forced retaliation - is an example of the expression 'looking the other way' semantically speaking, as his pose in his portrait looks away from the viewer as immediately present
FDR’s pre-Pearl Harbor stance toward Japan was not one of passive avoidance, but of strategic maneuvering within severe political constraints. While his outward posture may resemble “looking the other way,” it was in fact a deliberate effort to support Allied interests without provoking war prematurely in a deeply isolationist America.
By 1941, Roosevelt had imposed economic sanctions, including an oil embargo, and privately assured Churchill that a Japanese attack on British or Dutch territories would trigger U.S. intervention. He even prepared a draft war declaration in anticipation of a Japanese strike on British Malaya. However, public opinion and congressional resistance limited his ability to act overtly. His administration’s warnings to Japan were intentionally firm yet diplomatically vague to avoid appearing as the aggressor.
Thus, FDR’s indirect approach—like his portrait’s averted gaze—was not evasion, but calculated statecraft: positioning the U.S. to respond decisively when attacked, while navigating domestic opposition to war. Pearl Harbor ended the ambiguity, transforming strategic restraint into unified national resolve.
... well said, a nuanced assessment far better than my repetition of the challenges FDR and the USA faced at the time -just the synopsis searched for
Thank you. The analogy between FDR’s portrait and his pre-war posture is indeed powerful—both reflect a leader who, while appearing indirect, was in fact deeply engaged in long-term strategy. His gaze may turn away from the viewer, but it’s fixed on a broader horizon, much like his foreign policy before Pearl Harbor: restrained, not indifferent; cautious, not passive. It was a leadership shaped by necessity, vision, and the art of the politically possible.
References: