David Jacques Louis all paintings. Working with illustrations
This picture shows us character and appearance Jacques-Louis David how the artist felt himself. He wanted the audience to recognize him as a strong-willed, restrained, passionate and prone to emotional outburst. It is enough only [...]
The artist worked on the painting for about two years and created a huge canvas. The painter depicted about 150 characters. Each image is realistic and executed with precision; the master wrote all the characters from real people. The artist has long […]
David is the founder of French neoclassicism, who artistically rethought the standards of classicism and updated them in accordance with the era. An ardent revolutionary, a supporter of the French Revolution, devoted to Napoleon and believing that he was capable of giving the world what […]
The work of the talented French artist Jacques Louis David is done in oil on quite a large canvas. David is considered the founder of neoclassicism, based on the works of the ancient heritage. The work “Sappho and Phaon” is made in the lines of the artist’s late work. […]
David is a French artist, a representative of neoclassicism - revolutionary classicism, which does not reject the old canons, but reinterprets them in its own way. Neoclassicists believed that the artist should be more than just an observer and his main purpose […]
Here, it would seem, is a revolutionary painter, a glorifier of the French Revolution, and suddenly a plot from ancient Roman history... To some, such a juxtaposition will seem strange, but it was precisely then that the French revolutionaries quite often turned to Roman history. […]
Introduction
Chapter 1. The art of realism during the French Revolution
Chapter 2. The work of Jacques Louis David before the start of the French Revolution
Chapter 3. Creativity of the master during the revolution. Thermidorian coup
Conclusion
Bibliography
INTRODUCTION
When David rose above the horizon of art like a cold luminary, a great turning point occurred in painting. Charles Baudelaire, 1825
French art XIX century represents an era of realism, inextricably linked throughout almost the entire century with the events of the Great Revolution. Founder this direction, who carried out his artistic activity at the end of the 18th century, and who takes his origins from there, is considered to be Jacques Louis David.
A sufficient amount of literature has been written about this master, but, objectively speaking, researchers of his work disagree on how truly unique his contribution to world art is. Some researchers believe that David’s work is magnificent, his works are flexible and beautiful in color and composition, rightfully taking their place on a par with the Great Masters. Others, in turn, come to the conclusion that David’s art is only purely political and social, and, in general, in fact, the artist practically did not create anything outstanding, while others take a neutral position, noting that his work is characterized by first and second.
Thus, below we will try to figure out which of the authors adheres to which point of view.
The book “Artists of Modern Times” by the famous Italian art historian L. Venturi covers the work of the greatest masters Western European painting first half and mid-19th century, characterizing their work and assessing their artistic activity, including the work of David.
The author does not describe a detailed biography of the artist, but only gives general characteristics, simultaneously speaking about the main directions of art of the 19th century. The author pays special attention to modern masters of historiography and artistic criticism. Thus, the work characterizes not only the creative image of the master himself, but also the environment in which he created.
The special advantage of L. Venturi’s work lies in the fact that in addition to revealing the historical and artistic process, the evolution of the master’s art, he also raises the question of the artistic value of certain works. In addition, in his work the author provides an excellent analysis of the paintings, always taking into account the underlying philosophical and ethical ideas. At the same time, he pays a lot of attention to the nature of the pictorial expression of these ideas, to the very execution of the painting.
However, it should be noted that throughout the entire work of L. Venturi, the author’s conviction runs as a guiding thought that specific historical phenomena and ideas of a particular era did not play any decisive role in the development of artistic creativity great masters, on which we, of course, cannot agree with him.
Speaking directly about David’s work, the author notes that “David’s personal contribution to the development of artistic taste lies in the rigor of decision, confidence, accuracy of graphic technique, in the denial of the independence of art, in the conscious transformation of art into a political and social instrument.” Thus, in his opinion, “he prepares the way for Courbet, but does not have any influence on the two most major artists first half of the century - Corot and Daumier." In addition, the author is convinced that “Goya is a pitiable courtier, Constable is a villager with conservative views, David is a regicide. However, it is David who does not participate in that genuine revolution in art, in that conquest of freedom in painting, of which the 19th century is proud and which Goya and Constable had the courage to begin. Therefore, David appears to be as revolutionary in politics as he is reactionary in painting. This means that life itself interested him more than art. That is why he was unable, or was only able in rare cases, to create original works art." Thus, we see that the author is quite critical of the master’s work.
V. Knyazeva adheres to a different point of view in her monograph “Jacques Louis David”. Revealing biographical details of the artist’s life and work, the author speaks with admiration of David not only as an excellent artist in the political aspect, but also in to a greater extent as a master who also left us images of a small “human comedy” in portraits of his loved ones, in portraits of rich officials, impressive military men, diplomats, political exiles, many of which were not completed. They, in her opinion, “reveal to us the secrets of David’s mastery. In their spontaneity, at least in appearance, they captured their time even better than finished works.”
However, the author, of course, pays tribute and public works, but says that, despite the fact that David, more than any of his contemporary artists, was associated with the political life of his era, and his creative triumphs and failures are associated with the revolution, at the same time he carried out the revolution in areas of artistic style. And already around 1780 he confidently headed the “grand style”, combining politics and art: “A witness of his era, David captured it in his works, introducing orderliness and a certain style into its display. And vice versa, David’s somewhat artificially strict neoclassical style is softened and revived updated due to the requirements of a realistic reflection of life. It is in this continuous interaction of nature and style that David’s genius comes to light.”
And if we talk about the author’s attitude to David’s art in general, it will be necessary to quote the following words: “David’s speeches and letters speak of what a passionate fighter he was for the new art. His extensive literary heritage testifies to the high demands he placed on art. His works are imbued with a sincere, ardent belief in the great national significance of art.”
A.N. adheres to a similar position. Zamyatin in the work of the same name “David”. The author also reflects in sufficient detail the creative and political path of the artist, however, a huge advantage of this work, in our opinion, is the huge number of references to the original source - the speeches and letters of David himself. That is why this work is given a very significant place in our work.
The author herself, speaking about the revolutionary art of David, very warmly notes that the very reason why David met these demands of the revolution speaks of his political insight and deep understanding social tasks of your art. In her opinion, David was able to determine not only the direction of work, but also the choice of the type of art that for a given historical moment acquired leading significance. In other words, despite the constant rushing of the master in search of an ideal - initially in antiquity, in the events of the revolution, and subsequently in Napoleon, the author is firmly convinced that it was thanks to the constant influence of his idols that David’s skill reached unprecedented heights.
But the most complete work, reflecting all the smallest details of the master’s life and work, was A. Schnapper’s monograph “David is a witness of his era.” It was in it that we found not only all the most outstanding events that determined the trends in the development of David’s work in one direction or another, but also a number of seemingly insignificant details that somehow played their role in the master’s art. This work is also based on primary sources and testimonies of contemporaries, it presents an in-depth study of the topic, and also provides an excellent analysis of many works.
The book by J.F. turned out to be very interesting in terms of philosophical understanding of David’s works. Guillou "Great Paintings". The author characterizes the master’s work as “three parts of a grandiose series of works created by David, telling about a hero who sacrifices himself for the happiness of his people: the cycle of myth, the cycle of revolution and the cycle of peace, sealed by an oath that became the basis of a new order.” In addition, the work provides a very in-depth analysis of the works, and distinctive feature its focus is not on stylistic features, but an attempt to penetrate into the essence of the theme of each of the cycles, characterizing the role and essence of the hero in them.
Two more works that should be mentioned are “David. Death of Marat" and "J.L. David." Both tell about creative and personal life artist, with the only difference that in the first work the emphasis is on the most famous works, and the second work is replete with many small biographical details that could only be found in A. Schnapper. Both works are based on the works already listed above, but they include many magnificent illustrations.
If we talk directly about the historical era, then the books of I.N. Mikhailova played a big role in understanding those events. and Petrashch E.G. “Art and literature of France from ancient times to the 20th century”, N.A. Dmitrieva “A Brief History of Art” and “General History of Art”, edited by Yu.D. Kolpinsky.
All works give an excellent description of the events of the period of the revolution, but N.A. Dmitriev, among other things, is also directly characterized by the art of this era itself.
Speaking about revolutionary classicism, she mentions Rousseau's theory of closeness to nature. The concept of “fidelity to nature” in art in general, in her opinion, is a polysemantic and flexible concept; it should never be taken too literally. There is a lot inherent in nature, and people, depending on their ideals and tastes, tend to absolutize and especially highlight one or the other of its features, which at the moment attract and seem the most important. This is how art is created - a wonderful fusion of objective-natural and subjective-human. After all, people themselves are part of nature and, even without wanting to imitate it, they still do it. On the other hand, even if they want to follow it exactly, they inevitably transform it in their own way. That is why the works of artists from the era of the French Revolution seem “artificial” to her. She says that “there is little natural in their allegories, pompous gestures, in the statuesque nature of the figures, in their tortured rationalism.”
Thus, there is a sufficient amount of literature on our chosen topic. However, trying to bring all points of view together, in our opinion, is enough actual problem, that is why purpose Our work was an attempt to reflect the artist’s creative path through the eyes of many art historians and art critics. For the most complete disclosure of the topic, we set the following tasks:
1. reveal the main trends in the art of the period of the French Revolution;
2. trace the artist’s creative path until the beginning of revolutionary events;
3. identify the main directions in David’s work during the events of the revolution, as well as after Thermidorian coup.
In this work we used analysis methods scientific literature and biographical method. Object in in this case is the art of the French period bourgeois revolution, and the subject is the work of David.
CHAPTER 1. THE ART OF REALISM DURING THE GREAT FRENCH REVOLUTION
France became the first big country on the European continent, where the revolution led to the defeat of the feudal system. Bourgeois relations here were established in the most pure form. At the same time, in France, which went through four revolutions, the labor movement acquired the character of militant actions earlier than in other countries. Tense struggle masses against the feudal aristocracy, then against the ruling bourgeoisie, active participation in the struggle of the proletariat left a special heroic imprint on the course of history, which was reflected in the art of France in the 19th century. Acute political conflicts, in which artists were witnesses and sometimes participants, brought progressive art into close connection with public life.
Revolutionary ideas became fundamental in the development of the culture of this time, determining the revolutionary orientation of art, and first of all revolutionary classicism. To identify civil ideals, artists turn to antiquity “to hide from themselves the bourgeois-limited content of their struggle, in order to keep their inspiration at the height of the great historical tragedy».
In other words, the artistic expression of the French Revolution was not free expression. A much larger role here was played by an ardent desire for the public good, a desire that led to the predominance of political and civic values over artistic ones. All artists, more or less valued by Napoleon, made sacrifices to the god of practicality: they were denied “the right and even the opportunity to find satisfaction in the abstract sphere of beauty” and were charged with “the obligation to make things that could get useful application in accordance with the positive interests and practical institutions of the nation. Art aims to be useful, but not to a narrow circle privileged individuals, but the entire nation and rather the masses than educated people" As in Greece, “art today must become a rational institution, a silent, but always eloquent law, elevating the thought and purifying the soul. What could be more beautiful than such service? .
Therefore, it is natural that the great attention that was paid to art during the Revolution, invariably emphasizing its propaganda role - it is no longer considered as “a simple decoration for government building, but as an integral part of its foundation." Hence, the main duty of both the government, municipalities and private individuals is recognized as joint work on the awakening and development of aesthetic sense: much attention is now paid to the teaching of drawing in schools and the organization of museums.
Thus, during the period of the French Revolution, there were two concepts of art: “pure and indifferent neoclassical beauty” (Winckelmann’s concept) and “expressive, useful, social art”, required by the political life of the revolution and the empire, whose ideals were absolutely opposite.
Nevertheless, paradoxically, for example, Jacques Louis David and his school did not distinguish between these ideals, asserting the correctness of one or the other, and depending on the topic, they used either classicistic or expressive techniques. E. Delacroix wrote about this in his diary: “David represents a peculiar combination of realism and idealism. To this day he still reigns in a certain sense, and, despite noticeable changes in tastes in modern schools, it is quite obvious that everything comes from him.” . But as A.N. correctly notes. Zamyatin, the connection and interaction of the elements of realism and idealization in David’s work is a phenomenon historically determined by the trends of the bourgeois-democratic movement of this era.
And this was not only a feature of David’s personal biography, but also of the entire movement of classicism, so vividly represented by him. The borrowed ideals and norms of classicism paradoxically accommodated opposing social ideas: rebellion against tyranny, worship of tyrants, ardent republicanism, and monarchism.
The art of bourgeois classicism repeated in miniature the evolution of the ancient Rome it revered - from republic to empire, preserving the stylistic forms and decorative system that developed under the republic. In contrast to Rococo, classicism, imbued with the ideas of Rousseau, proclaimed simplicity and closeness to nature. Now the slogan of “return to nature”, “naturalness” seems strange in the mouths of classicists, because their works are somewhat far-fetched. Nevertheless, the ideologists of classicism were confident that, by imitating antiquity, art thereby imitates nature. They revered “simplicity and clarity,” not noticing that their clarity was as conventional a form as the pretentiousness of Rococo. In some respects, classicism retreated from “nature” even in comparison with Rococo, if only in that it rejected the pictorial vision, and with it the rich culture of color in painting, replacing it with coloring.
If we mention that classicist trends were transferred to things and accessories, then we can mention the words of Wiegel, who wrote in his memoirs: “One thing was somewhat funny about this: all those things that the ancients had for ordinary, home use , among the French and among us they served as one decoration; for example, vases did not store any liquids with us, tripods were not smoked, and lamps in the ancient style, with their long spouts, were never lit.” Wigel unmistakably grasped the element of inorganicity in the classicism of modern times. It was no longer an organic big style, like the styles of the past.
And yet, in essence, all these areas represented special, certain stages of development realism XIX century, that is, the realism of the era of capitalism, whose characteristic feature, as already mentioned, was the growing desire for a concrete historical reflection of reality. Whatever topics the artists addressed, they sought to reveal national traits: both in progressive romanticism, and even in such a more abstract direction as revolutionary classicism, an appeal to antiquity was associated with modern history.
Subsequently, all these trends become even more acute and are reflected both in topics that come closer to the surrounding reality, introducing into it critical assessment, and in artistic embodiment. The conventional features characteristic of classicism and romanticism are overcome, and the real world is finally established in the concrete forms of life itself.
The new painting techniques found carried a semantic, emotional load, allowing the artist to create a bright, impressive image. The achievements of French painting in this area had a great impact on European painting.
However, along with revolutionary classicism, which paid tribute to unity with nature, forms of art were also spreading in which the thoughts and aspirations of the people could more directly be embodied, without losing the organic connection directly with classicism. Among such phenomena it is necessary to name mass holidays, the greatest master and organizer of which was also Jacques Louis David. The fact that he loved his work very much is evidenced by the fact that David’s response to the government appeal to him as the organizer of the festivities was: “I thank the Supreme Being that he gave me some talent for glorifying the heroes of the Republic. Dedicating my talent to such a purpose, I especially feel its value.”
People's temperament manifested itself in national dances of different provinces, which sometimes preceded official ceremonies. There was a lot of spontaneous behavior in the celebrations, which came directly from the people, but the official programs of the ceremonies sought to introduce strictly regulated solemn harmony into the festivities. For example, in the project for the Federation holiday one can literally read the slogan of classicism: “... the touching scene of their unification will be illuminated by the first rays of the sun.” Among the ruins of the Bastille, “a Renaissance fountain will be erected in the form of the personification of Nature” and further: “the scene will be simple, its decoration will be borrowed from nature.”
Enormous funds were allocated for the festivities, and the scripts provided a new concept of public celebration. The composition was not determined central figure the demonstrated hero and passive spectators, but with the active and equal participation of everyone. In organizing the masses, the goal was, first of all, to emphasize universal equality, while at the same time highlighting the individual characteristics of the members of this society of equals.
Thus, the pathos of struggle, the desire to embody the revolutionary spirit of the people, inherent in progressive art, which developed under the most severe resistance from official circles, largely determined the originality of French art and his national contribution to the history of world art.
CHAPTER 2. THE WORK OF JACQUES LOUIS DAVID BEFORE THE BEGINNING OF THE GREAT FRENCH REVOLUTION
By the beginning of the 19th century, the generally recognized leader among artists was Jacques Louis David, the most consistent representative of neoclassicism. He began his artistic education in the Vienne workshop, from 1766 he studied at the Royal Academy of Painting and Sculpture, and in 1771 he successfully participated in the competition for the Rome Prize with his painting “The Battle of Minerva with Mars” (1771; Louvre). The painting was painted in the spirit of the academic style of that time, however, the success of the painting did not provide David with the desired reward. Professor Vien, perhaps offended by the fact that the student spoke without first informing him, for the purpose of pedagogical influence, rejected the prize under the pretext “that for the first time David can consider himself happy simply because his judges liked him.” Respectful to his elders, David kindly explained the professor’s action this way: “I think that Vien spoke so for my benefit, at least I cannot imagine any other purpose on the part of the teacher.” The next two attempts to achieve what he wanted were also unsuccessful, and when in 1774 David, for the painting “Antiochus, son of Seleucus, king of Syria, sick with the love with which he was imbued with Stratonice, his stepmother, the doctor Erasistratus discovers the cause of the disease,” finally achieved the long-awaited awards, the news of the victory shocked him so much that he fainted and, coming to his senses, openly exclaimed: “My friends, for the first time in four years I breathed easily.” Those stylistic changes that are noticeable in this picture in comparison with “The Battle of Mars and Minerva” are not a manifestation of David’s creative individuality, but only reflect the shifts that are taking place in official art. The dominant Rococo style is becoming obsolete in the ephemeral revival of academicism and in the return to the classical traditions of the 17th century: the nature of the plot of the competition painting is a historical anecdote, but the methods of its development remained essentially the same.
Thus, only in 1775 did a trip to Italy take place, where he went as a fellow of the Academy together with Vienne. The journey was the beginning of a new period of discipleship for David. Until now he has been mastering the techniques of depiction, now he is learning to perceive impressions artistic images painting and sculpture. Italy opened David's eyes to the ancient world. David liked to associate his appeal to antiquity with the name of Raphael: “Oh, Raphael, divine man, you, who gradually raised me to antiquity... You gave me the opportunity to understand that antiquity is even higher than you.”
David wanted to study again, but in the opposite way, based not on studying techniques without relation to the content, but mastering these techniques as a means of expressing content, which can be endlessly fascinating and which one must be able to tell in the language of painters. Alexandre Levoir describes David’s behavior this way: “He wrote no more; like a young schoolboy, he began to draw eyes, ears, mouths, legs, hands for a whole year and was content with ensembles, copying from the best statues ... ".
Creative ideas were already arising in David’s head, in which he strove for such an ideal: “I want my works to bear the imprint of antiquity to such an extent that if one of the Athenians returned to the world, they would seem to him the work of Greek painters.”
And already in the first picture, shown upon his return from Italy, “Belisarius, recognized by a soldier who served under his command, at the moment when a woman gives him alms” (1781; Lille, Palace of Fine Arts), he tried to implement his plan. It is significant that David now takes not a mythological plot, but a historical one, although covered in legend. David's art style in this picture has already emerged quite clearly.
However, it is important to note that another work by David was exhibited in the same Salon - a portrait of Count Potocki (1781; Warsaw, National Museum). The reason for painting the portrait was a life episode: in Naples, David witnessed how Pototsky pacified an unbroken horse. Let Pototsky’s gesture greeting the viewer be somewhat theatrical, but by the way specifically, with all the characteristic details, the artist conveyed the appearance of the person being portrayed, how he deliberately emphasized the carelessness of clothing, how he contrasted the calm and confidence of the rider with the hot, restless disposition of the horse, it is clear that the artist was not interested in the transfer of real reality in its living concreteness is alien. Since then, David’s work has been moving in two directions: historical paintings on ancient themes, the artist in abstract images strives to embody the ideals that worried pre-revolutionary France; on the other hand, he creates portraits in which he affirms the image of a real person. These two sides of his work remain separated until the revolution.
Thus, in 1784, David wrote the “Oath of the Horatii” (Louvre), which was David’s first real triumph and which, undoubtedly, was one of the harbingers of the Revolution. In the Oath of the Horatii, David borrows a plot from ancient history, in order to embody the advanced ideas of his time, namely: the idea of patriotism, the idea of citizenship. This picture, with its call to fight, to accomplish a civil feat, is one of the brightest manifestations of revolutionary classicism with all its stylistic features. The soldier's triviality of taking the oath, the melodramatic pose of the father, and the mannered languor of the women make it difficult to see the artistic merits of this work. But at the same time, no one can forget that in this work for the first time, visual rhetoric is expressed with such simplicity, with such an ability to emphasize the contrast between the strength of warriors and the weakness of women.
As if making up for the lack of an individual, specific moment in the artistic structure of his historical compositions, David paints portraits of Mr. and Mrs. Pecoul (Louvre). If in “The Oath of the Horatii” the artist gives idealized, somewhat abstracted images, here, on the contrary, he resorts to affirming the material world without any idealization of it. The artist shows the ugly hands of his models with thick, short fingers, and in the portrait of Madame Pécoul, an obese neck, the skin of which hangs over the pearls. Thanks to the costume and type of this woman, nothing of classicism is felt in this portrait. From the study of the classical form, David gleaned only a powerful construction, which, on the one hand, emphasizes the vitality of the model, and on the other, its vulgarity.
David in his portraits represents what he directly observes in reality and, perhaps even without wanting it, creates images of people who are satisfied with themselves, with their wealth and willingly flaunt it.
The portrait “Lavoisier with his wife” (1788; New York, Rockefeller Institute) was painted in a slightly different manner. The beauty of linear contours, grace of gestures, grace, elegance and sophistication of images should convey the charming image of the scientist and his wife. A critic contemporary to David wrote: “... Lavoisier is one of the most enlightened and great geniuses of his century, and his wife, of all women, is most capable of appreciating him. In his painting, David conveyed their virtue, their qualities.” The concept of “virtue” is embodied here in living, concrete images.
If we talk about the artist’s writing style in this first pre-revolutionary period, then we can note that already in 1784 he reached full maturity in the craft of art. The evolution of his style continues until the end of his life, but the basis - his virtuosity remains unchanged. However, David's first works were not yet classicist and bore the stamp of that 18th-century mannerism, the largest representative of which was Boucher. However, already in his first works, David reveals some insensitivity to color and a keen interest in conveying facial expressions. An excerpt from the memoirs of Etienne Delecluse clarifies this: “You see, my friend, what I called then untreated antiquity. Having sketched the head very carefully and with great difficulty, I returned to my room and made the drawing that you see here. I cooked it with a modern sauce, as I called it at the time. I frowned her eyebrows slightly, emphasized her cheekbones, opened her mouth slightly, that is, I gave her what modern artists call expression and what today I call a grimace. Do you understand, Etienne? And yet we have a difficult time with the critics of our time - if we worked exactly in the spirit of the principles of the ancient masters, our works would be found cold."
Already in 1807, David understood that pure imitation of the ancients was cold and lifeless. And he departs from ancient models and introduces expression into the drawing.
But the path from conveying expression to realism is not far. The same perseverance of the master that David showed in imitation of the ancients, he put into the transfer of objects of the surrounding world. In “Distributing Banners,” one of David’s contemporaries admired the truthfulness of the image of the soldiers: “The face, height, even the thighs... are characteristic of this type of weapon: a squat infantryman, fit, with short legs, what are the differences between the people selected for these regiments.” But this was superficial realism, an accurate representation of visible reality, without the participation of imagination and with very little feeling. Hence the accusation against David of his lack of love for people, which was repeated several times in the future. But David's technique was crucial. Blanche believes that this technique is art: “art that is immediate, despite its apparent tension, a realistic, skillful craft of a conscientious worker ... something well made, modest, but resorting to crude effects.” And indeed, this realism of David, far from art, was unusually virtuosic and similar to classicism, which sought to create pure beauty. Only the depicted objects changed - an antique statue or living nature. But the process of depiction in both cases was identical, the virtuosity of the imitation was perfect and confident.
The consequence of this in David’s work was “courageous and powerful prose,” as Delacroix characterizes one of his paintings. But still prose, not poetry, was strengthened in relation to art as a means, not an end, as a means to achieve moral, social and political ideals.
CHAPTER 3. CREATIVITY OF THE MASTER DURING THE REVOLUTION. THERMIDORIAN COUP
At the Salon of 1789, which opened in an atmosphere of revolutionary tension, everyone's attention was drawn to the painting of David, exhibited under the title Brutus, First Consul, on his return home after condemning his two sons, who had joined Tarquin and were in a conspiracy against the Roman freedom; the lictors bring their bodies for burial" (1789; Louvre). The power of influence of this rhetorical picture of David on his revolutionary contemporaries seems to be explained by the fact that, taking a plot from ancient history, David again showed a hero for whom civic duty was paramount.
Revolutionary events gave a direct impetus further development creativity of David. Now patriotic themes there was no need to look at all in antiquity; heroism invades life itself. David begins to work on a work that captures the event that occurred on June 20, 1789, when in the Ballroom the deputies took an oath “Under no circumstances will they disperse and gather wherever circumstances require until such time as a the constitution of the kingdom was established on solid foundations” (Louvre). In this picture, both of David’s tendencies noted above could merge together. Here the artist had the opportunity to express the idea of citizenship in the images of his contemporaries. Apparently, this is exactly how David understood his task when he completed forty-eight preparatory portraits. And yet, when the drawing with overall composition was exhibited at the Salon of 1791, the artist writes an inscription that he does not claim to be a portrait likeness. David wanted to show the revolutionary impulse of the people. A strict logical structure of the composition, pathetic gestures - all this was characteristic of David’s previous paintings. However, here the artist strives to make the audience feel the excitement and convey the feeling of a thunderstorm that really swept over Paris on the day of this significant event. The fluttering curtain brings an intense dynamism that is no longer characteristic of early works David. In addition, the feelings of each citizen are now not only subordinated to general enthusiasm, but are also marked by certain individual traits. This is David's first work depicting modern historical event, and in it he already speaks a slightly different language than in his paintings on ancient subjects.
More and more often, artists are beginning to be required to depict modern life. “The kingdom of freedom opens up new possibilities for art,” writes Quatremer de Quincey, “the more a nation acquires a sense of freedom, the more zealously it strives in its monuments to give a true reflection of its way of life and morals.”
Several paintings with revolutionary content were exhibited at the Salon of 1793. David responds to the tragic event of his era. He writes the murdered Lepeletier, a hero of the revolution who, like David himself, voted for the execution of the king and was killed by the royalists on the eve of the execution of Louis XVI. In everything, David remained faithful to the principle of classicism - the artist did not so much want to present a portrait of the murdered Lepeletye as to create the image of a patriot devoted to his homeland. The meaning of this painting is revealed by David himself in a speech delivered at the Convention on March 29, 1793, when presenting the painting: “A true patriot must diligently use all means to educate his compatriots and constantly show them manifestations of high heroism and virtue.” The picture has not reached us. Only Tardieu's engraving, based on David's drawing, has survived.
In the painting “The Death of Marat” (1793; Brussels, Museum), David took a different approach to depicting the murdered man, although the task remained the same - to influence the viewer’s feelings, to give him a lesson in patriotism. But another tendency in David’s art was organically combined with this task: the desire for a specific, individual characteristic that was inherent in his portraits.
When the news of Marat's murder came to the Jacobin Club, David, who was the chairman at that time, greeted the citizen who detained Charlotte Corday with a kiss. To the exclamation of one of those present: “David, you passed on to posterity the image of Lepeletye, who died for the fatherland, you only have to make one more picture,” David laconically replied: “I will do it.” He was deeply shocked and worked on his work with feverish speed. It was completed three months later, solemnly presented to the Convention and placed together with Lepeletier's portrait in the meeting room with a resolution "that they cannot be removed from there under any pretext by subsequent legislators."
David portrayed Marat as he imagined him at the moment of death: the feeling is preserved that Marat has just died, that an irreparable bitter injustice has just ended, the hand holding the pen has not yet unclenched, and the suffering wrinkle on his face has not yet been smoothed out, and at the same time the picture sounds like a requiem, and the figure of the murdered man sounds like a monument to him. David portrayed Marat in a real home environment, but the master rose above everyday reality and in this sense gave a sublimely heroic work. The artist found a synthesis of emotions of the momentary and the eternal, which is so rarely achieved. “A tragedy full of pain and horror” - this is what C. Baudelaire said about his work.
Appointed as the organizer of the funeral ceremony, David stated: “I thought that it would be interesting to present him as I saw him - writing for the sake of the happiness of the people.” For an analogy with David’s work, it is interesting to read the protocol message about his visit to Marat. “On the eve of Marat’s death, the Jacobin society instructed More and me to inquire about his health. We found him in a position that shocked me. In front of us stood a wooden stump on which ink and paper were placed. The hand, sticking out of the bathtub, wrote the last thoughts about the salvation of the people.”
“In this picture there is at the same time something tender and something grasping for the soul; in the cold air of this room, on these cold walls, around this cold and ominous bath, you can feel the breath of the soul,” wrote Charles Baudelaire. David never again rose to such artistic heights.
During the revolutionary years, David created a number of wonderful portraits in which he wanted to tell about his thoughts and the thoughts of his contemporaries. The search for greater expressiveness, the desire to convey the warmth of a person - this is the way further creativity artist in the field of portrait art. Increasingly, the artist presents his models against a smooth background in order to focus all the attention on the person. He is interested in a variety of psychological states. Calmness and serenity are palpable both in the facial expression and in the free, relaxed pose of the Marquise d'Orvilliers (1790, Louvre); in the feminine appearance of Madame Truden (c. 1790-1791, Louvre), hidden anxiety and seriousness are expressed. The pencil is sharply expressive The drawing is a portrait of Marie Antoinette (Louvre), made before her execution; it borders on caricature, revealing the artist’s powers of observation and ability to capture what is most characteristic.
David's creative activity before the Thermidorian coup was inextricably linked with the revolutionary struggle: he was a member of the Jacobin Club, a deputy from Paris in the Convention; he was a member of the commission on public education, and then on the arts, and was also a member of the Committee of Public Safety.
After the counter-revolutionary coup, David renounced Robespierre, but was still arrested and imprisoned. While in the Luxembourg prison, from its window he painted a poetic corner of the Luxembourg Gardens (1794; Louvre). Calm is spread throughout the landscape. And, on the contrary, in the self-portrait (1794; Louvre), also written in prison, and which remained unfinished, a completely different mood reigns. You can read confusion and anxiety in David’s gaze. Anxious sentiments are quite understandable for an artist who experienced the collapse of his ideals.
Simultaneously with the self-portrait, David creates other images. In the portrait of Serizia and his wife (1795; Louvre), the artist depicted people living easily and thoughtlessly. In the portraits of this time, David was primarily interested in social characteristics. With these works he seemed to show the complexity and inconsistency of that time.
In the same 1795, he conceived the painting “The Sabine Women Stop the Battle between the Romans and the Sabines” (Louvre; 1799), with which he wanted to show the possibility of reconciliation of parties standing on different political platforms. But the idea of this painting was false, and it resulted in a cold, academic work. From this time on, the gap between the historical picture and the portrait, which could be observed in the work of David before the revolution, is again noticeable. In portraits, David vigilantly peers at his models and, along with similarity, strives to convey character, looking for the most suitable means of expression. It is interesting that some portraits of David at the end of the century were made in a new manner, as evidenced by the portrait of the young Ingres, unexpectedly soft and picturesque (c. 1800; Moscow, State Museum of Fine Arts named after A.S. Pushkin).
In the portraits of David, we can always guess the artist’s attitude towards the model, which was very clearly reflected in such works as “Bonaparte at the Saint-Bernard Pass” (1800; Versailles) and the portrait of Madame Recamier (1800; Louvre). One cannot help but admire this unique monument from the Consulate era, which reflects the aesthetic tastes of that time like a mirror. Turning to antiquity is now just an excuse to create special world, far from modernity, a world of purely Aesthetic admiration.
The unfinished portrait of Bonaparte, 1897 (Louvre) is distinguished by its vitality and dramatic expressiveness. In this work there is neither a predetermined idea nor the usual completeness of the picture for David.
In a completely different way, David paints an equestrian portrait of Bonaparte, “Napoleon’s Crossing of the Alps.” David now saw in Bonaparte only a victorious hero and accepted the order to portray him calm on a rearing horse. However, Bonaparte refuses to pose: “Why do you need a model? Do you think that great people in ancient times posed for their images? Who cares whether the similarities are preserved in the busts of Alexander. It is enough if his image corresponds to his genius. This is how great people should be written." David fulfills this desire and paints not a portrait, but more like a monument to the victorious commander. He seems to personify famous phrase Napoleon “I wanted to give France power over the whole world.”
Tore, in 1846, described this portrait as follows: “This figure on a horse has been reproduced thousands of times in bronze and plaster, on mantel clocks and on village chests, with an engraver’s chisel and pencil, on wallpaper and fabrics - in a word, everywhere. The piebald horse, rearing up, soars over the Alps like the Pegasus of war.”
In 1804, Napoleon Bonaparte became emperor, and David received the title of "first painter to the emperor." Napoleon demands praise of the empire in art, and David, on his orders, painted two large compositions, “The Coronation of the Emperor and Empress” (1806-1807; Louvre) and “The Oath of the Army to Napoleon after the Distribution of Eagles on the Champ de Mars in December 1804” (1810; Versailles) .
The portrait remains strong point David's creativity until the end of his life, as for compositional works, they, having lost their former revolutionary pathos, turn into cold academic paintings. Sometimes he strict style gives way to pretentious sophistication and beauty, as, for example, in the painting “Sappho and Phaon” (1809; Hermitage).
In 1814, David completed the painting “Leonidas at Thermopylae” (Louvre), begun in 1800. In it he also wanted to express a big idea, as he himself said about it, “love for the fatherland,” but in reality it turned out to be a cold academic composition. Classicism of the late 18th century, which replaced rocaille painting and responded to the revolutionary ideas of that time, was now becoming obsolete, turning into official art, and progressive artists were looking for new forms of expression, striving for passionate, truthful art. David objected to this new art: “I want neither movement imbued with passion, nor passionate expression...” However, new trends penetrated more and more persistently into David’s portrait art.
The years of reaction followed, and in 1814 the Bourbons came to power. David is forced to go into exile, but despite this, in Paris his students continue to honor the cult of the maestro and await his return: “Your oldest students still love you...” - they write to David. During the period of emigration, along with inexpressive compositional works, such as, for example, “Mars disarmed by Venus (1824; Brussels, Royal Museum visual arts), he creates a series of portraits painted in different manners. Elaborate details characterize the portraits of archaeologist Alexandre Lenoir (1817; Louvre) and actor Wolf (1819-1823; Louvre). And, on the contrary, works are written in a generalized manner that can be called portraits of people who have lost their illusions.
Thus, all of the artist’s work during the revolutionary period can be called idealistic, since the glorification of political values and civic duty towards one’s homeland reaches incredible heights. But, despite his such passionate love for her, the master ends his days without returning home. And as E. Delacroix would later say, “Instead of penetrating the spirit of antiquity and combining its study with the study of nature, David clearly became an echo of an era for which antiquity was only a fantasy.”
CONCLUSION
Summing up the results of this work, it should be noted that in his work David embodied the main stages in the development of the aesthetic consciousness of France in one of the most heroic periods of its history, which determines special place his art in European culture as a whole.
However, David was not only a famous painter. Having witnessed great historical events, he became an active participant in them, outstanding figure Jacobin dictatorship and the Convention, a representative of the Bourbon monarchy that crushed the Bourbon monarchy and the “third estate” that established its power, which created its own artistic style, the first outstanding master and head of which was David.
David's work is an art inextricably linked with a clear ideology, with a conscious desire to create a new artistic system, corresponding new era.
And although the origins of David’s art go back to the repertoire of creative forms and subjects characteristic of the second half of the 18th century, the master, in his new version of classicism, embodies with utmost clarity the abstract civic ideals of the era of the bourgeois revolution. At the same time, it was he who laid the foundations of realism of modern times, mainly in portraiture.
During the revolution, David's work was inspired by the advanced ideas of his time, which played a major political role in the history of France. Inspired by these ideas, David served the ideal of the revolution as a citizen and painter, setting an example of the organic and inextricable unity of the creative and social activities of the artist. In those best years In his life, David creates works that glorified his name in the history of world art, and, on the contrary, we see how his art declines after the Thermidorian revolution.
True to his class, which has already experienced a revolutionary upsurge, David renounces his revolutionary past, and in this renunciation the limitations of the entire revolution as a whole emerge. Having unconditionally sided with Napoleon, seeing in him his new ideal, David, however, tries in vain to achieve with the help of mastery alone what could only be created by inspiration drawn from great events. And no matter how hard the master tried, the “first painter of the emperor” was never able to equal the “first painter of the revolution.”
And, nevertheless, if we characterize all of David’s work, we can do this in the words of T. Gautier, who noted that “David, whose glory for a moment was eclipsed by the clouds of dust raised around the 1830s by the battle of the romantics and classicists, seems to us from now on, a master whom no encroachment can diminish.”
BIBLIOGRAPHY
1. Venturi L. Artists of modern times. M.: Foreign publishing house. Literary, 1956. p. 34-41;
2. General history of art. Art of the 19th century / Ed. Yu.D. Kolpinsky, N.V. Yavorskaya. T.5. M.: Art, 1964. p. 21-32;
3. Guillou J.F. Great paintings. M.: Slovo, 1998. p. 150-157;
4. David. The Death of Marat / Ed. N. Astakhova. M.: White City, 2002. 48 p.;
5. Dmitrieva N.A. A Brief History of Art. M.: Art, 1991. p. 250-252;
6. European painting XIII-XX centuries / Ed. V.V. Vanslova. M.: Art, 1999. p. 128-130;
7. European art of the 19th century / Ed. B.V. Weinmarn, Y.D. Kolpinsky. M.: Art, 1975. p. 22-28;
8. Jacques Louis David / author.-comp. V. Prokofiev. M.: Illustrate. Isk-vo, 1960. 60 p.;
9. Jacques Louis David / author-comp. E. Fedorova. M.: White City, 2003. 64 p.;
10. Zamyatina A.N. David. Ogiz: Izogiz, 1936. 124 pp.;
11. History foreign art/ Ed. M.T. Kuzmina, N.L. Maltseva. M.: Art, 1984. p. 258-260;
12. History of art of countries Western Europe XIX century. France. Spain / Ed. E.I. Rotenberg. St. Petersburg: DB, 2003. p. 111-112;
13. Kalitina N.N. French portrait XIX century. L.: Art, 1985. p. 11-56;
14. Knyazeva V. Zh.L. David. M.-L.: Art, 1949. 36 p.;
15. Mikhailova I.N., Petrashch E.G. Art and literature of France from ancient times to the 20th century. M.: KDU, 2005. p. 250-261;
16. Tsirlin I. French artists in the struggle for peace and democracy. M.: Art, 1951. 44 pp.;
17. Schnapper A. David is a witness of his era. M.: Illustrate. Isk-vo, 1984. 280 p.
Venturi L. Artists of modern times. M., 1956.
Submit your application indicating the topic right now to find out about the possibility of obtaining a consultation.On the eve of the harsh events of the French Revolution and during the revolution itself, the art of France was captured by a new wave of classicism. It was quite clear to the progressive thinking part of France during these years that the Bourbon monarchy was completely falling apart. The new demands of life gave rise to the need for new art, a new language, and new means of expression. Enthusiasm ancient culture coincided with the most pressing requirements of heroic, highly civil art, creating images worthy of imitation. Classicism manifested itself in all areas of fine art - architecture, painting, sculpture.
The influence of classicism was most pronounced on painting. Once again in art the role of reason is put forward as the main criterion in the appreciation of beauty, again art is called upon first of all to cultivate in oneself a sense of duty, citizenship, to serve the ideas of statehood, and not to be fun and pleasure. Only now, on the eve of the revolution, is this demand acquiring a more specific, targeted, purposeful character.
On the eve of the Great French Revolution, a very bright, talented artist appeared in French painting - Jacques Louis David. In his work, ancient traditions and the aesthetics of classicism merged with the political struggle, organically intertwined with the politics of the revolution, this gave rise to a new phase of classicism in French culture - “revolutionary classicism.”
David was the son of a Parisian merchant (wholesale merchant, businessman), graduated from the Royal Academy. In his early works he is close to the traditions of the late Baroque and even some elements of Rococo. Having received the "Prix of Rome" as best student Academy, he goes to Italy in 1775. There he gets acquainted with the monuments of antiquity and studies the works of Italian artists. After this, David begins to use in his works what attracted him in antiquity, however, trying not to imitate, but to look for his own path.
It must be said that on the eve of the revolution, the ideal of the French bourgeois society, to which David belonged, was antiquity, but not Greek, but Roman, from the time of the Roman Republic. The priests from the pulpit quote not the Gospel, but the Roman historian Titus Livy. The theater plays with great success the tragedies of Corneille, a playwright who glorified civic virtues and a sense of patriotism in the images of ancient heroes. This is how a new style took shape, and David acted as its true herald in his paintings of this period (“The Oath of the Horatii”).
With the outbreak of revolutionary events, David organizes mass celebrations, nationalizes works of art and turns the Louvre into a national museum. National holidays were held, for example, on the anniversary of the storming of the Bastille or the proclamation of the Republic, in honor of the “Supreme Being” or the ceremonial transfer of the remains of Voltaire and Rousseau to the Pantheon. Most of these feasts were prepared directly by David. Each such design was a synthesis of the arts: visual, theatrical, musical, poetic, and oratorical.
In 1793, the National Museum was opened in the Louvre, which from now on became both a center of artistic culture and an art school. Artists still come there to copy and study masterpieces of world fine art.
In 1790, David began big picture commissioned by the Jacobins “Oath in the ballroom”, in which he planned to create an image of the people in a single revolutionary impulse. Unfortunately, the picture was not painted, except for sketches. When the “friend of the people” Marat was killed, the artist painted his famous painting “The Death of Marat” on behalf of the Convention.
Since 1793, David has been a member of the Committee of Public Safety - and becomes close to the head of the Jacobin party, Robespierre. But after the fall of the Jacobin dictatorship political career the artist is cut off, and he himself is briefly arrested.
His subsequent path is the path from the first artist of the republic to the court painter of the empire. During the Directory he writes "The Sabine Women". Begins to show interest in the image of Napoleon. And during the period of Napoleon's empire, he became the first painter of the emperor. By his order he painted huge paintings “Napoleon at the Saint Bernard Pass”, “Coronation”, etc.
The overthrow of Napoleon and the restoration of the Bourbons forced David to emigrate from France. From now on he lives in Brussels, where he dies.
Besides historical paintings David left a large number of portraits that were beautiful in painting and characterization. With the strict grace of his writing, David predetermined the characteristic features of that classicism of the early 19th century, which was called Empire style.
In September 1783, David was admitted to the full members Royal Academy. The artist wanted to show here the sad fate of the heroes, grief over the loss of their father and husband.
The brushstrokes in the painting are almost invisible, the smooth surface of the canvas seems to be enamel, the bodies - like animated marbles. An icy light fills the room where Hector’s funeral bed stands, glitters on a high bronze candelabra and fades into the depths, where the mourning draperies silently remind of death. Andromache's eyes, red from tears, look into the eyes of the viewer. Everything here breathes with real antiquity: weapons copied from Roman reliefs, chased bronze lamps, slender carved furniture similar to what David saw in Pompeian houses. But the main thing that excited the audience was the feeling of necessity and nobility of the feat.
Kavrtina was a great success with the audience.
One day, David and a friend watched the king’s retinue go hunting. Cheerful exclamations, laughter, animated voices came from the lawn located at a distance. Several courtiers and officers tried to take turns jumping onto the bucking, apparently almost unbroken, stallion. The horse was unusually good - dapple gray, with a long tangled mane. He reminded David of the horses of the Dioscuri from the Roman Capitol. And everything here seemed like antiquity come to life: a wild horse tearing from the hands of people, a grove pierced by the sun, the dilapidated wall of a patrician villa in the distance...
No one was able to tame the stallion, it was impossible to stay in the saddle, the most skilled riders failed. Finally another one decided to try his luck. Very young, thin, quick in his movements, he walked out onto the lawn with light steps and threw off his caftan. Left in only a camisole, the young man seemed completely fragile next to the huge stallion. Almost without touching the stirrups, he jumped into the saddle and, strongly jerking the reins, raised the horse on its hind legs. Dust and clods of earth flew into the eyes of the spectators; the stallion rushed at a frenzied gait different sides, suddenly stopped, trying to throw the rider over his head, and again rushed forward like a quarry. Everyone watched the duel between man and horse with bated breath.
The man won. Shuddering and throwing his head back, squinting with bloodshot eyes, the stallion stopped in the very middle of the clearing. The rider turned his happy and tired, very boyish face to the audience and solemnly took off his hat, saluting the king. His chest heaved heavily under the blue ribbon of the order, the excitement of the recent struggle had not yet faded from his eyes, the lace jabot tore, revealing his neck. The audience applauded as if in a theater. This scene was so vividly imprinted in the artist’s eyes that he began to paint the picture.
The artist depicted Count Pototsky riding a magnificent and already submissive stallion. He takes off his hat in salute to the king. The light blue ribbon of the Order of the White Eagle on the Count's chest, cream leggings, blue sky, lush green young grass, white lace of Potocki's shirt, sun spots on the ground - a real feast of painting!
As you can see, not only antiquity, but also modern life, if it has something of the heroism of the Romans, and perhaps simply of human courage, is capable of firmly capturing the heart of an artist.
David chose a historical plot inspired by the novel of the then famous writer Jean Francois Marmontal about the sad fate of Belisarius, the commander of Emperor Justinian. Mixing history with legend, Marmontal described the life of a courageous warrior, a favorite of soldiers, who won many victories for the glory of his master. But Justinian did not trust Belisarius and was afraid of him. In the end, the emperor decided to get rid of the too famous military leader. Belisarius was deprived of his ranks and wealth, and then, by order of a cruel and distrustful monarch, he was blinded.
In Marmontal's book, David was attracted by one of the last episodes - an old warrior recognizes his commander in a decrepit, blind beggar begging for alms.
The painting depicts heavy pedestals and the bases of powerful columns. In the distance there were hills that resembled the Alban Mountains. There, in the dense mass of trees, the roofs of houses and temples can be seen...
Belisarius sits on a stone, his head is raised up - he is blind, he does not see the world, he only listens to it. The armor on the commander's shoulders sadly sets off the rags in which he is dressed. A guide boy in a light tunic holds out the battle helmet of Belisarius. And into this helmet, which so often with its sheer brilliance terrified the enemies of a powerful power, into this helmet in which Belisarius fought in Persia, in Africa, in Rome, some kind-hearted woman puts alms.
At a distance, an old soldier looks with amazement and horror at the decrepit blind man. not daring to recognize the famous commander in a beggar who was rich and beloved by the soldiers. David had not yet dared to entrust the viewer with an assessment of the event, and the soldier seemed to express the surprise and grief of the artist himself.
The picture is full of humanity, courageous suffering and compassion.
Once David was excited by the play of Cornelius on the stage of the French Theater - the tragedy of Horace, as a story about the courageous and worthy life of the ancients, as a revival of ancient heroics:
Returned to Father's house after a battle with enemies, the only surviving son of old Horace. Here he, the winner, saw his own sister mourning the death of her lover - a young man from a hostile family. In anger, he killed his sister with a blow of his sword. And so the young man is put on trial, and his old father defends his son. The father’s heated speech sounds from the stage:
Holy laurels! You who are being stained here!
You, whose leaves protect your head from thunder!
Will you allow the enemy to drag himself to execution?
Oh, Romans, friends, are you ready?
To impose shameful shackles on the hero?
Will he really be mercilessly executed?
To whom does Rome owe its freedom?!
And David conceives a picture about Horace and his sons.
The canvas is a huge canvas. Against the backdrop of gloomy stone arcades, a scarlet cloak draped over the shoulder of the younger Horace burns like a torch. The three sons, in full battle armor, wearing helmets and carrying spears, extended their right hands towards their father in the traditional and courageous gesture of the Roman greeting. The old man himself, raising his coldly shining swords, seals his sons’ oath of fidelity to duty and readiness to fight enemies with his blessing and, like a military commander, admonishes them before the battle. The warrior sisters lean into each other's arms in sorrowful numbness. The sound of a heavy and menacing weapon seems to be coming from the canvas. Swords, hands of father and sons, united in the very center of the canvas, symbolize the meaning and meaning of the picture: above everything, above human feelings and lives, over the grief of women and the old age of the father, the oath of fidelity to duty and the blade of swords rises.
David's canvas embodied in living and proud people, in the strict features of ancient heroes, the concepts of duty, honor and love for the fatherland, it made people see the futility and insignificance of small everyday affairs, secular vanity next to the true greatness of the spirit, next to thoughts of freedom that corresponded to the mood many Parisians.
Therefore, the picture caused a stir; there were no indifferent people, there were only friends and enemies. And that’s why some academics were so indignant: they rightly saw in the film not only a violation of accepted canons, but also dangerous freethinking.
The plot refers to the famous battle during the Greco-Persian Wars.
In September 480 BC. at the end Greco-Persian War The Persians, in an attempt to invade Greece, make the transition to the rocky gorge of Thermopylae. After two days of fighting, the Persians decide to take a desperate step when the traitor Efcalt shows them a roundabout route to the rear of the Greeks. The leader of the Spartans, Leonidas, dies along with 300 Spartans, surrounded by enemies. They waged heroic resistance against vastly superior forces and fought to the last, thanks to which their compatriots were able to evacuate civilians and prepare for defense.
The central character of the picture is King Leonidas, naked and unarmed (but with a large round shield, a belt of armor and a helmet), crouched on a piece of rock, bending his left leg.
On his right hand is his brother Agis, with a wreath on his head, which is worn during sacrifice before battle ( ancient custom), and blind Eurytus, guided by a Spartan slave, swings his spear.
On the other side is a group of Spartans with a trumpeter over their heads. Soldiers clutch weapons and shields or kiss women before going to their deaths.
On the left of the painting, a soldier clings to a rock to engrave with his handle the phrase “Those who go to Sparta will be told that we died obeying their laws.”
The painting “Leonidas at Thermopylae” does not show the battle itself, but the preparation for it.
The picture was painted during the period of the French Revolution, when society did not yet know what awaited them tomorrow, but everyone was in lively anticipation of change. The appearance of this painting was awaited as if it were a hero. The freedom of composition, a direct hint of modernity delighted the audience, but outraged the academicians, and they wanted to prohibit the exhibition of what they considered to be a seditious painting. However, I had to give in to the demands of the audience and the painting was put on display.
Bright splashes of color burst across the darkish canvas. Brutus's wife and daughters clinging to her seemed petrified; a silent cry frozen on their lips made their faces look like ancient tragic masks. Pieces of multi-colored material thrown on the table, a needle stuck into a ball of thread, spoke of a former life with its ordinary and now forever lost serene peace.
Brutus sat at the foot of the statue of Rome, motionless, silent, he forced himself not to turn around, not to look at the bodies of his executed sons. The figure of Brutus, immersed in shadow, seemed like a statue of despair and endless determination.
The spectators, many of whom had already made or were ready to make any sacrifices in the name of still distant freedom, stood silent and serious. These days people sincerely forgot about everyday little things. Brutus gave the audience an example of the perseverance necessary for anyone who doomed himself to fight.
The Spartan princess Helen was the most beautiful mortal woman in the Ecumene. They said that she inherited beauty from Zeus. Everyone dreamed of becoming her husband, but she refused everyone. Elena was very temperamental by nature and did not adhere to decency in her relationships. The girl's father, King Tyndareus, fearing his daughter's new tricks, married her to a rich young man, the son of the Trojan king Priam Menelaus, who was madly in love with her. After the death of Helen's father, Menelaus became king in his place. He idolized his wife, did not leave her one step, which caused her furious anger and indignation. She was rude to her husband, shouted at him and did not hide the fact that she did not love him at all. Wanting to soften his obstinate wife, Menelaus gave her gifts, but this did not help for long.
Everything has changed since Elena met the beautiful young man Paris and fell in love with him. From visiting merchants, Paris learned that the most beautiful woman on earth lived in Sparta. He wished to see the queen and went to Sparta to King Menelaus on several ships. The young king warmly received the guest, and the whole evening, forgetting about decency, did not take his eyes off her. Elena clearly reciprocated the stranger's feelings.
The next day, Menelaus went on business, and Paris met with Helen, and they made an escape plan. She let the Trojan prince into her chambers and spent several passionate nights with him. And then, having collected the jewelry, she set off with her lover on his ship.
The Trojans fell in love with Helen for her beauty. But Menelaus did not accept the loss of his wife. He vowed to destroy Menelaus and his friends and sent an army to Troy. But only 10 years later, with the help of cunning and the Trojan Horse, the Greeks captured Troy. Paris died from a poisoned arrow. And Menelaus forgave his wife who threw herself at his feet and lived with her until his death.
David found a story about this from Titus Livius. how in distant centuries, which even to the Romans seemed ancient, a great strife occurred between the Romans and the Sabines. The Romans invited the neighbors of the Sabines to the holiday, but the intentions of the Romans were insidious: they unexpectedly attacked the guests and captured the Sabine women present at the holiday. The Sabines decided to take revenge, gathered an army and marched on Rome. But at that moment, when a bloody battle was ready to break out, the Sabine women rushed into the midst of the warriors and forced them to stop the battle. Since then, the legend said, the Romans and Sabines united into a single people.
David considered that this legend could not be more timely in his era. David has not painted a single painting for so long. But finally the picture is finished.
The stormy battle froze on the canvas, constrained by the dispassionate purity of lines. Beautiful as marble statues, the naked warriors froze with weapons in their hands. Even the Sabine women, who rushed to separate the enemies, seemed petrified, even the mother, who raised her child to the sky, stopped, like a statue.
A forest of flying spears rose in the depths of the picture near the walls of ancient Rome. Ahead, two leaders stopped before a decisive battle. Romulus is ready to throw a light javelin, the leader of the Sabines Tatius is waiting for the enemy with a drawn sword and a raised shield. The copied weapons could amaze with the precision of their outlines. David painted all the characters in the picture from life.
Napoleon himself looked at the picture, but he did not understand it. The reaction of the audience also turned out to be ambiguous: along with high appreciation from art connoisseurs who understood its relevance in these difficult times, there were many perplexed cheerful exclamations - how can so many people be exposed to the public naked! A blank wall of misunderstanding stood between the audience and the canvas.
The artist painted a picture on famous story on the death of the Roman philosopher, poet and statesman Seneca.
Seneca belonged to the equestrian class. At the request of the mother of the future emperor, Nero became his tutor.
From his youth, Seneca was interested in philosophy. During the reign of Emperor Caligula, he enters the Senate and quickly becomes a popular speaker. The fame of the orator and writer Seneca arouses the envy of the emperor so much that he wanted to kill him, if not for the persuasion of one of his concubines.
During the reign of Emperor Nero, he becomes his first adviser. Seneca's influence on the emperor was enormous. Later he receives the highest position of consul in the empire and becomes very rich.
Nero persuades his advisers Seneca and Burrus to indirectly participate in the murder of his mother Agrippina. After this crime, Seneca's relationship with the emperor becomes increasingly strained. Seneca later resigned and left his entire fortune to Emperor Nero.
Nero, feeling the enormous influence of Seneca in society, hindering him, decides to remove his teacher and adviser. Seneca was sentenced to death, but had the right to choose the method of his death.
Seneca decided to commit suicide. Despite her husband's entreaties, his wife Paulina decided to leave with him. They both cut veins in their arms. Seneca, who was already old, was bleeding slowly, and he opened the veins in his legs. Since death still did not come, Seneca asked the doctor to give him poison.
Socrates is a famous ancient Greek philosopher. IN ordinary life He was distinguished by great simplicity, meekness and extraordinary courage in the struggle for the truth and his convictions.
Usually Socrates preached on the streets, mainly attracting young people to conversation, to discussion, helping young men to delve into the essence of the concepts of good and evil, beauty, love, immortality of the soul, knowledge, etc.
The directness of Socrates' judgment created many enemies for him, who accused him of corrupting youth and denying state religion. The main accuser of Socrates was the rich and influential democrat Anytus.
The philosopher was sentenced to death. His friends suggested he escape, but Socrates refused and courageously and calmly drank the cup of hemlock poison.
David depicted a prison room. A simple bed stands against a bare stone wall. It shows Socrates saying goodbye to his students. On the floor lie the shackles from which the philosopher has already been freed.
The artist contrasts the stern courage of the old philosopher with the deep despair of those gathered around him. The executioner himself, who transfers the poison to the condemned, is shocked by what is happening.
At the foot of the bed, David depicted Plato, deep in thought. The dialogue Crito, part of Plato's corpus, sits by the bed. He expresses his feelings more openly than Plato. At the head of the bed, the most expressive of all those present is Apollodorus, the Greek grammarian and philosopher. And of course, Socrates’ disciples are nearby, not hiding their grief.
The picture conveys a historical event: the murder by the enemies of the French Revolution of the publisher of the newspaper "Friend of the People" Jean Marat, who in the newspaper especially called for the execution of the tyrant king, otherwise there would be no peace for ordinary French people.
Marat was sick, so he lay in the bath, covered with a sheet, taking treatment for a cold. The day before, he was brought a letter from a woman who asked to see her to tell him about the supposedly impending conspiracy. At the moment of taking a bath, Marat was just reading a letter, in his other hand he had a pen. At this time that woman came and was allowed to see Marat. She entered and plunged a knife into Marat's defenseless chest, thus avenging the executed king. The next day, a delegate from the people of Giro proposed to paint a picture about the death of Marat, a friend of the common people.
David accurately depicted the situation of the event: Marat lies in the bath, a letter of petition is still clutched in his hand, his head is wrapped in a towel, and the other hand, with a feather, hangs powerlessly; There's a knife lying nearby. On the cabinet where the writing instruments are located, there is a large written sign: “David to Marat.”
Cold walls and a cold bath add an ominous mood. Powerlessness and suffering are forever etched on Marat’s face. The pale, blurry color of the painting gives it the appearance of a tombstone sculpture.
This canvas is more than two and a half meters wide. The artist conveys in the picture the triumphal procession of Emperor Napoleon after the French Revolution. This is a monument to Napoleon - a slightly theatrical figure on a rearing horse against the backdrop of a wild mountain landscape, against the backdrop of a stormy sky with rushing clouds.
Everything was magnificent in this picture: the rearing horse on the edge of the abyss, the wide cloak fluttering in the icy wind, the calm gesture of the general’s hand sending troops forward, the commander’s face, devoid of the slightest bit of emotion. All the spectacular details: the shiny harness, the gilded hilt of the saber, the hat with braid, the sewing of the collar, the tossed mane of the horse - were located on the canvas in a thoughtful and clear disorder and made up a mosaic as unified as it was rich.
A living image of time appeared on the canvas, hiding behind the dazzling brilliance ceremonies sober calculation and behind the pride of victories - a thirst for power.
On the rock, trampled by the hooves of a horse, acting as a pedestal, the names of the great commanders of antiquity are inscribed: Charlemagne and Hannibal. The third name is Bonopart.
The First Consul was very pleased with the portrait and ordered three copies of it.
The inviting gesture of an outstretched hand is subsequently often repeated in paintings of the Romantic era.
Pope Pius II is the founder of the Order of Bethlehem. While studying at the university, he read the works of Cicero and Livy, and, imitating the Roman poets, wrote erotic poetry. He was a humanist. He showed diplomatic abilities at the court of the German Emperor Frederick III, and then became his personal secretary.
At the age of 40 he took priestly orders and was appointed bishop of Siena, then a cardinal, and finally the Pope.
Being a humanist, Pius supported the development of cultural life at the papal court. Was interested classical literature, wrote Latin poetry.
He strongly supported attempts to find a cure for the then raging plague. At the court of Pius II, a letter was drawn up to the Turkish Sultan calling for conversion to Christianity. Founded the military Order of St. Mary of Bethlehem.
next to the Pope is Cardinal Caprara - he was appointed first consul of France (at that time by Napoleon Bonaparte) - papal legate at the court of Papius Pius II. Caprara's residence became Paris.
In 1802 he was appointed Archbishop of Milan by the Pope. And in 1804 he persuaded Pius II to travel to Paris for the coronation of Napoleon. Caprara, as Archbishop of Milan, crowned Napoleon as King of Italy, placing a crown on him.
Lucie Semplis Camille Benoit Desmoulins is a French lawyer, journalist and revolutionary. The initiator of the march on the Bastille, which marked the beginning of the Great French Revolution.
Desmoulins was a comrade of Maximilian Robespierre and was imbued with respect for the ancient revolutionary spirit.
Despite his stuttering, he was an excellent speaker and became a lawyer.
During the unrest in Paris, he addressed the crowd, calling to arms. The first one attached a green ribbon (the color of hope) to his hat. This call gave the first impetus to the destruction of the Bastille. He demanded the proclamation of a republic.
At the trial of Louis XVI he stood for the death of the king.
However, later Desmoulins began to call for mercy in his articles, but Robespierre stopped supporting him. As a result, Desmoulins was convicted by a revolutionary tribunal and executed along with Danton.
The painting depicts Desmoulins in the best years of his life with his wife and child.
David Jacques Louis David Jacques Louis
(David) (1748-1825), French painter, public figure. He studied at the Royal Academy of Painting and Sculpture (1766-74) with J. M. Vien. In 1775-80 in Italy he studied the art of antiquity, perceiving it as an example of civic-minded artistic creativity. In the pre-revolutionary era in France, the largest representative of the so-called revolutionary classicism. Works of David from the 80s. (“The Death of Socrates”, 1787, Metropolitan Museum of Art; “Lictors bring the bodies of his sons to Brutus”, 1789, Louvre) are characterized by the sublimity of the concept, the scenic solemnity of the figurative structure, the bas-relief composition, the predominance of volumetric and chiaroscuro principles over color. The journalistic orientation, the desire to express the heroic freedom-loving ideals of the era through images of antiquity were first embodied in David’s painting “The Oath of the Horatii” (1784, Louvre), perceived by the public as a call to revolutionary struggle. In portraits of David in the 80s and early 90s. the social essence of the model is emphasized, the classicist idea of a strong-willed and active person is embodied ("Doctor A. Leroy", 1783, Louvre). Inspired by the Great French revolution, David sought to create a historical painting on a modern theme ("The Oath in the Ballroom", 1791, unfinished). The paintings "The Murdered Lepeletye" (1793, not preserved) and especially "The Death of Marat" (1793, Museum contemporary art, Brussels) with its tragic sound, harsh life truth, simplicity and laconicism of composition, ascetic restraint of color and sculptural monumentality of forms became monuments to the heroes of the revolution, combining the features of a portrait and a historical painting. David was an active figure in the revolution, a member of the Convention (1789-94), organized mass public festivals, and created the National Museum in the Louvre.
After the counter-revolutionary Thermidorian coup from the late 90s. David again turned to the dramatic events of ancient history, highlighting the theme of resolving contradictions (“Sabine women stopping the battle between the Romans and Sabines”, 1799, Louvre). Since 1804, David, Napoleon’s “first artist,” painted a number of custom, decorative and spectacular ceremonial compositions and portraits (“Coronation of Josephine,” 1805-07, Louvre). Late portraits of David, marked by simplicity of composition, close attention to appearance and inner world models paved the way for the realistic quest of 19th century painters. In 1816, after the restoration of Bourbon power, he was forced to leave for Brussels. David was the teacher of A. Gros, F. Gerard, J. O. D. Ingres and others.
J. L. David. "Oath of the Horatii." 1784. Louvre. Paris.
,
,
Essays: in Russian translation: Speeches and letters., M.-L., 1933. Literature: V. N. Berezina, J. L. David, Leningrad, 1963; I. A. Kuznetsova, L. David, M., 1965; Verbraeken R., J.-L. David jugé par son époque et par la postérité, P., 1973; Brookner A., J.-L. David, L., 1980; Schnapper A., David témoin de son temps, Friborg, 1980.
(Source: Popular art encyclopedia." Ed. Polevoy V.M.; M.: Publishing house "Soviet Encyclopedia", 1986.)
See what “David Jacques Louis” is in other dictionaries:
David, self-portrait (1794) ... Wikipedia
David, self-portrait (1794) Birth name: Jacques Louis David Date of birth: August 30, 1748 Place of birth: Paris ... Wikipedia
David, Jacques Louis David, self-portrait (1794) Birth name: Jacques Louis David Date of birth: August 30, 1748 Place of birth: Paris ... Wikipedia
David, Jacques Louis- Jacques Louis David. Portrait of Madame Recamier. DAVID Jacques Louis (1748 1825), French painter. Representative of classicism. Taking antiquity as an example of citizenship, he performed works of great public resonance (“Oath... ... Illustrated Encyclopedic Dictionary
David Jacques Louis (30.8.1748, Paris, ≈ 29.12.1825, Brussels), French painter. He studied with the historical painter J. M. Vien at the Royal Academy of Painting and Sculpture in Paris (1766≈74). Early works D., in which echoes are palpable... ... Big Soviet encyclopedia
- (David) (1748 1825), French painter. Taking antiquity as an example of citizenship and love of freedom, he became the founder of the so-called revolutionary classicism of the late 18th century, performing works that were strict in composition and rhythm... ... encyclopedic Dictionary
David, Jacques Louis- (David, Jacques Louis) 1748, Paris 1825, Brussels. French painter. Having expressed artistic ideals French society on the eve, during and after the Revolution of 1789, acted not only as one of the greatest masters of educational... ... European art: Painting. Sculpture. Graphics: Encyclopedia
- (David, Jacques Louis) (1748 1825), French painter; born in Paris on August 30, 1748. In 1766 he became a student of Joseph Marie Vienne at the Royal Academy of Painting and Sculpture. Vien awakened in the young man a passion for classical antiquity and... Collier's Encyclopedia
- (David) historical painter, famous transformer of late French painting XVIII century, who had a significant influence on the direction of art even in other countries (1748-1825). Even in adolescence, he discovered outstanding artistic... ...
- (David) historical painter, banner. French converter painting of the late 18th century, who had a significant influence on the direction of art even in other countries (1748-1825). Even in adolescence, he discovered outstanding artistic abilities; But … Encyclopedic Dictionary F.A. Brockhaus and I.A. Efron
Jacques-Louis David
1748-1825
French painter and teacher, major representative of French neoclassicism
Joseph Vien
Francois Boucher
When the child's ability to draw was noticed, it was decided that he would become an architect, like both of his uncles.
David takes drawing lessons at the Academy of St. Luke, in 1764 his relatives introduce him to François Boucher in the hope that he will take Jacques-Louis as his student. However, due to the artist’s illness, this did not happen - nevertheless, he recommended that the young man begin studying with one of the leading masters historical painting early neoclassicism of Joseph Vienne.
Royal Academy of Painting and Sculpture
French Academy in Rome
Two years later, in 1766, David entered the Royal Academy of Painting and Sculpture, where he began studying in Vienne's workshop.
In 1775-1780 David studied at French Academy in Rome, where he studied antique art and the work of Renaissance masters.
Italy opened David's eyes to the ancient world. David liked to associate his appeal to antiquity with the name of Raphael: “Oh, Raphael, divine man, you, who gradually raised me to antiquity... You gave me the opportunity to understand that antiquity is even higher than you.”
In 1771, David successfully participated in the competition for the Rome Prize with his painting “The Battle of Minerva with Mars.” The painting was painted in the spirit of the academic style of that time, however, the success of the painting did not provide David with the desired reward. Professor Vien, perhaps offended by the fact that the student spoke without first informing him, for the purpose of pedagogical influence, rejected the prize under the pretext “that for the first time David can consider himself happy simply because his judges liked him.”
"Battle of Minerva with Mars"
Respectful to his elders, David kindly explained the professor’s action this way: “I think that Vien spoke so for my benefit, at least I can’t imagine any other purpose on the part of the teacher.”
"Antiochus, son of Seleucus, king of Syria.."
In 1774, David, for the painting “Antiochus, son of Seleucus, king of Syria, sick with the love with which he was imbued with Stratonice, his stepmother, the physician Erasistratus discovers the cause of the disease,” finally achieved the long-awaited reward, the news of the victory shocked him so much that he fainted and, having come to his senses, openly exclaimed: “My friends, for the first time in four years I breathed easily.”
In 1775 A trip to Italy is made, where he goes as a scholarship holder of the Academy together with Vienne.
Creative ideas were already arising in David’s head, in which he strove for such an ideal: “I want my works to bear the imprint of antiquity to such an extent that if one of the Athenians returned to the world, they would seem to him the work of Greek painters.”
And already in the first picture shown upon his return from Italy, “Belisarius, recognized by a soldier who served under his command, at the moment when a woman gives him alms,” he tried to implement his plan.
"Belisarius, recognized by a soldier.."
It is significant that David now takes not a mythological plot, but a historical one, although covered in legend. David's art style in this picture has already emerged quite clearly.
Portrait of Count Pototsky, the reason for painting the portrait was a life episode: in Naples, David witnessed how Pototsky pacified an unbroken horse. Let Pototsky’s gesture greeting the viewer be somewhat theatrical, but by the way specifically, with all the characteristic details, the artist conveyed the appearance of the person being portrayed, how he deliberately emphasized the carelessness of clothing, how he contrasted the calm and confidence of the rider with the hot, restless disposition of the horse, it is clear that the artist was not interested in the transfer of real reality in its living concreteness is alien. From then on, David’s work seemed to go in two directions: in historical paintings on ancient themes, the artist, in abstract images, strives to embody the ideals that worried pre-revolutionary France; on the other hand, he creates portraits in which he affirms the image of a real person.
"Oath of the Horatii"
In 1784, David wrote the “Oath of the Horatii” (Louvre), which was David’s first real triumph and which, undoubtedly, was one of the harbingers of the Revolution. In “The Oath of the Horatii,” David borrows a plot from ancient history in order to embody the advanced ideas of his time, namely: the idea of patriotism, the idea of citizenship. This picture, with its call to fight, to accomplish a civil feat, is one of the brightest manifestations of revolutionary classicism with all its stylistic features.
The portrait “Lavoisier with his wife” (1788; New York, Rockefeller Institute) was painted in a slightly different manner. The beauty of linear contours, grace of gestures, grace, elegance and sophistication of images should convey the charming image of the scientist and his wife.
David in his portraits represents what he directly observes in reality and, perhaps even without wanting it, creates images of people who are satisfied with themselves, with their wealth and willingly flaunt it.
Revolutionary events gave a direct impetus to the further development of David's work. Now there was no need to look for patriotic themes at all in antiquity; heroism invades life itself. David begins to work on a work that captures the event that occurred on June 20, 1789, when in the Ballroom the deputies took an oath “Under no circumstances will they disperse and gather wherever circumstances require until such time as a the constitution of the kingdom is established on sound foundations.”
Louis XVI
Actively participated in the revolutionary movement. In 1792, he was elected to the National Convention, where he joined the Montagnards led by Marat and Robespierre, and voted for the death of King Louis XVI. He was a member of the Committee of Public Security, in whose capacity he signed orders for the arrest of “enemies of the revolution.” Due to political differences at this time, he divorced his wife.
"The Ballroom Oath"
"The Death of Marat"
In an effort to perpetuate the events of the revolution, David painted a number of paintings dedicated to the revolutionaries: “The Oath in the Ballroom” (1791, unfinished), “The Death of Marat” (1793, Museum of Modern Art, Brussels).
The task is to influence the feelings of the viewer, to give him a lesson in patriotism. But another tendency in David’s art was organically combined with this task: the desire for a specific, individual characteristic that was inherent in his portraits.
After the counter-revolutionary coup, David renounced Robespierre, but was still arrested and imprisoned. While in the Luxembourg prison, from its window he painted a poetic corner of the Luxembourg Gardens (1794; Louvre). Calm is spread throughout the landscape. And, on the contrary, in the self-portrait (1794; Louvre), also written in prison, and which remained unfinished, a completely different mood reigns.
You can read confusion and anxiety in David’s gaze. Anxious sentiments are quite understandable for an artist who experienced the collapse of his ideals.
Self-portrait 1794
Bonaparte at the Saint Bernard Pass (1801)
In 1797, he witnessed the ceremonial entry of Napoleon Bonaparte into Paris and since then became his ardent supporter, and after he came to power - the court “first artist”. David creates paintings dedicated to Napoleon’s crossing of the Alps, his coronation, as well as a number of compositions and portraits of people close to Napoleon
"Coronation of the Emperor and Empress"
"The Army's Oath to Napoleon"
In 1804, Napoleon Bonaparte became emperor, and David received the title of "first painter to the emperor." Napoleon demands praise of the empire in art, and David, on his orders, writes two large compositions, “The Coronation of the Emperor and Empress” (1806-1807; Louvre) and “The Oath of the Army to Napoleon after the Distribution of Eagles on the Champ de Mars in December 1804” (1810; Versailles) ).
"Sappho and Phaon"
The portrait remains the strong point of David’s work until the end of his life; as for compositional works, they, having lost their former revolutionary pathos, turn into cold academic paintings. Sometimes his strict style gives way to pretentious sophistication and beauty, as, for example, in the painting “Sappho and Phaon” (1809; Hermitage).
The years of reaction followed, and in 1814 the Bourbons came to power. David is forced to go into exile, but despite this, in Paris his students continue to honor the cult of the maestro and await his return: “Your oldest students still love you...” they write to David.
"Mars Disarmed by Venus"
During the period of emigration, along with inexpressive compositional works, such as “Mars Disarmed by Venus” 1824, he created a number of portraits painted in different manners. Elaborate details characterize the portraits of archaeologist Alexandre Lenoir (1817; Louvre) and actor Wolf
Portrait of Alexandre Lenoir
