For one thing, Romanticism took
from the Neoclassical attitude of seriousness adopted after the
Revolution. A further backlash against
the licentious lewdness of the Rococo Period, Romanticism (as we mean it here)
was a style of art that portrayed dramatic and exotic subjects perceived with
strong feelings. This heightened sense
of emotion is one of the key differences in Romantic art. Neoclassical paintings like Ingres'
Apotheosis of Homer was painted flatly and linearly, you will recall, with not
a whole lot of bursting emotion.
Romantic paintings breathe emotion.
They also shift their focus primarily onto the present, instead of
looking back to the Classical past (again, as Ingres' Apotheosis painting
did). These paintings often deal with
current events but portray them in the fashion one would portray an ancient,
epic event of Classical Greek or Roman mythology—dramatically. Romanticism sees all of contemporary life
through the Classical lens of epic drama and passionate emotionalism. The changes can be heard in music at this
time as easily as the difference between Mozart and Beethoven.
In one sense, then, the court
paintings of Jacques-Louis David could be considered Romantic—and they very
often are. I placed them under the
Neoclassical Period of art because: (1) that is how I was taught; and (2) it
helps one to better see the immediate withdrawal away from the Rococo style
after the French Revolution. But it is
true that David's paintings of Napoleon are as much Romantically inspired as
they are Neoclassically styled. His
paintings were of contemporary events, like the emperor's coronation; and they
were often shown in dramatic fashion, like his painting of Napoleon Crossing
the Alps. Romanticism and Neoclassicism
share much in common, so I will pick up where we left off and return to another
David painting, now under the category of Romantic art.
Just after Napoleon's Syrian
Campaign, his troops won a decisive victory over the Ottoman Turks at Jaffa in
Israel. After the conquest, many of
Napoleon's men were infected with Bubonic plague and deemed incurable. Their emperor had them poisoned to prevent
further spread of the disease, but in so doing he fell into disfavor with many
among the general public (understandably so, I think). To counter the negative sentiment towards his
name, Napoleon turned once more to his favorite painter in order to generate
some more promotional propaganda. This
time, we see Napoleon at a "pest house" (or plague colony) of infected
Bubonic plague victims. The highly
contagious nature of the disease made it necessary to isolate those suffering
from it to prevent further contamination.
It would have been considered absolutely dangerous to enter into a
plague house such as we see here, but Napoleon stands upright and calm. It would have been considered even more
dangerous not to have a cloth or handkerchief covering one's mouth while among
the colony. It would have been
considered complete suicide to touch one of the sick, but Napoleon, with no
glove or cloth to protect him, stretches out his helping hand like the great
Healer, Christ Himself. Meanwhile we can
see the city of Jaffa burning in the background with a French flag staked over
it, but this is conveniently pushed away from the scene at present. What artist Jacques-Louis David has painted
is an extraordinary image of Napoleon as a fearless general, a compassionate
leader, a helper of the weak, and an inspiration to his men, a great emperor,
and no less great a man than the Son of Man.
Propaganda makes heroes.
Thanks for sharing post.
ReplyDeleteromanticism paintings characteristics