Jacques Louis David ja Prantsuse Revolutsioon (0)

Introduction
The great French Revolution has been regarded to as one of the most influential events in modern Western history, and therefore there are various interpretations to explain how the Revolution evolved and what it was like. It is important to focus on very different kinds of historical evidence and sources to get a clear picture of the Revolution. Therefore, one must not forget to look not only at the written sources but also at the more cultural and artistic interpretations. One of the best examples of cultural and political distribution of the Revolutionary ideas was Jacques -Louis David, who, with his paintings , perpetuated The French Revolution from the Republican point of view. His art was mostly tightly connected to the main figures , events and ideas of the French Revolution. David had more than 5 pieces of art that captured the essence of the Revolution. His paintings represented political ethics, current ideals and foundations. Furthermore , the wider public was enthralled with his ability to represent brotherhood and patriotism while using the neoclassicistic style. (Friedlaender, 1952, p.16)
Jacques-Louis David was born in Paris in 1748 as the son of an ironmonger. The leader of the French classical movement studied with the artist Joseph-Marie Vien. Although , he attained his real art education in Rome, where he was surrounded by ancient ruins and the masterpieces of great Italian painters. After returning to Paris in 1789 David started to shape his vision , connecting the themes from Antique with the themes of strict morality and heroic sacrifice. This was compatible with the new ideas of the French Republic and therefore David quickly turned into a national hero . When the French revolution started, Jacques-Louis David was as passionate towards politics as he was towards his art. He joined the National Convention, staged Republic marches and attacked the Royal Academy . His actions almost ended with him being guillotined but fortunately he was only sentenced a time in prison . Thereupon, with the rise of Napoleon , David was released from the prison and became the Emperors new personal painter. ( Graham -Dixon, 2008, p.268)
With regard to the French artists in general, in the 18th century they were dependent on the Academy and therefore very restricted by formalities. King Louis XIV had forced painters to be extremely classical in their style and keep the paintings as clear and formal as possible. (Friedlaender, 1952, p.5) By the second half of the century political changes allowed art to be freer and therefore classicism started to bear a rather political note . Political art, various pamphlets, literature and the Enlightenment laid the foundations of the soon coming French Revolution. (Friedlander, 1952, p.7)
Analysis
To begin with, the 18th century was all about the rebirth of classicism and antiquity. Surprisingly, it was very hard for David to find examples from Antique, because they almost did not exist . Only some paintings that were meant for decor in Pompeii were preserved. That is why he went to Pompeii for an expedition, in order to best represent the classicism requirements. David painted carefully all the contours and forms of the human body , because he started to imitate Antique sculptures . Moreover , David and Classicism in general were not limited to only mimicking the external form of the Antique, but also the plot was often borrowed from the Antique literature or mythology . Best suited were the subjects that glorified bravery, loyalty, love for the fatherland and other virtues. Paintings were supposed to be instructive and fight against vices. (Leesi, 2003, p.115)
As a matter of fact , the whole life of Jacques-Louis David was somehow connected to political change and therefore David was left with no other choice than to be a part of the French Revolution. In 1780 David returned to Paris and a few years later he exhibited his masterpiece Oath of the Horatii in the Salon . The Salon was a place where all the great men in Paris, who later on were participants of the Revolution, would gather, discuss relevant topics and enjoy culture. The message behind the Horatii impressed many important figures of that time, including Thomas Jefferson, who appreciated the message of patriotism and individual sacrifice on the painting. ( Roberts , 1989, p.4, 5) In the Oath of Horatii David used a very popular story from mythology that captured the patriotism of men and at the same time the feeling of abandonment among the women . The legend tells the story of a noble father who gives swords to his three sons , who take an oath to fight for their country . Moreover, at the same time the wives of the three sons are in deep morning and represent the more delicate part of the legend and of the painting. (Roberts, 1989, p.18) The painting represents antiquity and Spartan and Roman heroic essence combined with a political content. (Friedlaender, 1952, p.17) The message of the Horatii was very much favored by the Academy for its heroic and instructive story. However , controversially David saw Horatii as a protest against the bureaucratic institution of the Academy. (Roberts, 1989, p.18) Roberts (1989) comments on the attentions of Jacques-Louis David:
“Yet the Horatii has long been regarded as subversive, or to use the term that has gained recent currency , it is seen in some quarters as prerevolutionary. To see the work as prerevolutionary is different than seeing it as “fully republican” as critics once did. L.D. Ettlinger repudiated that idea in 1967, when he explained that David was neither political nor republican when he painted the Horatii.”(Roberts, 1989, p.18)
Moreover, in 1978 Thomas crow, an American art historian, published an article which revived the historical dispute about David’s intentions with his Horatii. Crow claimed that Horatii was definitely a prerevolutionary painting and that Ettlinger’s idea of Horatii being republican is false . (Roberts, 1989, p.19)
In 1781 David exhibited his painting Belisarius, which was based on a legend of Belisarius, who was a victorious and noble military general falsely accused of betrayal. (Rosenblum, Woldemar, 1984, p.25) Same misfortune happened to one general in France :
“The legend was especially popular in the late eighteenth century, not only because of its dramatic ingredient of grim misfortune, but because it offered a historical counterpart to the contemporary scandal of a French general, the Count de Lally, who, after mismanaging a French expedition to India, was wrongly convicted of treason and executed in 1766, but then officially exonerated in 1781, the year of David’s painting. It was the kind of parallel between contemporary events and distant history that David’s art would evoke more and more as the Revolution approached.”(Rosenblum, Woldemar, 1984, p.25)
Although, the painting is not specifically created to represent the French Revolution, its theme borrowed from antiquity and classical style are both already representing David’s style that continued to be his trademark for upcoming revolution years.
In 1989, David exhibited his Brutus and the Lictors in the Salon. This painting is the first to be painted while the actions of the revolution were already starting. The figures on the painting tell us a story about a man named Brutus who was the founding father of the Roman Republic and who sent his own sons to death because they had betrayed the country. As for the style of the painting, David was still using the Roman approach with classical style and mostly borrowed all aspects from antiquity.
With regard to the receptivity of the public, the king and his supporters tried to ban the panting, but despite of all their efforts it was widely spread and seen. Moreover, it was extremely risky for David to send Brutus to an exhibition sponsored by the king himself , because of the fact that a while ago David himself worked for the king and now he is presenting a work that potentially damages the king’s reputation. (Friedlaender, 1952, p.18) The theme of Brutus and the Lictors brings about the feeling of patriotism and sacrifice. Moreover, the events that occurred in France at the time when David was painting Brutus were in accordance with the emotions and the message on the painting:
“The themes associated with David’s painting, a corrupt court , sexual scandal, the tyrannical power of kings , emasculation of the Senate, and aristocratic plots against the government , were reenacted in Paris in the months just before the work was finished and put to exhibit .” (Roberts, 1989, p.48, 49)
Although, Brutus had a huge impact on the political side of the 18th century, another important impact was on the fashion of the Revolution. Women started to dress like the daughters of Brutus and even the furniture was imitated .Furthermore, one of David’s contemporaries saw the paintings to be even more influential than other sources of that time:
“ Through his Brutus as through his Horatii, David talks to the people more directly and more clearly than all the inflammatory writers whom the regime has confiscated and burned” (Friedlaender, 1952, p.18,19)
In 1791, David was offered to do a panting about a very notable event in the course of the French Revolution: the oath of the tennis court . On the 20th June of 1789 the freshly assembled Parliament was not able to enter the Versaille and therefore they gathered in a ballroom, where they swore an oath to stay together until a new constitution has been made. David believed the painting to be so big and detailed that it would take at least 4 years to complete it. Unfortunately, the political situation changed really quickly and radically, that he only managed to do some sketches. Overall , in the 18th century historical representations in art from were extremely rare, therefore even only sketches of the Tennis Court Oath became very famous. (Friedlaender, 1952, p.22)
Moreover, representing crowds of important historical figures as great heroes in the same space was a challenge for David, but he succeeded with great accuracy. (Friedlaender, 1952, p.22) The main characters of the painting are positioned to look more outstanding than others and their muscularity makes them appear even more heroic. (Lajer, 1999, p.106) He placed one of the main figures, Jean Bailly , to the center of the room on a table that divided the room into two sides , but did not break the unity of the whole picture. Aside from Bailly, other important delegates like abbe Gregoire, dom Gerle and Rabaut Saint- Etienne , were located centrally and made identifiable. Around the table representatives of Protestantism , regular clergy and secular clergy were all together without special division. This shows how the Revolution makes everybody equal and unifies even opposite sides. Moreover, above the oath takers some soldiers watch upon the activities ready to disband the whole Parliament and outside the windows there is lightning that struck to the royal cathedral symbolizing the soon fall of the king. (Roberts, 1989, p.53)
During the bloodiest year of the French Revolution, 1793, David was offered to paint three depictions of Revolution martyrs, who were assassinated for being Republican. With the three portrays and mainly with the first two, David had the opportunity to encourage citizens to be loyal , through showing violence that triggers pity and this, in turn , triggers loyalty. (Roberts, 1989, p.90)
The first to be painted was Le Peletier de Saint-Fargeau, who was murdered in 1793. His murderer, a former royal guard, killed Le Peletier because he voted for the death of the king. David kept the painting in his family, who later sold it to Le Peletier’s daughter. She found the painting to be disgraceful and destroyed it, with all existing copies and sketches. (Roberts, 1989, p.75, 76) Furthermore, in the context of the Revolution, the painting with a long sword displayed above Le Peletier brings forth the idea of killing the tyrant. With The death of Le Peletier David has the power to control the attitudes towards the death of the king and Le Peletier. (Vaughan,????????????????) By creating a martyr of Le Peletier, people found it easier to relate to the events and political actions that occurred at that time.
The second martyr and the most famous among the three was Jean-Paul Marat . Marat was a member of the Jacobin club , publisher of the newspaper called L’ami du Peuple and one of the main prompters of the carnage of 1792. He was assassinated in 1793 by a supporter of the Girondists, Charlotte Corday , who stabbed him in the chest while Marat was taking a bath. The members of the Jacobin club organized him a funeral and his coffin was placed in Pantheon. Marat would have gone down in history as a great murderer, if it had not been Charlotte Corday, whose deed allowed the Jacobins to display Marat as a martyr. The same deed enabled David to portray him as a hero. David, a member of the Jacobin club, commemorated his killing with a sincerely mourning painting. (Vaughan, ?????????????) With The death of Marat David expressed both his personal and public emotions and thoughts. For the public Marat was first and foremost a painting about patriotism and courage:
“In these “martyr” canvases he portrays the tragedy of the patriot (and later in life David still viewed Marat as such ) who, in the midst of carrying out his patriotic duties, falls a victim to the dagger.” (Friedlaender, 1952, p.25)
Furthermore, Marat was using his bathroom as an office, because he had a severe case of skin disease and taking a bath would relieve his pain. Accordingly, David painted him dead in a bathtub, almost in a Christ like pose. The wound on Marat’s right chest can be compared to Jesus ’s wounds when he was crucified, and therefore Marat seems like a hero dying for a noble cause. Moreover, with depicting Marat as Christ, although David himself and Marat were both atheists, Jacques-Louis David in a way creates a new religion , praising the social reformers of the French Revolution. (Rosenblum, Woldermar- Jansen , 1984, p.30) In 1793 David gave a speech while presenting The death of Marat, where he calls citizens to honor and praise Marat:
“Hurry, all of you! Mothers, widows, orphans, oppressed soldiers, all whom he defended at the risk of his life, approach and contemplate your friend ; he who was so vigilant is no more; his pen, the terror of traitors, his pen has slipped from his hand ! Grieve! Our tireless friend is dead. He died giving you his last crust of bread ; he died without even the means to pay for his funeral. Posterity, you will avenge him; you will tell our descendants how he could have possessed riches if he had not preferred virtue to fortune . . . . To you, my colleagues, I offer my homage with my brush ; as you observe the livid and bloody features of Marat, you will remember his virtue, which you must never cease to emulate.”
The painting itself is very symbolic. In Marat’s left hand there is a letter from Corday and beside it a letter with some money to a soldier’s widower. This portrays him as a good hearted and humble man, who supports the poor and weak . Furthermore, Marat is writing on an old box that was used as a table. On the panting the box symbolizes the conditions of the revolutionaries supporting the Republic, because usually only the rich and the supporters of the king could own luxurious furniture. All in all, David represented Marat on the panting as a loyal and true friend with strict principles. (Graham-Dixon, 2008, p.269)
Although The death of Marat is a portrait , many of art historians consider it to be a history painting. In the later years historians have started to consider new perspectives and therefore they investigate using cultural documentations and anthropology . Historians found out that during the French Revolution, people who saw the painting would become more affectionate towards the Revolution and the new Republic, and would see Marat as a role model.(Vaughan,????????????????, p.56, 57)
Last but not least, the third martyr that David depicted was Joseph Bara . Bara was a young boy, who anchored himself to an army fighting the opposers of the Revolution. He was murdered, because he refused to give away two horses to the counterrevolutionaries. David portrayed him as an innocent victim and therefore the painting of Bara was very different from two previous martyr portrays. Bara is depicted as lying naked on the ground with a national emblem in his hand. David did not paint the real story, but instead portrayed Bara as being killed after being surrounded by enemies who demanded him to cry out ‘Long live the King!’ . As usual for Jacques-Louis David, he made the story and the person better than it actually was. Furthermore, Bara was painted later than the two previous martyr portrays and therefore David’s own perception of the Revolution had changed and so Bara was more of an expression of immense tensions caused by the French Revolution:
“In other words , even as one side of David remained fanatically loyal to the Revolution, another side avoided its grim reality .” (Roberts, 1989, p.90)
This piece of art already predicts the end of revolution with the message that revolution puts too much political and personal press on people and that they cannot resist it any more.
Conclusion
In conclusion, Jacques-Louis David paved the way for Revolution with his historical, mythological and philosophical narrations. His greatest masterpieces like Marat, The Tennis Court Oath and The oath of Horatii are true historical representations of the French Revolution. People of the 18th century looked at his work to get inspired and to better understand contemporary occurrences. Same can be said about art historians and various history interpreters, who examine the ideas, motives and style of David to get a better understanding of the French revolution. Without the contribution of Jacques-Louis David in the French Revolution, there would be much less sources to rely on while trying to recreate the culture, ideas, motives, events and everyday life in the 18th century France.