Jacques-Louis David’s work was the epitome of neoclassicist painting from France. The most iconic and riveting of his work is The Death of Marat (1793). David had a very deep, personal connection to the subject of this particular piece, as both men were involved in the Jacobin party of the French Revolution. This particular work really holds a unifying momentum for French revolutionaries in this era. With the utilization of his particular neoclassical style, David paints The Death of Marat into a galvanizing image to fuel revolutionary support against the monarchy. This development is evident through the historic significance surrounding the events of the assassination of Marat and David’s personal involvement in the revolution, David’s selective detailing of the painting’s imagery and iconography, and David’s trends with historic depictions. Jean-Paul Marat was a political journalist during the French Revolution. Marat was known for radical views (at the time) surrounding the defense and fair treatment of the sans-culottes, or better known as the masses of the lower class, becoming the heralding voice to unite them with the Jacobin party. The Jacobins were known for being radical anti-monarchists in support of a republic. Now, all of these ideas were considered radical at the time because, for centuries upon centuries, the French monarchy went uncontested and without a form of checks and balances that most modern democracies are instituted with. These views were also seen as controversial due to the fact that, for the longest time, if citizens weren’t of elite standing, they did not have any social or political grounds for what is seen in modern times as civil rights and that was the norm. By pushing against the status quo, this was a definitive move against the power of the monarchy and a push for a new form of government. The Jacobins are attributed their most of their notoriety from leading the Reign of Terror, which started in the same year as Marat’s death, 1793. One of the great oppositions to this movement was the Girondists, as the group was not very enthusiastic to send every person who opposed the revolution to their death; however, the group was still anti-monarchy. The Girondists were actually part of the Assembly, just like the Jacobins; however the Jacobins were more like a political club and was created by the highest officials in the Assembly, which in turn made it semi-elitist. For comparative purposes, on a political map, Girondists would be more moderate right-wing, possibly verging on conservatism or traditionalism, thus Jacobins would be radical left-wing, nearing on totalitarianism. Neither group even got close to nearing any type of libertarianism, as both groups still wanted majority control over the proletariat. The differences in the parties/groups play a key role in the death of Marat. Charlotte Corday, who was a Girondist, assassinated Marat, who worked for and identified as a Jacobin, on July 13, 1793[1]. At that point, Girondists had been accused of being sympathizers to the crown. Corday was executed by guillotine a few days after the assassination. David was also a notable member of the Jacobins, temporarily holding a high position in the club in 1973[2]. David is documented to have been close with Marat personally and professionally through their political ties. When news of Marat’s death reached the public, David was immediately asked to make a final image of the journalist. The painting was then displayed for a few years until it was taken down and hidden[3], which could be due the tumultuous state of political affairs and the rapidly changing regimes. In a Khan Academy video, Dr. Beth Harris and Dr. Steven Zucker discuss the formal similarity David’s painting has to the Pietà in subject positioning and subject theme, which can be seen at (2:52) of the video. The doctors hypothesize that with the onslaught of the era of Enlightenment, and, subsequently, reason, that painters such as David were replacing standard religious iconography with modern martyrs as a way to push out the Monarchy[4] and the divine right of kings. By depicting Marat as a modern martyr, David made a visual push for the people to denounce the monarchy and embrace the Jacobin revolution, regardless of radical it may have been. In David’s selection of Marat’s positioning being allegorical to paintings of Christ, he made a selective choice of detail within his work. As well as the subject positioning, David makes three other key choices in his creation of the painting: depiction of the condition of Marat’s body, eliminating any secondary figures, and drawing Corday’s letter used for entry in Marat’s hand. When David arrived at Marat’s apartment a few days later, where the assassination took place, Marat’s body was already deepening into primary stages of decomposition as the summer heat was exacerbating the speed that which decomposition occurred. Marat’s remains were turning green[5] and still had visible signs of his skin ailment. Knowing that Marat was stabbed while soaking in a bath to treat his skin ailment, signs of that ailment would have been visible. In David’s painting, Marat has a ghostly pale and luminous complexion on the exposed parts of his body. David completely eliminated any sign of discoloration or imperfection in the painting, almost like using a self-curated form of Photoshop airbrushing. Also, once someone dies, his or her muscles immediately start to decompose and lose form. In David’s painting, Marat retains a taut, firm musculature that is nearly impossible after multiple days of decomposition. David’s depiction of Marat’s dead form gives Marat a perfect physique, which could lead viewers into believing that his death was untimely. In other depictions of Marat’s assassination, Corday is included, usually shown in the process of stabbing Marat in his bath. J. L. Delignon’s Marat struck dead (late 1790s) depicts a much more gruesome scene than that of David’s The Death of Marat, showing Corday having already stabbed Marat and preparing to strike again whilst Marat hangs over the side of the bath seeming to plead with her to spare him. David refraining from including the figure of Corday and only including her name on the letter clutched in Marat’s dead hand removes any possibility of Corday being portrayed as a heroine or a martyr herself. This could be seen as quite manipulative on David’s part, fueling the backing for the Jacobins. This also has interesting feminist implications, removing all autonomy from Corday as a political being[6], and just placing her as a murderer. Placing the letter Corday used in Marat’s hand created this implicit association that the Girondists were manipulative and against the welfare of the people, quite possibly becoming a leading attribute to the Girondist downfall and rise of support around the Jacobins, thus eliminating all preventative stops that the Girondists would have put in around the monarchy and the subsequent Reign of Terror. These galvanizing and vilifying images were nothing new for David. David established a pattern of making powerful images of patriotic historic and mythical events. One of David’s most notable examples would be Oath of the Horatii (1784), which predates his painting of Marat. In this painting, three Horatii brothers (Romans) vow to their father to die for their country in patriotic duty against the Curatii (Albans). Later in the legend, one of the Horatii sisters is morning the loss of her Curatii betrothed, and her Horatii brother executes her for her lack of patriotic commitment to her country. David’s painting, in short, shows three young men holding their duty to their country above all else. David also painted The Tennis Court Oath (1791) depicting one of the early major moments of the French Revolution. Both Oath of the Horatii and The Tennis Court Oath display neoclassicist hyper realistic figures and architecture, which allow for the paintings to achieve a level of relatability for the common person unattainable prior to this era. Because of David’s talent in depicting figures so realistically, he was immediately asked by the Jacobins to create the painting depicting Marat in his final moments or in death. Vaughan and Weston cite that a member of the Jacobins, Audouin, stated at the news of Marat’s death, “Return Marat to us whole again”[7]. Vaughan and Weston also note Audouin’s statement “reveals an interesting faith in the power of the image to create a likeness so believable that the subject’s actual presence might be felt.”[8] This observation really gives modern audiences an understanding of what might have been felt by an audience in that era and how it might have pushed them to rally around the Jacobins, and thus the Revolution. [1] “Introduction.” David’s The Death of Marat. Eds. William Vaughan & Helen Weston. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 2000. 3. Print.
[2] Ibid. [3] “Introduction.” David’s The Death of Marat. Eds. William Vaughan & Helen Weston. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 2000. 2. Print. [4] Dr. Beth Harris and Dr. Steven Zucker, Jacques-Louis David. The Death of Marat. YouTube Video, 6:22. Nov. 3, 2014. https://youtu.be/Hw2_hv439Fg [5] “Introduction.” David’s The Death of Marat. Eds. William Vaughan & Helen Weston. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 2000. 6. Print. [6] Weston, Helen. “The Corday-Marat Affair: No Place for a Woman.” David’s The Death of Marat. Edited by William Vaughan & Helen Weston. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 2000. 128. Print. [7] “Introduction.” David’s The Death of Marat. Eds. William Vaughan & Helen Weston. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 2000. 6. Print. [8] Ibid.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Archives
May 2017
Categories |