In which pictures of Delacroix the theme of freedom sounds. Abstract on the topic: The work of the French artist Eugene Delacroix "Freedom leading the people

Jacques Louis David's painting "The Oath of the Horatii" is a turning point in the history of European painting. Stylistically, it still belongs to classicism; this is a style oriented towards Antiquity, and at first glance this orientation remains with David. "The Oath of the Horatii" is written on the plot of how the three brothers of Horace were chosen by the Roman patriots to fight the representatives of the hostile city of Alba Longa by the brothers Curiacia. Titus Livy and Diodorus Siculus have this story; Pierre Corneille wrote the tragedy on its plot.

“But it is precisely the oath of the Horatii that is absent from these classical texts.<...>It is David who turns the oath into the central episode of the tragedy. The old man holds three swords. It stands in the center, it represents the axis of the picture. To his left are three sons merging into one figure, to his right are three women. This picture is startlingly simple. Before David, classicism, with all its orientation towards Raphael and Greece, could not find such a harsh, simple masculine language to express civic values. David seemed to have heard what Diderot said, who did not have time to see this canvas: 'You have to write as they said in Sparta.'

Ilya Doronchenkov

During the time of David, Antiquity first became tangible thanks to the archaeological discovery of Pompeii. Before him, Antiquity was the sum of the texts of ancient authors - Homer, Virgil and others - and several tens or hundreds of imperfectly preserved sculptures. Now she has become tangible, right down to furniture and beads.

“But none of this is in the picture of David. In it, Antiquity is strikingly reduced not so much to the entourage (helmets, irregular swords, togas, columns), but to the spirit of primitive fierce simplicity. "

Ilya Doronchenkov

David carefully orchestrated the appearance of his masterpiece. He wrote and exhibited it in Rome, garnering rave criticism there, and then sent a letter to a French patron. In it, the artist reported that at some point he stopped painting a picture for the king and began to paint it for himself, and, in particular, decided to make it not square, as was required for the Paris Salon, but rectangular. As the artist had hoped, rumors and letters fueled public excitement, the painting was booked a profitable place at the already opened Salon.

“And now, with a delay, the picture is put into place and stands out as the only one. If it were square, it would be hung in a row of the others. And by changing the size, David turned it into a unique one. It was a very domineering artistic gesture. On the one hand, he declared himself to be the main one in the creation of the canvas. On the other hand, he attracted everyone's attention to this picture. "

Ilya Doronchenkov

The picture has another important meaning, which makes it a masterpiece for all time:

“This canvas does not address a person - it refers to a person standing in the ranks. This is a team. And this is a command to a person who first acts and then reflects. David very correctly showed two non-intersecting, absolutely tragically divided worlds - the world of acting men and the world of suffering women. And this juxtaposition - very energetic and beautiful - shows the horror that actually stands behind the history of the Horatii and behind this picture. And since this horror is universal, then the "Oath of the Horatii" will not leave us anywhere. "

Ilya Doronchenkov 

Abstract

In 1816, the French frigate Medusa was wrecked off the coast of Senegal. 140 passengers left the brig on a raft, but only 15 survived; they had to resort to cannibalism to survive the 12-day wandering on the waves. A scandal broke out in French society; an incompetent captain, a royalist by conviction, was found guilty of the disaster.

“For the liberal French society, the catastrophe of the frigate Medusa, the sinking of the ship, which for the Christian person symbolizes the community (first the church, and now the nation), has become a symbol, a very bad sign of the beginning of the new restoration regime.”

Ilya Doronchenkov

In 1818, the young artist Théodore Gericault, looking for a worthy subject, read the book of survivors and began work on his painting. In 1819, the painting was exhibited at the Paris Salon and became a hit, a symbol of romanticism in painting. Gericault quickly abandoned the intention of portraying the most seductive - a scene of cannibalism; he did not show the stabbing, despair, or the very moment of salvation.

“Gradually he chose the only right moment. This is the moment of maximum hope and maximum uncertainty. This is the moment when people who survived on the raft first see the brig "Argus" on the horizon, which first passed the raft (he did not notice it).
And only then, going on a collision course, I stumbled upon him. In the sketch, where the idea has already been found, "Argus" is noticeable, but in the picture it turns into a small dot on the horizon, disappearing, which attracts the eye, but does not seem to exist. "

Ilya Doronchenkov

Gericault refuses naturalism: instead of emaciated bodies, he has beautiful courageous athletes in his painting. But this is not idealization, it is universalization: the picture is not about specific passengers of Meduza, it is about everyone.

“Gericault scatters the dead in the foreground. It was not he who invented it: the French youth raved about the dead and wounded bodies. This excited, beat on the nerves, destroyed conventions: a classicist cannot show the ugly and terrible, but we will. But these corpses have another meaning. Look what is happening in the middle of the picture: there is a storm, there is a funnel into which the eye is drawn. And over the bodies, the viewer, standing right in front of the picture, steps on this raft. We are all there. "

Ilya Doronchenkov

Gericault's painting works in a new way: it is addressed not to an army of spectators, but to each person, everyone is invited to the raft. And the ocean is not just the ocean of lost hopes of 1816. This is human destiny.

Abstract

By 1814 France had grown tired of Napoleon, and the arrival of the Bourbons was received with relief. However, many political freedoms were abolished, the Restoration began, and by the end of the 1820s, the younger generation began to realize the ontological mediocrity of power.

“Eugene Delacroix belonged to that stratum of the French elite, which rose under Napoleon and was pushed aside by the Bourbons. Nevertheless, he was treated kindly: he received a gold medal for his first painting at the Salon, Dante's Boat, in 1822. And in 1824 he made a painting "The Massacre in Chios", depicting ethnic cleansing, when the Greek population of the island of Chios was deported and destroyed during the Greek War of Independence. This is the first swallow of political liberalism in painting, which concerned still very distant countries. "

Ilya Doronchenkov

In July 1830, Charles X issued several laws severely restricting political freedoms and sent troops to smash the opposition newspaper's printing house. But the Parisians responded by shooting, the city was covered with barricades, and during the "Three Glorious Days" the Bourbon regime fell.

The famous painting by Delacroix, dedicated to the revolutionary events of 1830, depicts different social strata: a dandy in a top hat, a tramp boy, a worker in a shirt. But the main one, of course, is a young beautiful woman with a bare chest and shoulder.

“Delacroix gets here what the artists of the 19th century, who are more and more realistically thinking, almost never get it. He succeeds in one picture - very pathetic, very romantic, very sonorous - to combine reality, physically tangible and brutal (look at the corpses loved by romantics in the foreground) and symbols. Because this full-blooded woman is, of course, Freedom itself. Political developments since the 18th century have presented artists with the need to visualize what cannot be seen. How can you see freedom? Christian values ​​are conveyed to a person through a very human - through the life of Christ and his suffering. And such political abstractions as freedom, equality, brotherhood have no form. And now Delacroix is ​​perhaps the first and, as it were, not the only one who, in general, successfully coped with this task: we now know what freedom looks like. "

Ilya Doronchenkov

One of the political symbols in the picture is the Phrygian cap on the girl's head, a permanent heraldic symbol of democracy. Another talking motive is nudity.

“Nudity has long been associated with naturalness and with nature, and in the 18th century this association was forced. The history of the French Revolution even knows a unique performance, when a nude French theater actress portrayed nature in Notre Dame Cathedral. And nature is freedom, it is naturalness. And this is what this tangible, sensual, attractive woman stands for. It denotes natural liberty. "

Ilya Doronchenkov

Although this picture made Delacroix famous, it was soon removed from his eyes for a long time, and it is understandable why. The spectator standing in front of her finds himself in the position of those who are attacked by Freedom, who are attacked by the revolution. It is very uncomfortable to watch the irrepressible movement that will crush you.

Abstract

On May 2, 1808, an anti-Napoleonic rebellion broke out in Madrid, the city was in the hands of the protesters, but by the evening on the 3rd day in the vicinity of the Spanish capital there were mass shootings of the rebels. These events soon led to a guerrilla war that lasted six years. When it is over, two paintings will be commissioned by the painter Francisco Goye to commemorate the uprising. The first is "The uprising of May 2, 1808 in Madrid."

“Goya really depicts the moment the attack started - that first Navajo strike that started the war. It is this tightness of the moment that is extremely important here. He seems to bring the camera closer, from a panorama he moves to an exceptionally close shot, which also did not exist to such an extent before him. There is one more exciting thing: the feeling of chaos and stabbing is extremely important here. There is no person you feel sorry for. There are victims and there are murderers. And these murderers with bloodshot eyes, Spanish patriots, in general, are engaged in butchery business. "

Ilya Doronchenkov

In the second picture, the characters change places: those who are cut in the first picture, in the second they shoot those who cut them. And the moral ambivalence of the street fight is replaced by moral clarity: Goya is on the side of those who rebelled and perish.

“The enemies are now divorced. On the right are those who will live. This is a series of people in uniform with guns, exactly the same, even more alike than Horace's brothers in David. Their faces are not visible, and their shako makes them look like cars, like robots. These are not human figures. They stand out in black silhouette in the darkness against the background of a lantern flooding a small clearing.

On the left are those who will die. They move, swirl, gesticulate, and for some reason it seems that they are taller than their executioners. Although the main, central character - a Madrid man in orange pants and a white shirt - is on his knees. He is still taller, he is slightly on the hillock. "

Ilya Doronchenkov

The dying rebel stands in the pose of Christ, and for greater persuasiveness Goya depicts stigmata on his palms. In addition, the artist makes all the time go through a difficult experience - to look at the last moment before the execution. Finally, Goya changes the understanding of a historical event. Before him, the event was portrayed by its ritual, rhetorical side, for Goya the event is an instant, passion, a non-literary cry.

The first picture of the diptych shows that the Spaniards are not slaughtering the French: the riders falling under the feet of the horse are dressed in Muslim costumes.
The fact is that in the troops of Napoleon there was a detachment of Mamelukes, Egyptian cavalrymen.

“It would seem strange that the artist turns Muslim fighters into a symbol of the French occupation. But this allows Goya to turn a modern event into a link in the history of Spain. For any nation that forged its identity during the Napoleonic Wars, it was extremely important to realize that this war is part of an eternal war for its values. And such a mythological war for the Spanish people was the Reconquista, the conquest of the Iberian Peninsula from the Muslim kingdoms. Thus, Goya, while remaining faithful to the documentary, to modernity, puts this event in connection with the national myth, forcing one to realize the struggle of 1808 as the eternal struggle of the Spaniards for the national and the Christian. "

Ilya Doronchenkov

The artist managed to create an iconographic formula for the execution. Whenever his colleagues - be they Manet, Dix or Picasso - turned to the topic of execution, they followed Goya.

Abstract

The pictorial revolution of the 19th century took place even more tangibly than in the event picture in the landscape.

“The landscape completely changes the optics. A person changes his scale, a person experiences himself differently in the world. A landscape is a realistic depiction of what is around us, with a sense of the moisture-saturated air and everyday details in which we are immersed. Or it can be a projection of our experiences, and then in the tints of a sunset or in a joyful sunny day, we see the state of our soul. But there are striking landscapes that belong to both modes. And it is very difficult to understand, in fact, which one dominates. "

Ilya Doronchenkov

This duality is clearly manifested in the German artist Caspar David Friedrich: his landscapes both tell us about the nature of the Baltic, and at the same time represent a philosophical statement. Friedrich's landscapes have a weary sense of melancholy; the person on them rarely penetrates further into the background and usually turns his back to the viewer.

His last painting, Ages of Life, depicts a family in the foreground: children, parents, an old man. And further, beyond the spatial gap - the sunset sky, the sea and sailboats.

“If we look at how this canvas is built, we will see a striking overlap between the rhythm of human figures in the foreground and the rhythm of sailing ships in the sea. Here are tall figures, here are low figures, here are big sailing ships, here are boats under sails. Nature and sailing ships are what is called the music of the spheres, it is eternal and independent of man. The person in the foreground is his final being. Frederick's sea is very often a metaphor for otherness, death. But death for him, a believing person, is the promise of eternal life, about which we do not know. These people in the foreground - small, clumsy, not very attractively written - follow the rhythm of a sailing ship with their rhythm, as a pianist repeats the music of the spheres. This is our human music, but it all rhymes with the very music that nature is filled with for Friedrich. Therefore, it seems to me that in this canvas Friedrich promises - not an afterlife paradise, but that our final being is still in harmony with the universe. "

Ilya Doronchenkov 

Abstract

After the Great French Revolution, people realized that they had a past. The 19th century, through the efforts of romantics-aesthetes and historians-positivists, created the modern idea of ​​history.

“The 19th century created historical painting as we know it. Non-abstract Greek and Roman heroes, acting in an ideal setting, guided by ideal motives. The history of the 19th century becomes theatrical and melodramatic, it approaches a person, and we are now able to empathize not with great deeds, but with misfortunes and tragedies. Every European nation created its own history in the 19th century, and in constructing history, in general, it created its own portrait and plans for the future. In this sense, the European historical painting of the 19th century is terribly interesting to study, although, in my opinion, it did not leave, almost did not leave truly great works. And among these great works, I see one exception that we Russians can rightfully be proud of. This is "The Morning of the Strelets' Execution" by Vasily Surikov. "

Ilya Doronchenkov

The nineteenth century historical painting focused on external credibility usually tells the story of a single hero who directs the story or is defeated. Surikov's painting is a striking exception here. Its hero is a crowd in colorful outfits, which occupies almost four-fifths of the picture; it makes the picture appear to be strikingly disorganized. Behind the lively swirling crowd, part of which will soon die, stands the colorful, agitated temple of St. Basil the Blessed. Behind the frozen Peter, a line of soldiers, a line of gallows - a line of battlements of the Kremlin wall. The picture is held together by the duel of the views of Peter and the red-bearded archer.

“A lot can be said about the conflict between society and state, people and empire. But it seems to me that this thing has some other meanings that make it unique. Vladimir Stasov, a propagandist of the Itinerants' creativity and a defender of Russian realism, who wrote a lot of unnecessary things about them, said very well about Surikov. He called this kind of paintings "choral". Indeed, they lack one hero - they lack one engine. The people become the engine. But in this picture, the role of the people is very clearly visible. Joseph Brodsky in his Nobel lecture perfectly said that a real tragedy is not when a hero dies, but when a choir dies. "

Ilya Doronchenkov

Events take place in Surikov's paintings as if against the will of their characters - and in this the concept of the artist's history is obviously close to Tolstoy's.

“Society, people, nation in this picture seem to be divided. Peter's soldiers in uniforms that appear black and archers in white are contrasted as good and evil. What connects these two unequal parts of the composition? This is an archer in a white shirt, going to execution, and a soldier in uniform, who supports him by the shoulder. If we mentally remove everything that surrounds them, we will never be able to assume in our life that this person is being led to execution. These are two friends who are returning home, and one supports the other in a friendly and warm manner. When Petrusha Grinev was hanged by the Pugachevites in "The Captain's Daughter", they said: "Don't worry, don't worry," as if they really wanted to cheer him up. This feeling that the people divided by the will of history is at the same time fraternal and united is an amazing quality of Surikov's canvas, which I do not know anywhere else either. "

Ilya Doronchenkov 

Abstract

In painting, size matters, but not every subject can be depicted on a large canvas. Various pictorial traditions depicted the villagers, but most often - not in huge paintings, but this is exactly what Gustave Courbet's "Funeral at Ornans" is. Ornand is a prosperous provincial town, where the artist himself comes from.

“Courbet moved to Paris but did not become part of the artistic establishment. He did not receive an academic education, but he had a powerful hand, a very tenacious gaze and great ambition. He always felt like a provincial, and it was best for him at home, in Ornans. But he lived almost his entire life in Paris, fighting against the art that was already dying, fighting against the art that idealizes and speaks about the general, about the past, about the beautiful, without noticing modernity. The kind of art that rather praises, that rather pleases, as a rule, finds a very high demand. Courbet was, indeed, a revolutionary in painting, although now this revolutionary nature of his is not very clear to us, because he writes life, he writes prose. The main thing that was revolutionary about him was that he stopped idealizing his nature and began to paint it exactly the way he sees, or the way he thought he was seeing. "

Ilya Doronchenkov

The giant painting depicts about fifty people almost in full growth. All of them are real faces, and experts have identified almost all the participants in the funeral. Courbet painted his fellow countrymen, and it was pleasant for them to get into the picture exactly as they are.

“But when this painting was exhibited in 1851 in Paris, it created a scandal. She went against everything that the Parisian public was used to at that moment. She offended artists by the lack of a clear composition and rough, dense pasty painting, which conveys the materiality of things, but does not want to be beautiful. She scared an ordinary person away by the fact that he could not really understand who it was. The breakdown of communications between the spectators of provincial France and the Parisians was striking. The Parisians took the portrayal of this respectable wealthy crowd as the portrayal of the poor. One of the critics said: "Yes, this is a disgrace, but this is a disgrace in the provinces, and Paris has its own disgrace." Ugliness was actually understood as the ultimate truthfulness. "

Ilya Doronchenkov

Courbet refused to idealize, which made him a true avant-garde of the 19th century. He focuses on French popular prints, the Dutch group portrait, and antique solemnity. Courbet teaches us to perceive modernity in its uniqueness, in its tragedy and in its beauty.

“The French salons knew images of hard peasant labor, poor peasants. But the mode of the image was generally accepted. The peasants had to be pitied, the peasants had to sympathize. It was a somewhat overhead view. The person who empathizes is by definition a priority. And Courbet deprived his viewer of the possibility of such patronizing empathy. His characters are majestic, monumental, ignore their viewers, and they do not allow to establish such a contact with them, which makes them a part of the familiar world, they very powerfully break stereotypes. "

Ilya Doronchenkov 

Abstract

The 19th century did not like himself, preferring to look for beauty in something else, be it Antiquity, the Middle Ages or the East. Charles Baudelaire was the first to learn to see the beauty of modernity, and artists who Baudelaire were not destined to see embodied it in painting: for example, Edgar Degas and Edouard Manet.

“Manet is a provocateur. Manet is at the same time a brilliant painter, whose charm of colors, colors that are very paradoxically combined, makes the viewer not ask themselves obvious questions. If we look closely at his paintings, we will often have to admit that we do not understand what brought these people here, what they are doing next to each other, why these objects are connected on the table. The simplest answer: Manet is above all a painter, Manet is above all an eye. He is interested in the combination of colors and textures, and the logical pairing of objects and people is the tenth thing. Such pictures often confuse the viewer who is looking for content, who is looking for stories. Manet doesn't tell stories. He could have remained such an amazingly accurate and exquisite optical apparatus, if he had not created his last masterpiece in those years when he was possessed by a fatal disease. "

Ilya Doronchenkov

The painting "The Bar at the Folies Bergères" was exhibited in 1882, at first won the ridicule of critics, and then was quickly recognized as a masterpiece. Its theme is a café-concert, a striking phenomenon of Parisian life in the second half of the century. It seems that Manet vividly and reliably captured the life of the "Folies Bergère".

“But when we begin to look closely at what Manet has done in his picture, we will understand that there are a huge number of inconsistencies, subconsciously disturbing and, in general, not receiving a clear resolution. The girl we see is a saleswoman, she must, with her physical attractiveness, make the visitors stop, flirt with her and order another drink. Meanwhile, she does not flirt with us, but looks through us. On the table, in the warmth, there are four bottles of champagne - but why not in ice? In the mirror image, these bottles are on the wrong edge of the table from the foreground. The glass with roses is not seen at the same angle from which all other objects on the table are seen. And the girl in the mirror does not look exactly like the girl who looks at us: she is denser, she has more rounded shapes, she leaned towards the visitor. In general, it behaves as the one we are looking at should behave. "

Ilya Doronchenkov

Feminist criticism drew attention to the fact that the girl, with her outlines, resembles a bottle of champagne standing on the counter. This is an apt observation, but hardly exhaustive: the melancholy of the picture, the psychological isolation of the heroine are opposed to a straightforward interpretation.

“These optical plot and psychological riddles of the picture, it seems, do not have an unambiguous answer, make us each time to approach it again and ask these questions, subconsciously saturated with that feeling of the beautiful, sad, tragic, everyday modern life that Baudelaire dreamed of and which forever left Manet in front of us. "

Ilya Doronchenkov 

In his diary, the young Eugene Delacroix wrote on May 9, 1824: "I felt the desire to write on modern subjects." This was not an accidental phrase, a month earlier he wrote down a similar phrase: "I want to write about the plots of the revolution." The artist has repeatedly spoken about his desire to write on contemporary themes before, but he rarely realized his Desires. This happened because Delacroix believed: “... everything should be sacrificed for the sake of harmony and real transmission of the plot. We must do without models in paintings. A living model never corresponds exactly to the image that we want to convey: the model is either vulgar or inferior, or its beauty is so different and more perfect that everything has to be changed ”.

The artist preferred plots from novels to the beauty of a life model. “What should be done to find the plot? He asks himself one day. - Open a book that can inspire and trust your mood! ” And he piously follows his own advice: every year the book becomes more and more a source of themes and plots for him.

This is how the wall gradually grew and strengthened, separating Delacroix and his art from reality. The revolution of 1830 found him so withdrawn in his solitude. Everything that a few days ago constituted the meaning of the life of the romantic generation was instantly thrown far back, began to “look small” and unnecessary in the face of the grandioseness of the events that had taken place.

The amazement and enthusiasm experienced these days invade Delacroix's secluded life. For him, reality loses its repulsive shell of vulgarity and ordinariness, revealing a real greatness that he had never seen in it and which he had previously sought in Byron's poems, historical chronicles, ancient mythology and in the East.

The days of July echoed in the soul of Eugene Delacroix with the idea of ​​a new picture. Barricade battles on July 27, 28 and 29 in French history decided the outcome of a political coup. These days, King Charles X, the last representative of the Bourbon dynasty, hated by the people, was overthrown. For the first time for Delacroix it was not a historical, literary or oriental plot, but a real life. However, before this idea was realized, he had to go through a long and difficult path of change.

R. Escolier, the artist's biographer, wrote: "At the very beginning, under the first impression of what he saw, Delacroix did not intend to depict Liberty among its adherents ... He just wanted to reproduce one of the July episodes, such as the death of d'Arcola." Yes, then many feats were accomplished and sacrifices were made. The heroic death of d'Arcola is associated with the capture of the Paris City Hall by the rebels. On the day when the royal troops were holding the suspension bridge of Greve under fire, a young man appeared and rushed to the town hall. He exclaimed: "If I die, remember that my name is d'Arcol." He was indeed killed, but managed to captivate the people and the town hall was taken.

Eugene Delacroix made a sketch with a pen, which, perhaps, became the first sketch for a future painting. The fact that this was not an ordinary drawing is evidenced by the precise choice of the moment, and the completeness of the composition, and thoughtful accents on individual figures, and the architectural background, organically fused with the action, and other details. This drawing could indeed serve as a sketch for a future painting, but art critic E. Kozhina believed that it remained just a sketch that had nothing to do with the canvas that Delacroix wrote later.

The artist is no longer satisfied with the figure of D'Arcola alone, who rushes forward and carries away the rebels with his heroic impulse. Eugene Delacroix transfers this central role to Liberty herself.

The artist was not a revolutionary and he himself admitted it: "I am a rebel, but not a revolutionary." Politics was of little interest to him, so he wanted to portray not a separate fleeting episode (even the heroic death of d'Arcola), not even a separate historical fact, but the nature of the entire event. So, about the place of action, Paris, can only be judged by a piece written in the background of the picture on the right side (in the depths you can barely see the banner raised on the tower of Notre Dame Cathedral), and by city houses. The scale, a sense of the immensity and scope of what is happening - this is what Delacroix communicates to his huge canvas and what the image of a private episode, even a majestic one, would not give.

The composition of the painting is very dynamic. In the center of the picture is a group of armed men in simple clothes, moving in the direction of the foreground of the picture and to the right. Because of the gunpowder smoke, the area is not visible, and how large this group itself is not visible. The pressure of the crowd, filling the depth of the picture, creates an ever-growing internal pressure that must inevitably break through. And so, ahead of the crowd, a beautiful woman with a three-color republican banner in her right hand and a gun with a bayonet in her left stepped broadly from a cloud of smoke to the top of the taken barricade. On her head is a red Phrygian cap of the Jacobins, her clothes flutter, exposing her breasts, the profile of her face resembles the classic features of Venus de Milo. It is a freedom full of strength and inspiration, which shows the way to the fighters with a decisive and courageous movement. Leading people through the barricades, Freedom does not give orders or commands - it encourages and leads the rebels.

When working on the picture, two opposing principles collided in Delacroix's worldview - inspiration inspired by reality, and on the other hand, distrust of this reality, which had long been rooted in his mind. Mistrust that life can be beautiful in itself, that human images and purely pictorial means can convey in its entirety the idea of ​​a picture. It was this mistrust that dictated Delacroix the symbolic figure of Liberty and some other allegorical refinements.

The artist transfers the entire event to the world of allegory, reflecting the idea in the same way as Rubens, adored by him, did (Delacroix told the young Edouard Manet: “You need to see Rubens, you need to be imbued with Rubens, you need to copy Rubens, because Rubens is a god”) in his compositions that personify abstract concepts. But Delacroix still does not follow his idol in everything: freedom for him is symbolized not by an ancient deity, but by the simplest woman, who, however, becomes regally majestic.

Allegorical Freedom is full of life's truth, in an impetuous impulse it goes ahead of the column of revolutionaries, dragging them along and expressing the highest meaning of the struggle - the power of the idea and the possibility of victory. If we did not know that Nike of Samothrace was dug out of the ground after the death of Delacroix, it could be assumed that the artist was inspired by this masterpiece.

Many art critics noted and reproached Delacroix for the fact that all the greatness of his painting cannot overshadow the impression that at first turns out to be only barely noticeable. We are talking about the collision in the artist's consciousness of opposing aspirations, which left its mark even in the completed canvas, Delacroix's hesitation between a sincere desire to show reality (as he saw it) and an involuntary desire to raise it to the sidelines, between a gravitation towards emotional, immediate and already established painting. accustomed to the artistic tradition. Many were not satisfied that the most ruthless realism, which horrified the well-meaning audience of art Salons, was combined in this picture with an impeccable, ideal beauty. Noting as a dignity a sense of life's certainty, which had never before been manifested in Delacroix's work (and never repeated again later), the artist was reproached for the generalization and symbolism of the image of Freedom. However, and for the generalization of other images, making the artist guilty that the naturalistic nudity of a corpse in the foreground is adjacent to the nudity of Freedom.

This duality did not escape both Delacroix's contemporaries and later connoisseurs and critics. Even 25 years later, when the public was already accustomed to the naturalism of Gustave Courbet and Jean François Millet, Maxime Ducan still raged in front of Liberty on the Barricades, forgetting any restraint of expressions: “Oh, if Freedom is such, if this girl with bare feet and bare chest that runs, screaming and waving a gun, then we do not need it. We have nothing to do with this shameful shrew! ”

But, reproaching Delacroix, what could be opposed to his painting? The revolution of 1830 was reflected in the work of other artists. After these events, Louis-Philippe took the royal throne, who tried to present his coming to power as almost the only content of the revolution. Many artists, who took this approach to the topic, rushed along the path of least resistance. The revolution, as a spontaneous wave of the people, as a grandiose popular impulse for these masters does not seem to exist at all. They seem to be in a hurry to forget about everything that they saw on the Parisian streets in July 1830, and “three glorious days” appear in their image as quite well-intentioned actions of the Parisian townspeople, who were concerned only with how to quickly acquire a new king instead of the exiled. These works include Fontaine's painting "The Guard Proclaiming King Louis Philippe" or O. Bernet's painting "The Duke of Orleans Leaving the Palais Royal".

But, pointing to the allegorical nature of the main image, some researchers forget to note that the allegoricality of Freedom does not at all create dissonance with the rest of the figures in the picture, it does not look as alien and exceptional in the picture as it might seem at first glance. After all, the rest of the acting characters are also allegorical in their essence and in their role. In their person, Delacroix, as it were, brings to the fore the forces that made the revolution: the workers, the intelligentsia and the plebs of Paris. A worker in a blouse and a student (or artist) with a gun are representatives of very specific sectors of society. These are undoubtedly bright and reliable images, but Delacroix brings this generalization to symbols. And this allegoricality, which is clearly felt already in them, reaches its highest development in the figure of Freedom. She is a formidable and beautiful goddess, and at the same time she is a daring Parisian. And next to him, jumping on stones, screaming with delight and waving pistols (as if conducting events) is a nimble, disheveled boy - a little genius of the Parisian barricades, whom Victor Hugo will call Gavroche in 25 years.

The painting "Liberty on the Barricades" ends the romantic period in the work of Delacroix. The artist himself was very fond of this painting of his and made a lot of efforts to get it to the Louvre. However, after the seizure of power by the “bourgeois monarchy,” the exhibition of this canvas was prohibited. Only in 1848, Delacroix was able to exhibit his painting one more time, and even for quite a long time, but after the defeat of the revolution, it ended up in the storeroom for a long time. The true meaning of this work by Delacroix is ​​determined by its second name, unofficial: many have long been accustomed to seeing in this picture the "Marseillaise of French Painting".

The story of one masterpiece

Eugene Delacroix. "Freedom on the Barricades"

In 1831, at the Paris Salon, the French for the first time saw the painting by Eugene Delacroix "Liberty on the Barricades", dedicated to the "three glorious days" of the July Revolution of 1830. With power, democracy and boldness of the artistic solution, the canvas made a stunning impression on contemporaries. According to legend, one respectable bourgeois exclaimed:

“You say the head of the school? Better say - the head of the rebellion! "

After the salon was closed, the government, frightened by the formidable and inspiring appeal from the painting, hastened to return it to its author. During the 1848 revolution, it was again put on public display at the Luxembourg Palace. And they returned it to the artist again. Only after the canvas was exhibited at the World Exhibition in Paris in 1855, it ended up in the Louvre. It still houses this one of the best creations of French romanticism - an inspired eyewitness testimony and an eternal monument to the people's struggle for their freedom.

What artistic language did the young French romantic find in order to merge these two seemingly opposite principles - a broad, all-embracing generalization and concrete reality, cruel in its nakedness?

Paris of the famous July days of 1830. Air saturated with gray smoke and dust. A beautiful and stately city disappearing in a powder haze. In the distance, barely noticeable, but proudly towering the towers of Notre Dame Cathedral -symbol history, culture, spirit of the French people.

From there, from the smoky city, over the ruins of the barricades, over the dead bodies of their dead comrades, the rebels stubbornly and resolutely step forward. Each of them can die, but the step of the rebels is unshakable - they are inspired by the will to victory, to freedom.

This inspiring power is embodied in the image of a beautiful young woman, in a passionate impulse calling for her. With inexhaustible energy, free and youthful speed of movement, she is like the Greek goddess of victory Nike. Her strong figure is dressed in a chiton dress, her face with perfect features, with glowing eyes, is turned to the rebels. In one hand she holds the tricolor flag of France, in the other - a gun. On the head is a Phrygian cap - an ancient symbolliberation from slavery. Her step is swift and light - this is how the goddesses step. At the same time, the image of a woman is real - she is the daughter of the French people. She is the guiding force behind the movement of the group on the barricades. From her, as from a source of light and a center of energy, rays radiate, charging with thirst and will to victory. Those in close proximity to it, each in their own way, express their involvement in this inspiring and inspiring call.

On the right is a boy, a Parisian gameman brandishing pistols. He is closest to Freedom and is kind of kindled by her enthusiasm and the joy of a free impulse. In a swift, boyishly impatient movement, he is even slightly ahead of his inspirer. This is the predecessor of the legendary Gavroche, portrayed twenty years later by Victor Hugo in Les Miserables:

“Gavroche, full of inspiration, radiant, took it upon himself to put the whole thing into motion. He scurried back and forth, climbed up, went down, rose again, made noise, sparkled with joy. It would seem that he came here to cheer everyone up. Did he have any incentive for this? Yes, of course, his poverty. Did he have wings? Yes, of course, his gaiety. It was some kind of whirlwind. He seemed to fill the air, being present everywhere at the same time ... Huge barricades felt him on their ridge. "

Gavroche in Delacroix's painting is the personification of youth, "a wonderful impulse", a joyful acceptance of the bright idea of ​​Freedom. Two images - Gavroche and Svoboda - seem to complement each other: one is fire, the other is a torch lighted from it. Heinrich Heine related how Gavroche's figure evoked a lively response from the Parisians.

"Damn it! cried a grocery merchant. "These boys fought like giants!"

On the left is a student with a gun. Before it was seenself-portrait artist. This rebel is not as swift as Gavroche. His movement is more restrained, more concentrated, meaningful. Hands confidently grip the barrel of the gun, the face expresses courage, firm determination to stand to the end. This is a deeply tragic image. The student realizes the inevitability of losses that the rebels will incur, but the victims do not frighten him - the will to freedom is stronger. An equally brave and determined worker with a saber stands behind him.

There is a wounded man at the feet of Freedom. He can hardly riseIt is taken in order to once again look up, at Freedom, to see and with all his heart to feel that beautiful, for which he perishes. This figure brings a dramatic start to the sound of Delacroix's canvas. If the images of Svoboda, Gavrosh, a student, a worker are almost symbols, the embodiment of the unyielding will of freedom fighters - inspire and call on the viewer, then the wounded one appeals to compassion. Man says goodbye to Freedom, says goodbye to life. He is still an impulse, movement, but already a fading impulse.

His figure is transitional. The viewer's gaze, still bewitched and carried away by the revolutionary determination of the rebels, descends down to the foot of the barricade, covered with the bodies of glorious fallen soldiers. Death is presented by the artist in all the nakedness and obviousness of the fact. We see the blue faces of the dead, their naked bodies: the struggle is merciless, and death is the same inevitable companion of the rebels, like the beautiful inspirer Freedom.

But not quite the same! From the terrible sight at the lower edge of the picture, we again raise our gaze and see a young beautiful figure - no! life wins! The idea of ​​freedom, embodied so visibly and tangibly, is so directed into the future that death in its name is not terrible.

The painting was written by a 32-year-old artist who was full of strength, energy, thirst to live and create. The young painter, who went through school in the workshop of Guerin, a student of the famous David, was looking for his own paths in art. Gradually, he becomes the head of a new direction - romanticism, which replaced the old - classicism. Unlike his predecessors, who built painting on rational foundations, Delacroix strove to appeal primarily to the heart. In his opinion, painting should shake the feelings of a person, completely capture him with the passion that possesses the artist. On this path, Delacroix develops his own creative credo. He copies Rubens, is fond of Turner, is close to Gericault, a favorite French coloristmasters becomes Tintoretto. Having arrived in France, the English theater captivated him by staging Shakespeare's tragedies. Byron became one of the favorite poets. These hobbies and affections formed the figurative world of Delacroix's paintings. He turned to historical topics,plots drawn from the works of Shakespeare and Byron. The East stirred his imagination.

But then a phrase appears in the diary:

"I felt the desire to write on modern subjects."

Delacroix states and more specifically:

"I would like to write about the plots of the revolution."

However, the dull and sluggish reality surrounding the romantic-minded artist did not provide worthy material.

And suddenly a revolution bursts into this gray routine like a whirlwind, like a hurricane. All Paris was covered with barricades and within three days swept away the Bourbon dynasty forever. “Holy days of July! exclaimed Heinrich Heine. the sun was red, how great the people of Paris were! "

On October 5, 1830, Delacroix, an eyewitness to the revolution, writes to his brother:

“I started painting on a modern subject -“ Barricades ”. If I didn’t fight for my country, then at least I’ll make a painting in his honor. ”

So the idea arose. At first, Delacroix conceived of depicting a specific episode of the revolution, for example, "Death d" Arcola ", the hero who fell during the capture of the town hall. But the artist very soon abandoned such a decision.image , which would embody the highest meaning of what is happening. In a poem by Auguste Barbier, he findsallegory Freedom in the form of "... a strong woman with a powerful chest, with a hoarse voice, with fire in her eyes ...". But not only Barbier's poem prompted the artist to create the image of Freedom. He knew how fiercely and selflessly the French women fought on the barricades. Contemporaries recalled:

“And women, first of all women from the common people - hot, excited - inspired, encouraged, embittered their brothers, husbands and children. They helped the wounded under bullets and buckshot, or rushed at their enemies like lionesses. "

Delacroix probably knew about the brave girl who captured one of the enemy's cannons. Then she, crowned with a laurel wreath, was carried with triumph in an armchair through the streets of Paris to the cheers of the people. So already reality itself gave ready-made symbols.

Delacroix had only to comprehend them artistically. After a long search, the plot of the picture finally crystallized: a majestic figure leads an uncontrollable stream of people. The artist depicts only a small group of rebels, alive and dead. But the defenders of the barricade seem unusually numerous.Composition is built in such a way that the group of combatants is not limited, not closed in itself. She is only part of an endless avalanche of people. The artist gives, as it were, a fragment of a group: the picture frame cuts off the figures from the left, right, bottom.

Usually, color in Delacroix's works acquires an acutely emotional sound, plays a dominant role in creating a dramatic effect. The colors, now raging, now fading, muffled, create a tense atmosphere. In Liberty on the Barricades, Delacroix departs from this principle. Very accurately, unmistakably choosing paint, applying it with wide strokes, the artist conveys the atmosphere of the battle.

But coloristic gamma restrained. Delacroix draws attention toembossed modeling shape ... This was required by the figurative solution of the picture. After all, depicting a specific yesterday's event, the artist also created a monument to this event. Therefore, the figures are almost sculptural. Therefore eachthe character , being part of a single whole picture, it also constitutes something closed in itself, represents a symbol cast into a complete form. Therefore, color not only emotionally affects the feelings of the viewer,but it also carries a symbolic meaning. In a brownish-gray space, here and there a solemn triad flares upnaturalism , and perfect beauty; gross, terrible - and sublime, pure. No wonder many critics, even those who were benevolent towards Delacroix, were shocked by the novelty and boldness of the picture, unthinkable for that time. And it was not for nothing that later the French called it the "Marseillaise" inpainting .

One of the finest creations and products of French romanticism, Delacroix's painting remains unique in its artistic content. "Freedom on the Barricades" is the only work in which romanticism, with its eternal craving for the majestic and heroic, with its distrust of reality, turned to this reality, was inspired by it and acquired the highest artistic meaning in it. But, answering the call of a specific event, which suddenly changed the usual course of the life of an entire generation, Delacroix goes beyond it. In the process of working on a picture, he gives free rein to his imagination, rejects everything concrete, transitory, singular that reality can give, and transforms it with creative energy.

This canvas brings to us the hot breath of the July days of 1830, the rapid revolutionary rise of the French nation and is the perfect artistic embodiment of the wonderful idea of ​​the people's struggle for their freedom.

E. VARLAMOVA

, Lance

K: Paintings of 1830

"Freedom leading the people"(fr. La Liberté guidant le peuple) or "Freedom on the Barricades"- painting by the French artist Eugene Delacroix.

Delacroix created a painting based on the July Revolution of 1830, which put an end to the Restoration regime of the Bourbon monarchy. After numerous preparatory sketches, it took him only three months to complete the painting. In a letter to his brother on October 12, 1830, Delacroix writes: "If I did not fight for the Motherland, then at least I will write for it."

For the first time "Liberty Leading the People" was exhibited at the Paris Salon in May 1831, where the painting was enthusiastically accepted and immediately bought by the state. Heinrich Heine, in particular, spoke about his impressions of the salon and of Delacroix's painting. Due to the revolutionary plot, the canvas was not exhibited in public for the next quarter of a century.

In the center of the picture is a woman symbolizing freedom. On her head is a Phrygian cap, in her right hand is the flag of Republican France, in her left is a gun. The naked chest symbolizes the dedication of the French of that time, who went to the enemy with "bare chests". The figures around Liberty - worker, bourgeois, teenager - symbolize the unity of the French people during the July revolution. Some art historians and critics suggest that the artist depicted himself in the form of a man in a top hat to the left of the main character.

In 1999, Svoboda flew a 20-hour flight from Paris to the Tokyo exhibition via Bahrain and Calcutta. The transportation was carried out on board the Airbus Beluga (the dimensions of the canvas - 2.99 m in height by 3.62 m in length - were too large for a Boeing 747) in an upright position in an isothermal pressure chamber, protected from vibration.

On February 7, 2013, a visitor to the Louvre-Lance Museum, where Freedom is exhibited, wrote down the lower part of the canvas with a marker, after which she was detained. The next day, restorers removed the damage in less than two hours.

Filmography

• “On the pavements. The Stopping Moment ", film Alena Zhobera from the cycle "Palettes" (France, 1989).

Write a review on the article "Freedom Leading the People"

Notes (edit)

Links

• in the Louvre database (fr.)

Excerpt from Liberty Leading the People

And my soul absorbed this laughter, like a condemned to death absorbs the warm farewell rays of the setting sun ...
- Well, what are you, mommy, we are still alive! .. We can still fight! .. You yourself told me that you will fight while you are alive ... So let's think if we can do something ... Can we rid the world of this Evil.
She again supported me with her courage! .. Again she found the right words ...
This sweet brave girl, almost a child, could not even imagine how Caraffa could have subjected her to torture! In what brutal pain her soul could drown ... But I knew ... I knew everything that awaited her, if I did not go to meet him. If I don’t agree to give the Pope the only thing he wanted.
- My dear, my heart ... I will not be able to look at your torment ... I will not give you to him, my girl! The North and others like him do not care who will remain in this LIFE ... So why should we be different? .. Why should you and me care about someone else, someone else's fate ?!
I myself was frightened by my words ... although in my heart I perfectly understood that they were caused only by the hopelessness of our situation. And, of course, I was not going to betray what I lived for ... For what my father and my poor Girolamo died. Simply, just for a moment I wanted to believe that we can just take and leave this terrible, "black" Karaffian world, forgetting about everything ... forgetting about other, unfamiliar people. Forgetting about evil ...
It was a momentary weakness of a tired person, but I understood that I had no right to even allow it. And then, to top it all off, apparently unable to withstand more violence, burning evil tears poured down my face ... But I tried so hard not to allow this! .. I tried not to show my dear girl into what depths of despair my exhausted, a soul tormented by pain ...
Anna sadly looked at me with her huge gray eyes, in which lived a deep, not childish sadness ... She gently stroked my hands, as if wishing to calm me down. And my heart screamed, not wanting to humble myself ... Not wanting to lose her. She was the only remaining meaning of my failed life. And I could not allow the non-humans, who were called the Pope, take it away from me!
- Mom, don't worry about me - as if reading my thoughts, Anna whispered. - I'm not afraid of pain. But even if it hurts a lot, my grandfather promised to pick me up. I spoke to him yesterday. He will wait for me if you and I fail ... And dad too. They will both be waiting for me there. But leaving you will be very painful ... I love you so much, mommy! ..
Anna hid in my arms, as if looking for protection ... And I could not protect her ... I could not save her. I have not found the "key" to Karaffe ...
- Forgive me, my sun, I let you down. I failed us both ... I couldn't find a way to destroy him. Forgive me, Annushka ...
An hour passed unnoticed. We talked about different things, never returning to the murder of the Pope, since both knew perfectly well that today we had lost ... And it didn’t matter what we wanted ... Karaffa lived, and that was the most terrible and most important thing. We failed to free our world from it. Failed to save good people. He lived in spite of all attempts, no matter what desires. No matter what...

Eugene Delacroix Liberty Leading the People, 1830 La Liberté guidant le peuple Oil on canvas. 260 × 325 cm Louvre, Paris "Freedom leading the people" (fr ... Wikipedia

Basic concepts Free will Positive freedom Negative freedom Human rights Violence ... Wikipedia

Eugene Delacroix Liberty Leading the People, 1830 La Liberté guidant le peuple Oil on canvas. 260 × 325 cm Louvre, Paris "Freedom leading the people" (fr ... Wikipedia

This term has other meanings, see People (meanings). The people (also the common people, the rabble, the masses) are the main unprivileged mass of the population (both working people, and declassed and marginalized). People do not include ... ... Wikipedia

Freedom Basic concepts Freedom of will Positive freedom Negative freedom Human rights Violence · ... Wikipedia

Liberty Leading the People, Eugene Delacroix, 1830, Louvre The July Revolution of 1830 (French: La révolution de Juillet) the July 27 uprising against the current monarchy in France, which led to the final overthrow of the senior line of the Bourbon dynasty (?) And ... ... Wikipedia

Liberty Leading the People, Eugene Delacroix, 1830, Louvre The July Revolution of 1830 (French: La révolution de Juillet) the July 27 uprising against the current monarchy in France, which led to the final overthrow of the senior line of the Bourbon dynasty (?) And ... ... Wikipedia

One of the main genres of fine art, dedicated to historical events and figures, socially significant phenomena in the history of society. Turned mainly to the past, I. zh. also includes images of recent events, ... ... Great Soviet Encyclopedia

Books

• Delacroix,. The album of color and tone reproductions is dedicated to the work of the outstanding French artist of the 19th century, Eugene Delicroix, who led the romantic trend in the visual arts. In the album…