Andromache mourns Hector. 1783

Jacques Louis David (August 30, 1748, Paris - December 29, 1825, Brussels), French painter. He studied with the historical painter J. M. Vienne at the Royal Academy of Painting and Sculpture in Paris (1766-1774). David's early works, in which the echoes of Rococo and the influence of sentimental ideas are palpable, are traditionally academic ("The Battle of Minerva and Mars", 1771, Louvre, Paris). In the years 1775-1780, David studied in Italy, where he discovered antiquity, taking it as an example of the citizenship of artistic creativity. The journalistic orientation, the desire to express heroic freedom-loving ideals through the images of antiquity are characteristic of the classicism of the pre-revolutionary era, the largest representative of which was David. For the first time in David, the principles of classicism are outlined in the painting Belisarius Begging Alms (1781, Museum of Fine Arts, Lille), distinguished by the strictness of the composition and the clarity of the rhythmic structure, and find their fullest expression in the Oath of the Horatii, rich in courageous drama (1784, Louvre) - a historical picture, perceived by the public as a call to fight. The works of David of the 1780s ("The Death of Socrates", 1787, Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York; "The Lictors Bring Brutus the Body of His Son", 1789, Louvre) are characterized by sublimity of design, scenic solemnity figurative system, bas-relief in the construction of the composition, as well as the predominance of the volumetric-chiaroscuro principle over color. In the portraits of the 1780s - early 1790s, which emphasize the social essence of the models, classic ideas about an energetic and strong-willed person were embodied ("Doctor A. Leroy", 1783, Fabre Museum, Montpellier). Inspired by the heroism of the French Revolution, David strives to create a historical painting on a modern theme ("The Oath in the Ballroom", not carried out; a sketch has been preserved, sepia, 1791, Louvre). The paintings "Murdered Lepelletier" (1793, not preserved, known from the engraving by P. A. Tardieu, National Library, Paris, and from the drawing by F. Devozh, Musee Magnin, Dijon) and especially "The Death of Marat" (1793, Museum of Modern Art, Brussels), with its tragic sound, severe laconicism, ascetic restraint of color and sculptural monumentality of forms, become monuments to the heroes of the revolutionary era, combining the features of a portrait and a historical painting. David was an active figure in the revolution, a member of the Jacobin Convention, organized mass folk festivals, created National Museum in the Louvre; under his leadership, the conservative Royal Academy of Painting and Sculpture (of which David had been a member since 1784) was abolished. After the counter-revolutionary Thermidorian coup since the late 1790s, David again turns to the dramatic events of ancient history, highlighting the theme of reconciliation of contradictions in them, recreating antiquity as a world of ideal beauty and pure harmony("Sabine women stopping the battle between the Romans and the Sabines", 1799, Louvre). In his art, the features of abstraction and rational narrative are growing. From 1804 David was Napoleon's "first painter"; in the coldly spectacular, variegated in color and overloaded in composition paintings commissioned by Napoleon (Coronation, 1805-1807, Louvre), the artist’s indifference to the events depicted is palpable, but he strives for an expressive characterization of individual characters. In the 1790-1810s, David painted numerous portraits, both ceremonial ("Napoleon at the crossing of St. Bernard", 1800, National Museum of Versailles and Trianons; "Madame Recamier", 1800, Louvre), and more realistic, approaching intimate (portraits of the Serisia couple, 1795, Louvre). In 1816, after the restoration of the Bourbons, David was forced to leave for Brussels. David was the teacher of A. Gros, F. Gerard, J. O. D. Ingres and many others.

Introduction

Chapter 1. The Art of Realism during the Great 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 like a cold luminary above the horizon of art, a great turning point took place in painting. Charles Baudelaire, 1825

French art of the XIX century is an era of realism, inextricably linked for almost the entire century with the events Great Revolution. Jacques Louis David is considered to be the founder of this trend, which carried out its artistic activity as early as the end of the 18th century, and originates from there.

A sufficient amount of literature has been written about this master, but, objectively speaking, the researchers of his work disagree on how truly unique his contribution to world art. Some researchers believe that David's work is magnificent, his works are plastic 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 also inherent in first and second.

Thus, below we will try to figure out which of the authors adheres to which of the points of view.

The book of the famous Italian art historian L. Venturi "Artists of the New Age" covers the work of the greatest masters of Western European painting of the first half and mid-nineteenth century, characterizing their work and evaluating their artistic activity, including the work of David.

The author does not describe a detailed biography of the artist, but only gives general characteristics, incidentally speaking about the main directions of art of the XIX century. Special attention the author pays modern master historiography and art criticism. Thus, the work characterizes not only the creative image of the master himself, but also the environment in which he worked.

The special advantage of the work of L. Venturi 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 gives an excellent analysis of the paintings, always taking into account the underlying philosophical and ethical ideas. At the same time, he pays much attention to the nature of the pictorial expression of these ideas, the very execution of the picture.

However, it should be noted that through the entire work of L. Venturi, the author’s conviction passes as a guiding thought that the concrete historical phenomena and ideas of a particular era did not play any decisive role in the development of the artistic creativity of the great masters, in 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 tool." Thus, in his opinion, "he prepares the way for Courbet, but does not have any influence on the two most important artists of the first half of the century - Corot and Daumier." In addition, the author is convinced that “Goya is a pitiable courtier, the Constable is a rural resident of 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, which the 19th century is proud of and which Goya and Constable had the courage to start. Therefore, David appears as revolutionary in politics as reactionary in painting. This means that life itself interested him more than art. That is why he did not succeed, or succeeded only in rare cases, in creating genuine works of art. Thus, we see that the author is quite critical of the master's work.

V. Knyazeva holds a different point of view in his monograph "Jacques Louis David". Revealing the biographical details of the life and work of the artist, the author speaks with admiration of David not only as an excellent artist in the political aspect, but in more as a master who also left us images of a small “human comedy” in portraits of his loved ones, in portraits of wealthy officials, imposing military men, diplomats, political exiles, many of which are not finished. They, in her opinion, “reveal to us the secrets of David's craftsmanship. In their immediacy, at least seeming, 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 political life of his era, and his creative triumphs and failures are associated with the revolution, at the same time he carried out a revolution in the field of artistic style. And already around 1780, he confidently headed the “great style”, combining politics and art: “Witness of his era, David captured it in his works, bringing order and a certain style to its display. And vice versa, David's somewhat artificially strict neoclassical style softens and is revived with an updated one due to the requirements of a realistic depiction of life. In this continuous interaction of nature and style, the genius of David is revealed.

And if we talk about the author's attitude to David's art as a whole, it will be necessary to cite the following words: “David's speeches and letters speak of what a passionate fighter for the new art he was. His extensive literary heritage testifies to the high demands he placed on art. His works are imbued with sincere, ardent faith in the great national significance of art.

A.N. Zamyatin in the work of the same name "David". The author also displays in sufficient detail the creative and political path of the artist, however, a huge plus of this work, in our opinion, is a huge number of references to the primary 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 went to meet these demands of the revolution speaks of his political insight and deep understanding of the social tasks of his 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 this historical moment took on the role of leader. 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 later 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 life and work of the master, was the monograph by A. Schnapper "David is a witness of his era". It was in it that we found not only all the most outstanding events, which determined the trends in the development of David's creativity in one direction or another, but also a number of seemingly insignificant, but somehow played their role in the art of the master. This work It is also based on primary sources and testimonies of contemporaries, it presents an in-depth study of the subject, as well as an excellent analysis of many works.

Very interesting in terms of philosophical understanding of the works of David was the book of J.F. Guillou "The Great Canvases". The author characterizes the master's work as "three parts of a grandiose series of works created by David, which tells 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 deep 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 to be named are David. Death of Marat” and “J.L. David". Both tell about creativity 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 excellent illustrations.

If we talk directly about the historical era, then the books of Mikhailova I.N. played a big role in understanding those events. and Petrashch E.G. "The Art and Literature of France from Ancient Times to the 20th Century", N.A. Dmitrieva "A Brief History of Art" and " General history 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, also directly characterizes the very art of this era.

Speaking of 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 loose concept, it should never be taken too literally. There is a lot in nature, and people, depending on their ideals and tastes, tend to absolutize and emphasize one or another of its features, which in this moment attract and seem most important. This is how art is created - a wonderful fusion of the objective-natural and the subjective-human. After all, people themselves are part of nature and, even not 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 of the era of the French Revolution seem to her "artificial". She says that "there is little natural in their allegories, pompous gestures, in the statuary nature of the figures, in forced rationalism" .

Thus, there is a sufficient amount of literature on the topic we have chosen. Nevertheless, to try to bring together all points of view, in our opinion, is a rather urgent problem, which is why purpose our work was an attempt to display creative way artist 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 Great French Revolution;

2. trace the artist's creative path up to the beginning of the revolutionary events;

3. identify the main directions in the work of David during the events of the revolution, as well as after the Thermidorian coup.

In this work, we used methods of analysis scientific literature and the biographical method. The object in this case is the art of the period of the French bourgeois revolution, and the subject is the work of David.

CHAPTER 1. THE ART OF REALISM IN THE PERIOD OF THE GREAT FRENCH REVOLUTION

France became the first large country on the European continent, where the revolution led to the defeat feudal system. Bourgeois relations here have established themselves in the most pure form. At the same time, in France, which had gone through four revolutions, the labor movement, earlier than in other countries, acquired the character of militant actions. The intense struggle of the popular masses against the feudal aristocracy, then against the ruling bourgeoisie, the 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, witnessed and sometimes participants of which were artists, put progressive art in close connection with public life.

Revolutionary ideas become the main ones in the development of the culture of this time, determining the revolutionary orientation of art, and, first of all, revolutionary classicism. To reveal civil ideals, artists turn to antiquity, "in order to hide from themselves the bourgeois-limited content of their struggle, in order to keep their enthusiasm at the height of the great historical tragedy."

In other words, artistic expression The French Revolution was not a free expression. An ardent striving for the public good played a much greater role here, a striving 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 placed on them "the duty to do things that could get useful application in accordance with the positive interests and practical institutions of the nation. Art aims to benefit, not to a narrow circle of privileged persons, but to the whole nation and rather to the masses than to educated people. As in Greece, “art must now become a rational institution, a mute but always eloquent law, elevating thought and purifying the soul. What could be more beautiful than such service?” .

Therefore, it is natural great attention, which is given to art during the Revolution, invariably emphasizing its agitational role - it is now considered not as "a simple decoration on a state building, but as an integral part of its foundation." Hence, the main duty of both the government, municipalities, and individuals is recognized as joint work on the awakening and development of an aesthetic sense: much attention is now being paid to teaching drawing in schools, organizing 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, public art”, required by the political life of the revolution and the empire, whose ideals were absolutely opposite.

However, 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 the classicist or the expressive technique. E. Delacroix wrote about this in his diary: “David is a kind of combination of realism and idealism. Until now, it still reigns in a certain sense, and, despite noticeable changes in tastes in modern school, it is clear that everything comes from him. . But as A.N. Zamyatin, the connection and interaction of elements of realism and idealization in David's work is a phenomenon historically conditioned by the tendencies of the bourgeois-democratic movement of this era.

And it was not only a trait personal biography David, but also the whole direction of classicism, so vividly represented by him. The borrowed ideals and norms of classicism paradoxically contained opposing social ideas: both rebellion against tyranny, and worship of tyrants, and ardent republicanism, and monarchism.

The art of bourgeois classicism repeated in miniature the evolution of the ancient rome- from republic to empire, preserving the stylistic forms and decorative system that developed under the republic. In contrast to Rococo, classicism, having been saturated with the ideas of Rousseau, proclaimed simplicity and closeness to nature. Now the slogan "return to nature", "naturalness" seems strange in the mouths of the classicists, because their works are somewhat far-fetched. Nevertheless, the ideologists of classicism were sure that, imitating antiquity, art thus imitates nature. They honored "simplicity and clarity", not noticing that their clarity was as conventional a form as the pretentiousness of the Rococo. In some respects, classicism departed 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 the classic tendencies were also transferred to things and accessories, then we can mention the words of Vigel, who wrote in his memoirs: “One thing was somewhat funny in this: all those things that the ancients had for ordinary, home use , the French and we served as one decoration; for example, vases did not retain any liquids with us, tripods did not smoke, and lamps in the ancient style, with their long spouts, were never lit. Wigel unmistakably captured the element of inorganicity in modern classicism. It was no longer an organic big style, like the styles of the past.

And yet, in essence, all these trends represented special, definite stages in the development of realism of the 19th 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 the most abstract direction as revolutionary classicism, the appeal to antiquity was associated with modern history.

Subsequently, all these tendencies become even more aggravated and affect both the topic, which comes closer to the surrounding reality, introducing into it critical appraisal, as well as in artistic expression. The features of conventionality inherent in classicism and romanticism are overcome, and the real world is finally affirmed in concrete forms of life itself.

The found new painting techniques carried a semantic, emotional load, allowing the artist to create a vivid, impressive image. The achievements of French painting in this area had big impact to European painting.

However, along with revolutionary classicism, which paid tribute to unity with nature, such forms of art are also spreading in which the thoughts and aspirations of the people could be more directly embodied, without losing organic connection directly with classicism. Among such phenomena, it is necessary to name mass holidays, the largest 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 the government appeal to him, as the organizer of the festivities, was followed by David's answer: “I thank the Supreme Being that it gave me some talent to glorify the heroes of the Republic. Devoting my talent to such an appointment, I especially feel its value.

The temperament of the people manifested itself in the national dances of the different provinces, which sometimes preceded the official ceremonies. There was a lot of spontaneity in the conduct of the holidays, coming directly from the people, but the official programs of ceremonies sought to introduce a strictly regulated solemn harmony into the festivities. For example, in the project of 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, “the fountain of the Renaissance 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 gave a new concept of a public holiday. The composition was determined not by the central figure of the demonstrated hero and passive spectators, but by the active and equal participation of all. In the organization of the masses, the goal was, first of all, to emphasize universal equality, while at the same time highlighting the individual features of the members of this society of equals.

Thus, the pathos of the struggle, the desire to embody the revolutionary spirit of the people, inherent in progressive art, which developed with the most severe resistance from official circles, to a large extent determined the originality of French art and its national contribution to the history of world art.

CHAPTER 2. THE WORK OF JACQUES LOUIS DAVID BEFORE THE GREAT FRENCH REVOLUTION

To early XIX century, the generally recognized leader among artists was Jacques Louis David - the most consistent representative of neoclassicism. He began his artistic education in the workshop of Vienne, 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 the painting “The Battle of Minerva with Mars” (1771; Louvre). The picture was painted in the spirit of the academic manner of that time, however, the success of the picture 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 award under the pretext "that for the first time David can consider himself happy just because his judges liked him." Respectful to the elders, David kindly explained the professor's act as follows: "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 they wanted also turned out to be unsuccessful, and when in 1774 David, for the painting “Antiochus, son of Seleucus, king of Syria, with a sick love that he was imbued with Stratonika, his stepmother, the doctor Erazistrat 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, recovering himself, frankly exclaimed: “My friends, for the first time in four years, I breathed lightly.” Those stylistic changes that are noticeable in this picture compared to the "Fight of Mars and Minerva" are not a manifestation of the creative individuality of David, 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 classical traditions XVII century: the nature of the plot of the competition picture is 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 scholarship holder of the Academy together with Vienne. The journey was for David the beginning of a new period of his apprenticeship. So far he has been consolidating the methods of depiction, now he is learning to perceive impressions. artistic images painting and sculpture. Italy opened David's eyes to 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, proceeding not from the study of techniques without regard to the content, but mastering these techniques as a means of expressing the content, which can be infinitely fascinating and which one must be able to tell in the language of painters. Alexandre Levoir describes David's behavior in this way: “He did not write anymore; 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 already arose 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 fanned by a legend. The style of David's art in this picture has already come to light 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. Although the gesture of Pototsky, greeting the viewer, is somewhat theatrical, but by the way in which the artist conveyed the appearance of the person being portrayed, with all the characteristic details, how he deliberately emphasized negligence in clothes, how he contrasted the calmness and confidence of the rider with the hot, restless disposition of the horse, it is clear that the artist was not the transfer of reality in its living concreteness is alien. Since then, David's work has been going in two directions: in historical paintings on antique themes, the artist in abstract images seeks to embody the ideals that excite 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.

So, in 1784, David wrote the "Oath of the Horatii" (Louvre), which was the first real triumph of David 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 struggle, to the achievement of a civic feat, is one of the brightest manifestations of revolutionary classicism with all its stylistic features. The soldierly triviality of taking an oath, the melodramatic posture of the father, the mannered languor of the women make it difficult to see the artistic merit of this work. But at the same time, no one can forget that in this work, for the first time, pictorial 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. Pekul (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 Ms. Pekul - an obese neck, the skin of which hangs over 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 drew only a powerful construction, which, on the one hand, emphasizes vitality 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 pleased 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, the grace of gestures, the grace, elegance and refinement of the images should convey the charming image of the scientist and his wife. A contemporary critic of David wrote: “... Lavoisier is one of the most enlightened and great geniuses of his century, and his wife, of all women, is the most capable of appreciating him. In his picture, David conveyed their virtue, their qualities. The concept of "virtue" is embodied here in living concrete images.

If we talk about the manner of writing the artist in this first pre-revolutionary period, it can be noted 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, the first works of David were not yet classic and bore the stamp of that mannerism of the 18th century, the largest representative of which was Boucher. However, already in the first works, David reveals some insensitivity to color and a keen interest in the transfer of facial expressions. A passage from the memoirs of Étienne Delescluse clarifies this: “You see, my friend, what I then called unprocessed 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 expressed it at the time. I slightly frowned her eyebrows, emphasized her cheekbones, slightly opened her mouth, that is, gave her what modern artists call expression and what today I call a grimace. Do you understand, Etienne? And yet we have a hard 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.

As early as 1807, David realized that pure imitation of the ancients was cold and lifeless. And he moves away from ancient patterns, introduces an expression into the drawing.

But from the transfer of expression to realism, the path is not far. The same perseverance of the master, which David showed in imitation of the ancients, he invested in the transfer of objects of the surrounding world. In The Distribution of Banners, one of David's contemporaries admired the veracity of the image of the soldiers: "The face, height, even thighs ... are characteristic of this type of weapon: a squat infantryman, smart, with short legs, which distinguishes the people selected for these regiments." But it was superficial realism, an accurate rendering of visible reality, without the participation of the imagination and with very little feeling. Hence the accusation of David in his lack of love for people, which was repeatedly repeated in the future. But David's technique was decisive. Blanche believes that this technique is art: "the art is direct, despite its seeming tension, the realistic, skillful craft of a conscientious worker ... something well done, modest, but resorting to rough effects" . And indeed, this realism of David, far from art, was unusually virtuoso and similar to classicism, which strove to create pure beauty. Only the depicted objects changed - an ancient statue or wildlife. But the process of representation in both cases was identical, the virtuosity of imitation is perfect and confident.

The consequence of this in the work of David was "courageous and powerful prose", as Delacroix characterizes one of his paintings. But still, prose, not poetry, was attached 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 IN THE PERIOD OF THE REVOLUTION. THERMIDORIAN REVOLUTION

At the Salon of 1789, which opened in an atmosphere of revolutionary tension, everyone's attention is drawn to the painting of David, exhibited under the title "Brutus, First Consul, on his return home after having condemned his two sons, who had joined Tarquinius and were in a conspiracy against the Roman freedom; lictors bring their bodies for burial” (1789; Louvre). The impact of this rhetorical picture of David on his revolutionary contemporaries, apparently due to the fact that, taking a plot from ancient history, David again showed a hero for whom civic duty was above all.

Revolutionary events gave a direct impetus to the further development of David's work. Now there was no need to look for patriotic themes in antiquity, heroism invades life itself. David begins to work on a work that captures the event that took place on June 20, 1789, when the deputies in the Ball Game Hall took an oath "Under no circumstances disperse and assemble wherever circumstances require, until such time as it is worked out and established on solid foundations the constitution of the kingdom "(Louvre). In this picture, both of the above-mentioned tendencies of David could merge. Here the artist had the opportunity to express the idea of ​​citizenship in the images of his contemporaries. Apparently, this is how David understood his task, performing forty-eight preparatory portraits. And yet, when a drawing with a general composition was exhibited at the Salon of 1791, the artist makes an inscription that does not claim to be a portrait resemblance. David wanted to show the revolutionary impulse of the people. The strict logical construction of the composition, the pathos of gestures - all this was also characteristic of David's previous paintings. However, here the artist seeks to give a sense of the excitement of the audience and convey the feeling of a thunderstorm that really swept over Paris on the day of this significant event. The fluttering curtain brings a tense dynamism that is no longer characteristic of early works David. In addition, the feelings of every citizen are now not only subordinated to the general enthusiasm, but also marked by some individual traits. This is the first work of David depicting a modern historical event, and in it he already speaks in a slightly different language than in his paintings of ancient subjects.

Increasingly, artists are beginning to demand display modern life. “The realm of freedom opens up new opportunities for art,” writes Quatremer de Quency, “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 customs.”

Several paintings of revolutionary content were exhibited at the Salon of 1793. David responds to tragic event of his era. He writes of the murdered Lepeletier - the 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 true to the principal of classicism - the artist did not so much want to present a portrait of the murdered Lepelletier, but to create the image of a patriot devoted to his homeland. The meaning of this picture is revealed by David himself in a speech delivered at the Convention on March 29, 1793, when the picture was presented: “ true patriot must with all diligence use all means to educate his compatriots and constantly show them manifestations of high heroism and virtue. The picture has not reached us. Only an engraving by Tardieu, based on a drawing by David, has survived.

In the painting "The Death of Marat" (1793; Brussels, Museum), David approached the image of the murdered man in a different way, although the task remained the same - to influence the feelings of the viewer, to give him a lesson in patriotism. But another trend 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 reached the Jacobin Club, David, who was chairman at the time, greeted the citizen who had detained Charlotte Corday with a kiss. To the exclamation of one of those present: “David, you passed on to the offspring the image of Lepeletier, who died for the fatherland, you just have to make one more picture,” David succinctly replied: “I will do it.” He was deeply shocked and worked on his work with feverish speed. It was completed in three months, solemnly presented to the Convention and placed together with the portrait of Lepeletier 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 had just died, the irreparable bitterest injustice had just ended, the hand holding the pen had not yet been unclenched, and the suffering fold had not smoothed out on his face, but at the same time the picture sounds like a requiem, and the figure of the murdered man is like a monument to him. David portrayed Marat in a real home environment, but the master rose above everyday reality and gave a sublimely heroic work in this sense. The artist found a synthesis of the emotions of the instantaneous and the eternal, which is so rare. “A tragedy full of pain and horror” - this is how Sh. Baudelaire spoke about his work.

Appointed as the organizer of the funeral ceremony, David stated: "I thought it would be interesting to present him the way I saw him - writing in the name of the happiness of the people." For an analogy with the work of David, 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, protruding from the bath, wrote the last thoughts about the salvation of the people.

“In this picture there is at the same time something tender and something that grabs the soul; in the cold air of this room, on these cold walls, around this cold and sinister bath, one can feel the spirit of the soul, ”wrote C. Baudelaire. David never again rose to such artistic heights.

AT revolutionary years David creates a row wonderful portraits, in which he wants to tell, as it were, about his thoughts and the thoughts of his contemporaries. The search for ever greater expressiveness, the desire to convey the spiritual warmth of a person - this is the path of the artist's further work in the field of portrait art. Increasingly, the artist presents his models on a smooth background in order to focus all attention on the person. He is interested in various psychological states. Calmness, 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. Sharply expressive pencil drawing - a portrait of Marie Antoinette (Louvre), made before her execution, it borders on a caricature, reveals the artist's powers of observation, the ability to grasp the most characteristic.

The creative activity of David before the Thermidorian coup is inextricably linked with revolutionary struggle: he was a member of the Jacobin club, a deputy from Paris in the Convention; he was a member of the committee for public education, and then for the Arts, and was also a member of the Committee of Public Safety.

After the counter-revolutionary coup, David renounced Robespierre, but was nevertheless arrested and imprisoned. During his stay in the Luxembourg prison, from her window, he writes a poetic corner Luxembourg Gardens(1794; Louvre). Tranquility permeates the entire landscape. And, on the contrary, in a 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 eyes. Anxious moods are quite understandable in an artist who has 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 characteristic. He, as it were, showed with these works 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 picture was false, and it resulted in a cold, academic work. Since that time, the gap between the historical picture and the portrait, which could be observed in the work of David before the revolution, will again be felt. In portraits, David vigilantly peers into his models and, along with similarity, seeks to convey specificity, looking for the most appropriate means of expression. It is interesting that some portraits of David of the end of the century are made in a new manner, this is evidenced by the portrait of the young Ingres, unexpectedly soft and picturesque (c. 1800; Moscow, Pushkin State Museum of Fine Arts).

In the portraits of David, we can always guess the attitude of the artist to the model, which is very clearly reflected in such works as Bonaparte at the St. Bernard Pass (1800; Versailles) and the portrait of Madame Recamier (1800; Louvre). It is impossible not to admire this original monument of the era of the Consulate, which reflects the aesthetic tastes of that time like in a mirror. The appeal to antiquity is now only a pretext to create a special world, far from modernity, a world of purely aesthetic admiration.

An 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 completeness of the picture, which is usual for David.

In a completely different way, David paints an equestrian portrait of Bonaparte "Napoleon's Crossing the Alps." David now saw in Bonaparte only a victorious hero and accepted an order to portray him calmly 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 if the similarity is 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 rather a monument to the victorious commander. He seems to personify the famous phrase of Napoleon "I wanted to give France power over the whole world."

Tore, in 1846, described this portrait as follows: “This figure on a horse was reproduced thousands of times in bronze and plaster, on mantel clocks and on rustic chests, with an engraver’s chisel and pencil, on wallpaper and fabrics - in a word, everywhere. A skewbald horse, rearing up, flies over the Alps like a Pegasus of war.

In 1804, Napoleon Bonaparte became emperor, and David received the title of "the first painter of the emperor." Napoleon demands the 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) .

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 is replaced by pretentious sophistication and prettiness, as, for example, in the painting "Sappho and Phaon" (1809; Hermitage Museum).

In 1814, David completed the painting "Leonidas at Thermopylae" (Louvre), begun in 1800. In it, he still 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 end of the 18th century, which replaced rocaille painting and answered revolutionary ideas of that time, now it was 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 don’t want either movement imbued with passion, or passionate expression ...” However, new trends penetrated David's portrait art more and more insistently.

The years of reaction come, and in 1814 the Bourbons come to power. David is forced to emigrate, 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 Mars Disarmed by Venus (1824; Brussels, Royal Museum visual arts), he creates a series of portraits painted in a different manner. The fine detail characterizes the portraits of the archaeologist Alexander Lenoir (1817; Louvre) and the actor Wolf (1819-1823; Louvre). And, on the contrary, in a generalized manner, works are written that can be called portraits of people who have lost illusions.

Thus, all the work of the period of the artist's revolution can be called idealistic, since the glorification of political values ​​and civic duty in relation to their homeland reaches incredible heights. But, despite his so passionate love for her, the master ends his days without returning home. And as E. Delacroix would later say, “Instead of penetrating into 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 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 in general.

However, David was not only a famous painter. Witnessing big historical events, he became an active participant in them, an outstanding figure in the Jacobin dictatorship and the Convention, a representative of the Bourbon monarchy that crushed the Bourbons, and the “third estate” that established its power, which created its own art style, the first outstanding master and head of which was David.

David's work is an art that is inextricably linked with a clear ideology, with a conscious desire to create a new artistic system that corresponds to new era.

And although the origins of David's art go back to the repertoire creative forms and plots characteristic of the second half of XVIII century, the master in his new version of classicism embodies with the utmost clarity the abstract civic ideals of the era of the bourgeois revolution. At the same time, it was he who laid the foundations for the realism of the new time, mainly in the portrait.

During the revolution, David's work is inspired by the advanced ideas of his time, which played a big role. 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 inseparable unity of the artist's creative and social activities. 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 is declining after the Thermidorian revolution.

Loyal to his class, which had already experienced a revolutionary upsurge, David renounces his revolutionary past, and in this renunciation the limitations of the entire revolution as a whole come through. Having unconditionally taken the side of Napoleon, seeing in him his new ideal, David in vain, however, tries to achieve with the help of skill alone what could be created only by inspiration gleaned from great events. And no matter how the master tried, but the "first painter of the emperor" could never be equal to the "first painter of the revolution."

And, nevertheless, if we characterize all of David's work, we can do it in the words of T. Gauthier, who noted that “David, whose glory was eclipsed for a moment by clouds of dust raised around the 1830s by the battle of romantics and classicists, we see henceforth a master whom no encroachment can belittle.”

BIBLIOGRAPHY

1. Venturi L. Artists of the new time. M.: Izd-vo inostr. literature, 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 canvases. M.: Slovo, 1998. p. 150-157;

4. David. Death of Marat / Ed. N. Astakhova. M.: Bely Gorod, 2002. 48 p.;

5. Dmitrieva N.A. Brief history of art. M.: Art, 1991. p. 250-252;

6. European painting of the XIII-XX centuries / Ed. V.V. Vanslova. M.: Art, 1999. p. 128-130;

7. European art of the XIX century / Ed. B.V. Weinmarn, Yu.D. Kolpinsky. M.: Art, 1975. p. 22-28;

8. Jacques Louis David / ed.-comp. V. Prokofiev. M.: Depict. Isk-vo, 1960. 60 p.;

9. Jacques Louis David / ed.-comp. E. Fedorova. M.: Bely Gorod, 2003. 64 p.;

10. Zamyatina A.N. David. Ogiz: Izogiz, 1936. 124 p.;

11. History of foreign art / Ed. M.T. Kuzmina, N.L. Maltseva. M.: Art, 1984. p. 258-260;

12. History of the 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 of the 19th 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. Tsyrlin I. French Artists in the Struggle for Peace and Democracy. Moscow: Art, 1951. 44 p.;

17. Schnapper A. David is a witness of his era. M.: Depict. Isk-vo, 1984. 280 p.

Venturi L. Artists of the new time. M., 1956.

Submit an application indicating the topic right now to find out about the possibility of obtaining a consultation.
Jacques-Louis David: Self-portrait, 1791
64x53
Uffizi Gallery, Florence (Galleria degli Uffizi, Firenze).

Jacques Louis David is considered to be the founder of French neoclassicism. In fact, three trends were combined in his painting style: rococo, neoclassicism and romanticism. The artist, already in his youth, was honored to be placed next to the outstanding French Rococo artist Francois Boucher, the creator of the elegant style. Echoes of the sensual and frivolous painting of Boucher can be clearly seen in the early works of David, such as, for example, "The Battle of Mars with Minerva" (1771). Here the battle scene is overloaded with figures of naked goddesses and plump cherubs, inappropriate on the battlefield.

Battle of Minerva and Mars Louvre, Paris (Musée du Louvre, Paris). 1771, 114x140

Neoclassicism was a reaction to the prevailing Baroque style at the time. Increasingly, critics and philosophers urged artists to turn to heroic and moral subjects from ancient history, displacing frivolous, lightweight mythological scenes with them.

There was nothing new or unusual about the revival of interest in classical culture. Classicism dominated French painting of the 17th century; Nicolas Poussin (1594-1665) is considered the founder of this trend, from whom David borrowed a lot. Compositionally, his painting "Saint Roch praying to the Mother of God for the healing of the plagued" (1780) resembles Poussin's painting "The Appearance of the Virgin to St. James", and "The Death of Socrates" (1787) - Poussin's painting "The Testament of Eudemidas".

"Saint Roch, praying to the Mother of God for the healing of the plagued" (1780)

Historical stories
Many canvases by neoclassical artists were painted on subjects taken from history. Ancient Greece and Ancient Rome. All historical paintings of David can be divided into three categories: oaths, death-bed scenes (for example, "The Death of Socrates") and battle scenes (for example, "Leonidas at Thermopylae", 1814). Oaths and deaths enjoyed special success in the 1780s, when these stories were interpreted by many in the light of modern political events. Such paintings were examples of devotion, self-sacrifice, heroism and high morality, and thus provided ideal material for revolutionary propagandists. True, in those years David sometimes wrote historical scenes, imbued with a romantic spirit, such as, for example, "The Love of Paris and Helen", 1788

Paris and Helena Louvre, Paris (Musée du Louvre, Paris) .1788. 144x180

Neoclassicism was largely due to the archaeological excavations of the 1740s in the ruined Pompeii and Herculaneum. Household items and decorations preserved here opened the ancient world to artists. More enthusiasm creative people was fueled by the books of the German archaeologist and connoisseur of ancient antiquities, Johann Winckelmann (1717-1768), which appeared soon: the multi-volume work Antiquities of Herculaneum, published from 1755 to 1792, and The History of Ancient Art (1764). In his studies, Winckelmann urged artists to strive to create an ideal of beauty, based on the surviving examples of ancient art. These books have become cult throughout Europe.

"The whole of Paris is playing in Greece," one traveler who visited the French capital in those years remarked. "The ladies have Greek hairstyles on their heads. Even the smallest veil cannot afford not to have his snuffbox "antique"".

As the “Portrait of Madame Recamier”, painted by David in 1800, shows, the fashion for the “Greek style” persisted until the end of the 18th century and served as a source for the creation of another style - the Empire, which flourished during the reign of Napoleon.

In the paintings of adherents of the "Greek style", the new fashion manifested itself in not always appropriate architectural details, painted as if "antique" still lifes. Even an inveterate supporter of Winckelmann's theories, David's teacher, Joseph-Marie Vienne, did not escape this temptation. Similar elements can be found in the early paintings of David - for example, on the canvas Antiochus and Stratonika (1774) or Belisarius (1781). The viewer's eye is constantly distracted from the main plot by the numerous details with which the composition is saturated.

David Jacques Louis - Antiochus and Stratonic 1774. School of Fine Arts, Paris.

But after a few years, everything changes. If we turn to such paintings by the artist as, say, The Oath of the Horatii (1784) or The Death of Socrates (1787), we can see that the composition has become lighter and more restrained.

This is the most famous painting of David. It reflects all the stylistic features of the artist. There are also traces of Poussin's classical manner with his predilection for expressive theatrical gestures, and the recreation of an ancient atmosphere. The plot of the picture is taken from an old legend dating back to the 7th century BC. At that time, Rome was at war against the neighboring city of Alba Longa, and it was announced that a duel between three Roman brothers from the Horatii family and three brothers from Alba Longa should resolve the conflict. These families were to intermarry, so it was initially clear that there could be no winners in such a battle. After the battle, only one of the Horatii brothers survived, but, returning home in triumph, he was cursed by his own sister for the murder of her fiancé, one of the Curiatii brothers. Enraged, he stabbed his sister, for which he was sentenced to death (but later pardoned).
At first, Corneille's Horace was a source of inspiration for David, but there was no oath scene in it. David borrowed the details of the military oath from Poussin, and the very idea of ​​the oath was, apparently, taken by the artist from the legend of Brutus.

The change occurred after David's stay in Italy (1775-80), it was then that the artist decided to get rid of the details that interfered with the main idea. As he later said to his students, "in my taste, thoughts, even behavior, something barbaric sometimes broke through, something that I had to refuse if I wanted to achieve depth and transparency in my paintings." An important role here was played not only by acquaintance with ancient art, but also by the artist's study of the works of Italian masters of the Renaissance, primarily Raphael and Caravaggio. "I feel as if I had a cataract removed. A veil has fallen from my eyes, and now I understand how weak and imperfect my style is based on false principles, and how much I have to do in order to get closer to the sparkling truth. Blind copying nature seems to me an unworthy, vulgar occupation, one must strive higher, to the level of ancient masters and Raphael ... "

The achievement of Jacques Louis David can be considered that he managed to convey in his works the very essence of the ethical ideals of Ancient Greece and Rome - virtue, heroism, self-sacrifice. To highlight the idea, the artist refused complex angles and various tricks with perspective, from an excess of architectural details and furniture. Gradually, David minimized the number of figures in his compositions, abandoned the picturesque background. He concluded what was happening in the picture in the likeness of a theatrical box, and he seemed to lead the characters to the ramp.

David's most famous neoclassical masterpieces were painted by him in the 1780s. Winckelmann noted that a great picture can only be painted in peace and quiet, away from the bustle of the world. It was under such conditions that David worked on The Death of Socrates and The Oath of the Horatii.

With the beginning of the French Revolution, the artist turned to turbulent events, which radically affected his manner. Now, having gone headlong into politics, David wrote hastily, excitedly, elements appeared in his works that made the artist’s canvases related to the emerging trend in painting, which would later be called romanticism.

Signs of romanticism are particularly evident in the painting "Napoleon at the St. Bernard Pass" (1800), where the conqueror's cloak flutters in the wind, and in the preliminary pen and ink drawing for the painting "The Oath in the Ballroom" (1791), where curtains billowing from the wind emphasize the excited state of the rebel-revolutionaries.

The neoclassical style that glorified David with the fall of Napoleon very quickly went out of fashion - obviously, he was too strongly associated with the bloody events of the revolution. He was replaced by a softer style that met the needs of the general public, Ingres, a student of David.

Revolutionary
David's views on painting were as fickle as his political leanings. Starting as a follower of the Rococo style, after five years spent in Italy, he took the position of a new trend called neoclassicism. Towards the end of his life, the former revolutionary artist returns to the sugary scenes from which he began his career. But after such canvases as "The Oath of the Horatii" or "The Lictors bring the bodies of his executed sons to Brutus", which glorified David, his last paintings seemed ridiculous.

This painting continues the theme begun by David in The Oath of the Horatii, the conflict between public and private interests. Brutus, the founder of the Roman Republic, decided to expel the royal family from Rome, but his sons took the side of the royal power. Brutus made a difficult choice - he condemned his children to death. In those years when David painted this picture, such a scene was not considered otherwise than as a call for the overthrow of the monarchy.

David's work is characterized by realistic foundations, dramatic strength, ideological purposefulness, which was especially pronounced during the years of the French Revolution, as well as the desire to capture current events of our time. He passed on his skill a huge number students, so that Delacroix, paying tribute to David, called him the founder of the entire new school of painting and sculpture.

This picture shows us the character and appearance of Jacques-Louis David, how the artist himself felt. He wanted the audience to recognize in him a strong-willed, restrained, passionate and prone to spiritual outburst. It is enough just […]

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 made 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, supporter of the French Revolution, devoted to Napoleon and believing that he was able to give the world what […]

The work of the talented French artist Jacques Louis David is made in oil on a fairly large canvas. David is considered the founder of neoclassicism, based on the works ancient heritage. The work "Sappho and Phaon" is made in outline late creativity artist. […]

David is a French artist, a representative of neoclassicism - revolutionary classicism, which does not reject the old canons, but rethinks them in its own way. Neoclassicists believed that the artist should be not just an observer and his main purpose […]

Here, it would seem, is a revolutionary painter, a chanter of the French Revolution, and suddenly a plot from ancient Roman history ... To some, such a neighborhood will seem strange, but just then the French revolutionaries quite often turned to Roman history. […]