Download
1 / 104
1.04k likes | 1.23k Views
E N D
Neoclassical Art新古典主义（英语︰Neoclassicism），兴起於18世纪的罗马，并迅速在欧美地区扩展的艺术运动。新古典主义，一方面起於对巴洛克（Baroque）和洛可可（Rococo）艺术的反动，另一方面则是希望以重振古希腊、古罗马的艺术为信念。新古典主义的艺术家刻意从风格与题材模仿古代艺术，并且知晓所模仿的内容为何。雕刻艺术则以浅浮雕（bas relief）图式表现，因此截然不同於巴洛克风格的深度雕刻。 以复兴古希腊罗马艺术为旗号的古典主义艺术,早在17世纪的法国就已出现。在法国大革命及其政治和社会改革之前,有一场纯粹的艺术革命,这就是新古典主义美术运动。这一时期的法国美术既不是古希腊和罗马美术的再现,也非17世纪法国古典主义的重复。它是适应资产阶级革命形势需要在美术上一场借古开今的潮流。 所谓新古典主义也就是相对于17世纪的古典主义而言的。同时,因为这场新古典主 义美术运动与法国大革命紧密相关,所以也有人称之为“革命的古典主义”。 新古典主义美术的特征是：选择严峻的重大题材(古代历史和现实的重大事件),在艺术形式上,强调理性而非感性的表现；在构图上强调完整性；在造型上 重视素描和轮廓,注重雕塑般的人物形象,而对色彩不够重视。法国新古典主义美术从维安、达维德到安格尔,取得了最优秀的成就,并达到高峰。
Neoclassical Art新古典主义一方面强调要求复兴古代趣味特别是古希腊罗马时代那种庄严、肃穆、优美和典雅的艺术形式；另一方面它又极力反对贵族社会倡导的巴洛克和罗可可艺术风格。 新古典主义又不同于17世纪盛行的古典主义，它排挤了抽象的、脱离现实的绝对美的概念和贫乏的、缺乏血肉的艺术形象。它以古代美为典范，从现实生活中吸取营养，它尊重自然追求真实，以及对古代景物的偏爱，表现出对古代文明的向往和怀旧感。 所谓“新古典主义”，首先是遵循唯理主义观点，认为艺术必须从理性出发，排斥艺术家主观思想感情，尤其是在社会和个人利益冲突面前，个人要克制自己的感情，服从理智和法律，倡导公民的完美道德就是牺牲自己，为祖国尽责。艺术形象的创造崇尚古希腊的理想美；注重古典艺术形式的完整、雕刻般的造型，追求典雅、庄重、和谐，同时坚持严格的素描和明朗的轮廓，极力减弱绘画的色彩要素。“新古典主义”的“新”在于借用古代英雄主义题材和表现形式，直接描绘现实斗争中的重大事件和英雄人物，紧密配合现实斗争，直接为资产阶级夺取政权和巩固政权服务，具有鲜明的现实主义倾向。因此，新古典主义又称革命古典主义，它的杰出代表是达维德。
Neoclassical Art18世纪下半期是法国封建君主制日趋腐败堕落和资产阶级逐渐强大的时期，是两个阶级面临决战的变革时代。1789年法国大革命前夕，资产阶级为取得革命的胜利，在意识形态领域高举反封建反宗教神权、争取人类理想胜利的旗帜，号召和组织人民大众起来为资产阶级革命而献身。为取得这一革命斗争的彻底胜利，首先要在人们的心理上注入为革命献身的美德和勇气，那就是为共和国而战斗的英雄主义精神。古代希腊罗马的英雄成了资产阶级所推崇的偶像，资产阶级革命家利用这些古代英雄，号召人民大众为真理而献身。正如马克思所指出的，他们战战兢兢地请出亡灵来给他们以帮助，借用他们的名字、战斗口号和衣服，以便穿着这种久受崇敬的服装，用这种借来的语言，演出世界历史的新场面。就在这样的历史环境下，产生了借用古代艺术形式和古代英雄主义题材，大造资产阶级革命舆论的新古典主义。
Neoclassical ArtIn the second half of the eighteenth century, often called the Age of Reason, a number of bright and bold individuals dared to think for themselves, free from the restrictions of religion and traditional authority. In France and other countries cultural leaders like Voltaire used their clever wit to ridicule vice and superstition and at the same time to praise tolerance, democracy, industriousness, and sincere human feelings. Enlightened men and women felt confident that the human intellect by itself could solve all problems,even social and moral problems. Needless to say, a reaction set in against the irresponsible way of life of the aristocracy a reaction that eventually led to political revolution in America, in France, and in other countries, under the banner of liberty and equality. A similar moral revolution took place in the art world. Art was now supposed to move a person's deepest feelings and teach virtue - not cater to wasteful living. Artists and critics believed that art should once again serve the nation and be good for the people, just as it had for the ancient Greeks and Romans. Classical art had depicted serious subjects in a serious way, and so late eighteenth century artists and architects deliberately began imitating Roman and Greek art.
Strickland, William, Second Bank of the United States, Philadelphia, 1818-1824
S. Pancras Station, by William Henry Barlow, at London, England, U. K., 1864 - 1868.
Canova AntonioPauline Bonaparte Borghese as Venus, Marble, lenght cm 185, Roma, Galleria Borghese.
Canova, Antonio, Pauline Borghese Bonaparte as Venus: detail of head showing "Grecian" coiffeur, 1804-1808
Canova Antonio, Venere vincitrice, Marble, detail from the bust of Paolina Buonaparte, 1808. Roma, Galleria Borghese.
Canova Antonio, Amore e Psiche, Marble, cm 155x168, 1792. Parigi, Museo del Louvre.
Canova Antonio Venere italica Marble, height cm 178, 1812.
Canova Antonio Ninfa dormiente, Marble, length cm 190, about 1820. This work was commissioned by Lord Londonderry.
John Flaxman (1755-1826), Memorial Slab for the Philmores
Angelica Kauffmann. Cornelia Pointing to Her Children as Her Treasures. Oil on canvas, 1785
Kauffmann, Angelica (Swiss, practiced mainly in England, 1741-1807), Papirius Pratextatus Entreated by his Mother to Disclose the Secrets of the Deliberations of the Roman Senate, oil on canvas.
David, ANTIOCHUS AND STRATONICE, Oil on canvas, 47'/4 x 531/8“. Paris, 1774, Unsigned, École des Beaux-Arts, Paris
After many rejections, this painting won David the Academy's first prize in 1774. The subject this time was also taken from ancient history. Erasistratus had been a Greek doctor and anatomist, the first man known to have dissected the human body. He was undoubtedly one of the fathers of modern medicine. Legend has it that he cured Antiochus, the son of Seleucus, King of Syria. This prince was afflicted with a malady that was causing him to waste away, and appeared to be incurable. Only Erasistratus was able to uncover the cause: Antiochus was dying of love for his young stepmother, Stratonice. Erasistratus persuaded the old king to give his young wife to his son, who then fully recovered. It is interesting to compare this picture to The Death of Seneca, painted by David only one year earlier, to see how far he had advanced in so short a time. There are only nine figures in this painting, whereas there had been fourteen in The Death of Seneca. The composition here is not marred by the extravagant contrasts in the earlier painting; it is linear, rather than angular. The space between the two main groups of characters is uncluttered and the groups are distinct from one another. On the left, Erasistratus is seated while Antiochus lies in bed; on the right, Stratonice is standing and Seleucus is leaning forward. In between, we have the elegant lines of Antiochus and his sickbed. The arrangement of the confidants and servants is discreet and appropriate to the occasion. The atmosphere is calm and noble--perhaps even a trifle too much so. The magnificent ornamentation, the architecture worthy of an imperial palace, the majesty of the different personages--the composition as a whole has the air of a great spectacle, although one would be hard-pressed to identify the genre to which it belongs. It is not tragedy; it is not comedy; it is not opera, nor is it ballet. It is not a real illness or a real cure, but it is, all the same, a magnificent representation. In this canvas, the painting- although still kept within the limits established by the Academy- is beginning to reflect a freer approach; David is beginning to find his way. Skillful and polished, this painting already displays the brilliance of a coloring that is starting to come to life. The colors David would always favor- white, blue, yellow, red, flesh and gold tones, gray and brown- are arranged with grace and sup- pleness as they softly ascend toward the red of Erasistratus's robe, the softer tone of the king's toga, and the indigo blue of the large drapery hanging from the ceiling. The drawing is firm but gentle: the body of Antiochus is superbly fresh, Erasistratus's head is vigorously rendered and Stratonice's face has a very pleasing delicacy. The lighting, however, is still arbitrary, and the architecture quite heavy and unbalanced. Most vitally, this painting still lacks vigor and compactness. These qualities would not appear until later, after David had assimilated the true lessons of the Antiquity that here is still draped, decorated, and arranged in the affected manner of his age.
David (1748-1825), Saint Roch, 1780, oil on canvas, Musée des Beaux-Arts at Marseille.
David BELISARIUS Oil on canvas, 9'5'/x" x 10'27/s"Paris, 1781Signed: L. David faciebat anno 1781. LutetiaeMusée Des Beaux-Arts, Lille
David had just returned to Paris after his sojourn in Rome. He solicited the honor of being admitted to the Academy and participating in its annual exhibition with a history painting. The subject he chose belonged more to the sentimental genre of which his age was so fond than to the heroic genre. In this respect, both Belisarius and Saint Roch can be considered transitional works in David's career. Belisarius, a general under Justinian, was one of the greatest military commanders of his time and the spearhead of Byzantium's attempts to rebuild the Roman Empire. His very successes, however, made him many enemies. Incriminated in a plot against Justinian, his eyes were put out on the Emperor's orders in 561 A.D. According to the historian Procopius, Belisarius, stripped of all his possessions, was reduced to begging in the streets of Byzantium. In this painting, Belisarius is begging for alms at the foot of a monument redolent of military triumph. The structure opens out onto a classical landscape dotted with tiny figures and shrubs, which forms a painting within the painting- evoking Poussin's landscapes of the Roman countryside, but in a more geometric and architectural way. This is a strong and sober work, centered around four expressive figures. Reticence and emotion emanate from the almost closed are formed by these personages. The woman is restraining her emotion; the faces of the child and the old man are admirably disposed in a contrapuntal and harmonious relationship. Slightly tilted, one toward the right, the other toward the left, they seem to form two slopes, one in the light and the other in shadow. Their tresses are flowing and the old man's beard brushes against the child's curls. Beyond them, dumbstruck as he recognizes his former general in this beggar, a soldier throws up his arms. He stands there as erect as the colonnade, a ghost from the past. The faces, which are very noble- those of the woman, the child, and the old man are particularly beautiful- personify different spiritual aspects of grandeur. The woman embodies delicacy, solicitude, and pity. The face of Belisarius exposes his suffering, which has been exacerbated by humiliation. Hennequin, David's young pupil, posed for the child's face, which is a cry of youth and entreaty. The somewhat muted colors originate, for the most part, in a natural harmony with the sorrowful solemnity of the scene. Following Vien's advice, David erased the woman's red cloak and made it more subdued. A powerful shaft of light pierces the painting, pushing that which evokes the past or is a painful reminder of it into shadow. The bright white of the child's clothing and the somber tone of the woman's cloak are highlighted in homage to the purity of these two figures, while the face of Belisarius seems to be enshrouded by a gray nimbus, and the soldier seems frozen in a shadowy vigil. It was on the basis of this painting that David was unanimously "approved" by the Academy in 1781. Belisarius was an immediate success, although some criticized its somberness. Diderot wrote: "This young man shows the grand manner in the way he has carried out his work; he has soul, his heads have expression without affectation, his attitudes are noble and natural, he draws, he knows how to cast a drapery and paint beautiful folds. His color is beautiful without being brilliant."
Jacques-Louis David, The Oath of the Horatii, 1786. Oil on canvas, French.
This painting occupies an extremely important place in the body of David's work and in the history of French painting. The story was taken from Titus-Livy. We are in the period of the wars between Rome and Alba, in 669 B.C. It has been decided that the dispute between the two cities must be settled by an unusual form of combat to be fought by two groups of three champions each. The two groups are the three Horatii brothers and the three Curiatii brothers. The drama lay in the fact that one of the sisters of the Curiatii, Sabina, is married to one of the Horatii, while one of the sisters of the Horatii, Camilla, is betrothed to one of the Curiatii. Despite the ties between the two families, the Horatii's father exhorts his sons to fight the Curiatii and they obey, despite the lamentations of the women. David succeeded in ennobling these passions and transforming these virtues into something sublime. Thus had Corneille and Poussin also done. Moreover, David himself stated: "If I owe my subject to Corneille, I owe my painting to Poussin." However, unlike Corneille, David finally decided to treat the beginning, rather than the denouement of the action, seeing that initial moment as being charged with greater intensity and imbued with more grandeur. And, it was he who chose the idea of the oath (it is not mentioned in the historical accounts), transforming the event into a solemn act that bound the wills of different individuals in a single, creative gesture. He was not the first painter to do so, but certainly the first to do it in such a stirring manner. If he was thus paying homage to the spirit of Poussin, from whose Rape of the Sabine Women he also borrowed the figure of the lictor for his drawing of the youngest Horatius, his conception was nonetheless much more sober and innovative. Instead of following a tight order, David disposed the figures in a spacious and rhythmical series. They stand out against something that resembles not so much an antique-style frieze as a three-dimensional proscenium, forcefully asserting their autonomy. In addition, the viewer's eye is spontaneously able to grasp only two superimposed orders- that of the figures and that of the decor. The first is striking because it is organized into three different groups, each with a different purpose. To the appeal of the elder Horatius in the center, the reply on the left is the spontaneous vigor of the oath, upheld loudly and with a show of strength, while on the right it is a tearful anguish, movement turned in upon itself, compressed into emotion. The distance between the figures accentuates this contrast. To the heroic determination of the men the canvas opposes the devastated grief of the women and the troubled innocence of the children. The decor is reduced to a more abstract order, that of architectural space- massive columns, equally massive arches, opening out onto a majestic shadow. The three archways loosely correspond to the three groups. The contemplative atmosphere is softened by shades of green, brown, pink, and red, all very discreet. Instead of opening his painting out onto a landscape or an expanse of sky, David closes it off to the outside, bathes it in shadow. As a result, the light in this setting takes on a brick-toned reflection, which encircles his figures with a mysterious halo. Through David's rigorous and efficient arrangement, the superior harmony of the colors, and the spiritual density of the figures, this sacrifice, transfigured by the oath, becomes the founding act of a new aesthetic and moral order.
《贺拉斯兄弟宣誓》 1782年，巴黎重新上演大剧作家高乃依(1606-1684年)1640年创作的悲剧《贺拉斯》。故事写的是罗马城和阿尔贝城之间发生战争，双方谈判各选三位勇士进行决战以定胜负。罗马城选了贺拉斯三兄弟，阿尔贝城推举了古里亚斯三兄弟，他们之间是亲缘关系，贺拉斯兄弟中老大娶古里亚斯兄弟的姐姐为妻；而古里亚斯兄弟中老三是贺拉斯兄弟的妹妹的未婚夫。这两对三兄弟之间的决战面临国家利益和个人利益之间的冲突和选择，结果是国家利益至上，大义灭亲，罗马城取得最后的胜利。达维德决定创作一幅以贺拉斯为题材的油画来表达他的政治信念和艺术思想。他为了发掘主题、深化艺术构思，深入体验古罗马时代的生活，他要求法国政府准许他回罗马去完成这幅作品。1784年他来到罗马，用了11个月的时间完成了这幅英雄主题的杰作。 画面所描绘的是贺拉斯三兄弟向代表罗马王的父亲老贺拉斯宣誓效忠祖国的庄严场面。构图以老贺拉斯为中心，其他人物分列两边成视觉对称式均衡。老贺拉斯高举宝剑，三个儿子伸出有力的手臂作接纳状，人们手脚相对；在老人身后是一组陷入悲痛的女子，她们低首相依、无可奈何。人物的动势和组合都以直线和金字塔式构成，造成视觉上的单纯、沉着、稳定和强健的冲击力，全部人物被置于罗马圆柱式建筑大厅，这更增加了画面庄严神圣的气氛。 画家精心选择了英雄出征前的宣誓和妻儿哭泣的情节，造成一种戏剧性的精神对比，形象地告诉人们：女人的眼泪也不能动摇英雄们尽忠报国的决心。达维德为了强调这个瞬间情节，着重加强了人物的形象表现力，集中刻画贺拉斯三兄弟的强健体魄、坚毅面貌、宽大步伐和伸向前方的手势，鲜明地揭示了三兄弟的英勇气概。女人们的情态是一组不可缺少的陪衬，她们的悲痛更加烘托出画面的悲壮气氛。作为画面中心人物的老贺拉斯，他是国和家的象征，他的庄严举止制约着三个儿子的行为，指示着他们履行国民的神圣义务、报效祖国。画家在人物造型上使用雕刻手法，形象坚实有力，重视素描的体积感，设色很单纯，可与雕刻相媲美。 人物的背景建筑采用多立克柱式和厚重朴实的拱门，简单沉着、稳定、不可动摇，在精神和形式方面与前景人物相呼应，并突出主体人物。这幅画虽然是达维德早期作品，但表现出他的艺术思想和艺术技巧已逐渐成熟。当这幅英雄主题的作品在罗马问世时，立刻受到社会的关注和赞美，被认为是新古典主义最好的代表作品。不久达维德回巴黎参加了1785年举办的沙龙展览，获得了革命热情高涨的法国人民的热烈欢迎。 《运送布鲁特斯儿子尸体的军士们》布鲁特斯是公元前84年古罗马第一个推翻暴君统治的英雄，他把神圣的罗马大皇帝驱逐到国外，建立了罗马共和国，并成为贤明的执政官，但是他的两个亲生儿子参与了伊特鲁立亚人的复辟阴谋活动，布鲁特斯为捍卫共和国的利益和神圣的法律，毅然处决了这两个逆子。画家借这一题材热情赞颂了为国家利益而大义灭亲的贤明君王。 这幅画中所描绘的是武士们将被处决的儿子尸体抬进大厅的一个瞬间，布鲁特斯的妻子作为母亲悲痛欲绝，两个女儿恐怖地依偎着母亲；布鲁特斯显示出一种刚毅和不可动摇的坚强性格，但毕竟处决的是自己的亲生儿子，这时作为父亲不可避免地陷入常人所具有的痛苦之中。画家特意将他安坐在一尊古罗马的英雄雕像投影下，利用朦胧模糊的光影既表现了布鲁特斯的形象又刻画了他复杂的内心世界，英雄的雕像是他依托的精神支柱，隐约的人物动势中体现出坐立不安的心态，但是不安中又含坚定，他高举两个手指表示共和国的兴旺就是最高的法律。这是一个十分感人的戏剧性场面，是情与理、个人利益与国家利益矛盾冲突的场面，画家在这里为人类树立了一个有血有肉正直无私的君王形象。 画面构图仍然遵循古典主义的对称式均衡原理，人物被置于罗马建筑的圆柱前，使画面更显庄重神圣。但是画家重视了画中人的个性刻画，这势必打破古典主义的理性程式，因而使官方学院派十分恼火，指责他“超出了学院派所规定的法则”。但是这幅画受到公众的欢迎，对大革命起着积极的舆论作用。人们称达维德为“共和党人的拉斐尔”，说他“以其天才加速了革命的到来”。
Jacques-Louis David. Portrait of Antoine-Laurent and Marie-Anne Lavoisier. 1788. Oil on canvas. 259.7 x 196 cm. The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, USA.
Antoine-Laurent Lavoisier (1743-1794) was an eminent scientist. Elected to the Académie des Sciences at the age of twenty-five, he became the first great French chemist. In 1783, he was the first person to succeed in determining the composition of water and in synthesizing the compound from its elements. This discovery made him famous. He was also an extremely wealthy man. A Fermier-Général (tax collector for the Crown), he belonged to that class of financiers whose wealth would eventually arouse envy and precipitate its downfall. He was also a remarkable administrator. In recognition of his very diverse talents, he was elected alternate deputy to the States-General in 1789. His wife, Marie-Anne Paulze (1758-1836), was the daughter of a Fermier-Général. She took drawing lessons from David, and was an intelligent, cultured woman with a passion for chemistry that matched her husband's. In this double portrait David has painted a happy couple--two intelligent, sensitive people who are united by their tenderness for each other. Aside from his portraits of the members of his own family, David, ever the realist, did not paint many common people. Most of his models came from the aristocracy and the haute-bourgeoisie. For this painting, David was paid an astronomical sum at the time: 7,000 pounds, or nearly double the amount he received as the royal commission for the Horatii. He preferred the sublime to the unpretentious; the Lavoisiers, however, had both qualities. David expresses his respect and affection for them through the air of superior simplicity with which he has endowed them. What David is depicting in this portrait is charming virtue, natural talent, intimacy between two exceptional individuals. This is the core of the painting. The balance, however, is admirable in its delicacy and harmony: the composition is enhanced by the dominant colors--red, black, blue, and white. Madame Lavoisier is wearing a full white dress whose folds form a reversed corolla. David has made the dress a soft, luminous mass that corresponds to the softness of her features and her gaze. Her husband's black suit, far from being somber, takes on a kind of luster from the whites and reds around it. The warmth of the large red velvet table covering reinforces the subdued simplicity of the scene. The blond curls of Madame Lavoisier's wig cascade down her back. Her aquamarine sash, tied like a ribbon on a gift box, and her husband's bright cuffs and jabot are sparkling grace notes against the pure tones of their garments. The laboratory instruments share this quietly shimmering quality. The distillation flask on the right has the transparency and brilliance of the finest glass, while the test tubes on the table have the flat, dense look of thick glass; each instrument has it's own distinct texture and reflections play off their surfaces with a marvelous lightness. They are in the picture to bear witness to the Lavoisiers' experiments and their sole object is to serve as symbols and emblems. They are, above all, still life masterpieces. On the left, the portfolio on the chair is a reminder of Madame Lavoisier's interest in art. The overall movement of the painting, restrained and delicate, is skillfully contained in a triangle bisected by Lavoisier's extended leg. This is not merely family tenderness- it is also amusing chemistry. It is a felicitous and quietly radiant display of David's talent at its best.
David, Jacques-Louis, The Lictors Bring to Brutus the Bodies of His Sons, Paris 1789. Oil on canvas, 323 x 422 cm. Musee du Louvre.
网球馆的宣誓>所描绘的就是该时代最重大的事件——自称占全国人口96％的第三等级代表宣布不制订宪法绝不罢休。网球馆的宣誓>所描绘的就是该时代最重大的事件——自称占全国人口96％的第三等级代表宣布不制订宪法绝不罢休。 Jacques-Louis David. The Oath of the Tennis Court. 1791. Pen and brown ink, brown wash with white highlights. 66 x 101 cm. Musée National du Chateau de Versailles, Versailles, France.
Jacques-Louis David. Death of Marat. Oil on canvas. 1793. Musées Royaux des Beaux-Arts de Belgique, Brussels, Belgium
France was in danger and the Revolution was in peril. The Committee of Public Safety had just been created. The Reign of Terror had begun. Marat, Robespierre's friend, a deputy to the Convention, and editor-in-chief of L'Ami du Peuple, was a fiery orator; he was also a violent man, quick to take offense. Some saw him as an intransigent patriot; for others he was merely a hateful demagogue. On July 13, 1793, a young Royalist from Caen, Charlotte Corday, managed, by a clever subterfuge, to gain entry into his apartment. When Marat agreed to receive her, she stabbed him in his bathtub, where he was wont to sit hour after hour treating the disfiguring skin disease from which he suffered. David, who had been Marat's colleague in the Convention, saw in him a model of antique "virtue." The day after the murder, David was invited by the Convention to make arrangements for the funeral ceremony, and to paint Marat's portrait. He accepted with enthusiasm, but the decomposed state of the body made a true-to-life representation of the victim impossible. This circumstance, coupled with David's own emotional state, resulted in the·creation of this idealized image. Marat is dying: his eyelids droop, his head weighs heavily on his shoulder, his right arm slides to the ground. His body, as painted by David, is that of a healthy man, still young. The scene inevitably calls to mind a rendering of the "Descent from the Cross." The face is marked by suffering, but is also gentle and suffused by a growing peacefulness as the pangs of death loosen their grip. David has surrounded Marat with a number of details borrowed from his subject's world- the green covering, white sheet, and wooden packing case, and he has also added a few others, including the knife and Charlotte Corday's petition, attempting to suggest through these objects both the victim's simplicity and grandeur, and the perfidy of the assassin. The petition ("My great unhappiness gives me a right to your kindness"), the assignat Marat was preparing for some poor unfortunate ("you will give this assignat to that mother of five children whose husband died in the defense of his country"), the makeshift writing-table and the mended sheet are the means by which David discreetly bears witness to his admiration and indignation. The face, the body, and the objects are suffused with a clear light, which is softer as it falls on the victim's features and harsher as it illuminates the assassin's petition. David leaves the rest of his model in shadow. In this sober and subtle interplay of elements can be seen, in perfect harmony with the drawing, the blend of compassion and outrage David felt at the sight of the victim. The painting was immediately the object of extravagant praise, then, returned by the Convention to David in 1795, it was rescued from obscurity only after his death. Misunderstood by the Romantics, who saw in it only a cold classicism, it was restored to a place of honor by Baudelaire, who wrote: "This is the bread of the strong and the triumph of spiritualism; as cruel as nature, this painting is redolent of the Ideal. What then was that ugliness which Holy Death so quickly erased with the tips of her wings! Marat can henceforth defy Apollo, Death has kissed him with her loving lips and he rests in the tranquillity of his metamorphosis. There is, in this work, something at once tender and poignant; in the cold air of this room, on these cold walls, around this cold and funereal bathtub, a soul flutters...."
Jacques-Louis David. The Intervention of the Sabine Women. 1799. Oil on canvas. 385 x 522 cm. Louvre, Paris, France.
David. The Intervention of the Sabine Women. 1799. Oil on canvas. 385 x 522 cm. Louvre, Paris, France.
Poussin, Nicolas, The Rape of the Sabine Women, 1633-34. Oil on canvas, 154.6 x 209.9 cm. MMOA, New York
We are in the early days of Roman history. The Romans have abducted the daughters of their neighbors, the Sabines. To avenge this abduction, the Sabines attacked Rome, although not immediately- since Hersilia, the daughter of Tatius, the leader of the Sabines, had been married to Romulus, the Roman leader, and then had two children by him in the interim. Here we see Hersilia between her father and husband as she adjures the warriors on both sides not to take wives away from their husbands or mothers away from their children. The other Sabine Women join in her exhortations. After many preliminary compositional sketches, which occupied him for some time, David chose to set out in a totally new direction, marking a turning point in his artistic development. He himself explained that, finally, he had wanted "to go back to the source" and "return art to the principles followed by the Greeks." It might surprise us that, in view of his intention to paint a picture that was "more Greek than the earlier ones," David chose a Roman subject. But the term "Greek Art" should be understood here in the ideal meaning of the term. As in his previous history paintings, David strove simultaneously for truth and grandeur. His figures are at one and the same time human beings and heroes. He borrowed his attitudes from classical bas-reliefs and his figures from contemporary models. The most striking thing about this painting is that the warriors are nude. David was inspired by the idea that the Greeks had represented their gods, athletes, and heroes in the nude. David was not seeking, as had Michelangelo, for example, to glorify masculine beauty, but rather to endow his heroes with a superior quality that, ultimately, was more moral than physical. With the exception of Romulus, these nude bodies are not Particularly muscular. David wanted to refine, to strip away anything that was unnecessary, to reduce everything to a supreme, heroic simplicity. The element that we probably find most seductive about this painting today is the way in which David has projected and controlled the tumultuous movement of all the figures, which he then brings to an abrupt halt. Hersilia and the other Sabine Women really seem to be bursting onto the scene, which they dominate. In contrast, the armies are only suggested, rather than represented, by a forest of lances, pikes, and standards; the leader of the cavalry puts his sword back in its sheath, the horses rear in a static, quivering motion; the two warriors who are about to clash are frozen in their attitudes, their furious precipitation arrested as they seem rooted to the spot. David has also tamed his colors. Of his earlier palette, he has retained only some of the vivid reds on the shoulder of Tatius, Romulus's helmet, and the robe of the woman behind Hersilia; elsewhere, the reds are shaded with brick-toned hues. Some yellows, not as bright as in earlier paintings, a bit of green on the old woman's robe, and a bit of blue near Tatius's foot recall the tones David had once preferred. In contrast, the nude bodies, the walls of Rome, the standards and the pikes, the horse's hide, and Hersilia's tunic make up a spectrum of clear bronzed tones under a slightly tinted sky. He has totally abandoned any attempt at chiaroscuro or shadow effects. The light is everywhere. He wants to show the light as a triumphant but gentle mediatrix, like the Sabine Women.
《马拉之死》以肖像的形式，描绘了大革命的杰出领导人马拉被害的悲剧情景，画家用激情和正义的呐喊塑造了一个永远活在人们心中的英雄形象。 让·保尔·马拉(1760-1793年)原是一位医学博士和物理学家，当大革命开始时他就毅然投身于革命，后来成为革命的雅各宾党的主要领导人之一，与代表大资产阶级利益的吉伦特派进行激烈的斗争。1789年8月他创办了《人民之友报》，因此人们称他为“人民之友马拉”。贵族大资产阶级很快认识到他的威胁，巴黎市长下令逮捕他，他不得不躲藏起来，昼夜在地下室中工作，致使患上了皮肤病，必须浸在温水中才能缓解痛苦。1793年，女刺客夏绿蒂·柯尔黛潜入他的工作地点用匕首刺杀了他。在马拉被害后两小时，达维德立即赶到现场为马拉画像，随即又到国民议会发表演说：“拿起笔为我们的朋友复仇！为马拉复仇！让他的战败的敌人重新看了他已变的面容而失色吧！”“我听见人民的声音，我服从他们。”这是一位革命艺术家的誓言。 大革命前达维德描绘的是历史题材，借古喻今；大革命开始后他就转向直接描绘现实题材。这幅画中的马拉是生活中的真实的英雄。达维德曾回忆说：“马拉死的前夕，雅各宾俱乐部派我和摩尔去看望他。当我们看到他时，使我大吃一惊。在他的身旁放着木箱，上面有墨水瓶和纸，从澡盆伸出来的，是曾经写下关于人民福利呼声的手。”画家又说：“我认为把他描绘成我看到他的那种姿态--为人民的幸福而奋争写作的姿态，是很有意义的。”我们现在看到的正是他真实的形象。 达维德在塑造马拉的形象时，加强了面部的刻画，从那镇定而又坚毅的遗容中，揭示了马拉的性格特征，表现出他那不顾疾病缠身的痛苦而紧张忘我工作的坚强意志。画面上的马拉躺在浴盆中，露出了上半身，他侧垂着头，右手还握着笔，左手拿着刺客留下的字条，上书致公民马拉的言词。浴盆边的木箱上压着一张字条上写着：“请将这份钱转交给一位有5个孩子的母亲，她的丈夫已为革命牺牲了。”所有这些细节好像表明马拉并没有死，还在工作，只不过太疲劳暂时休息片刻。在这里，画家真实地塑造了一位已经死去但仍永远活着的英雄。 这幅具有历史意义的肖像画构图庄重、严谨，意境崇高，造型单纯而鲜明，用笔深沉而有力度，人物形象突现在抽象的背景上，犹如一尊浮雕。为使马拉的形象具有英雄气质，画家采用庄严的古代墓碑形式，把人物的肖像性与历史的真实性和革命领袖的悲剧性结合起来，使画面沉浸在肃穆、深沉的哀悼气氛中。 • 《萨宾妇女》萨宾人是古意大利的一个民族，他们居住在阿比奈斯山脉中央地区，和罗马人相邻。传说罗马帝国的缔造者，原为一个部落的领袖，叫罗马诺（后来的罗马城名依他名而定）。他早就觊觎萨宾妇女的美丽，一心想劫夺为罗马士兵之妻。他设计邀请萨宾人参加他们的宴会，乘机悄悄地打进萨宾城，劫夺了许多美丽的萨宾妇女和他们的财产。若干年后萨宾人强大了，他们欲报此仇，但是被劫的女子已为罗马人之妻，为罗马人生儿育女了，此时萨宾人打来，又势必使他们沦为孤儿寡母的惨境，因此妇女们拖儿带女地出来阻止这场亲人之间的战争。《萨宾妇女》描绘的正是这一情节。在我们面前展开的是罗马人与萨宾人厮杀的激战场面，两队人马中间是一群妇女和婴儿，视觉中心描绘了一位美丽勇敢的女子，名叫艾埃茜妮，她奋不顾身地挺身而出阻止这场战争，孩子从她的怀抱中跌落在地，引起两位妇女来抢救孩子，她张开双臂用自己的身体阻挡双方的杀戮，她身后的一位妇女高举婴儿，这一情节向人们宣布：为了我们共同的下一代，我们要和平，不要战争，成为画面的高潮和主题思想。画面构图和人物造型完全遵循古典主义法则：严格按黄金分割律配置人物，对称、均衡、变化中有和谐统一。画面前景那位左手握盾、右手作投掷标枪者是罗马王罗马诺，他背向观众，对面一位持剑举盾面朝观众的人是萨宾王都斯，双方构成势均力敌的阵势，举双臂的艾埃茜妮使箭拔弩张的敌对双方对称呼应。情势虽然万分紧张，但是画面人物动势和标枪、盾牌圆质的形和线的变化造成画面的稳定感。尽管人人内心激动，但神情毫无生气。画家着意于人物的裸体、半裸体造型，严谨的雕塑形体和细腻的素描功力使这幅激战场面变成古代标准人体展览，缺乏内在精神的感染力，这正是古典主义的缺憾。也反映出达维德此时艺术创造上追求单纯的形式美，理性构思和造型冲淡了艺术美的真实激情。人们认为这是画家在大革命失败后，悲观失望，意志消沉，在这种情绪支配下，借复古以消愁肠。
Jacques-Louis David. Bonaparte Crossing the St. Bernard Pass. 1800. Oil on canvas. 260 x 221 cm. Musée National de Malmaison, Rueil-Malmaison, France.
Jacques-Louis David. Portrait of Mme Récamier. 1800. Oil on canvas. Louvre, Paris, France.
《拿破仑越过圣贝尔纳山》 在与奥国的干涉军战斗中，拿破仑以英勇大无畏的精神冒着冬天的严寒与雪崩的危险，出其不意地越过圣贝尔纳山险坡，带领主力军向敌人腹地前进。在画家的笔下，拿破仑被描绘成英勇、果敢、坚毅的统帅形象，他挥手勒马向上的雄姿以对角线趋势充满画面，整个世界统统在他的脚下，坡石上刻着永垂青史的名字。《拿破仑越过圣贝尔纳山》 在与奥国的干涉军战斗中，拿破仑以英勇大无畏的精神冒着冬天的严寒与雪崩的危险，出其不意地越过圣贝尔纳山险坡，带领主力军向敌人腹地前进。在画家的笔下，拿破仑被描绘成英勇、果敢、坚毅的统帅形象，他挥手勒马向上的雄姿以对角线趋势充满画面，整个世界统统在他的脚下，坡石上刻着永垂青史的名字。 • 《雷卡米埃夫人像》 朱利埃特·雷卡米埃夫人(1777-1849年)15岁时嫁给银行家雷卡米埃，以貌美和善于交际闻名巴黎，她组织的沙龙是法国文化界的中心，作家大仲马常出入其间，她与浪漫派作家夏多布里昂相好多年，也是达维德的好友。时年23岁的雷卡米埃夫人请达维德为她画肖像，画家深为少妇的优雅魅力所吸引，运用古典和写实手法相结合塑造形象，以古典的道具相配，企图创造古典美人意境。作画过程中夫人觉得画家忠于写实而没有美化她而不满，尤其对赤脚的描绘甚不乐意，私下里夫人又请达维德的学生、善赶时髦的画家热拉德为她另外画一幅，达维德得知后即中止画下去，这是一幅没有完成的肖像画。正由于没有画完才避免了古典画法的那种过于细腻工整、没有生气的毛病，反而更真实、更有生气盎然之感。 画中夫人神情仪态端庄大方，给人一种庄重宁静、古典的美感。她那善良的性格配合着随意的连衣长裙，半躺转首的姿式，沙发和灯架的造型配置与人物之间的关系都符合古典美学原则，加上柔和的色调，空荡抽象的背景，使得整个画面简练和典雅，古典与写实相结合，天衣无缝。 • 《拿破仑一世及皇后的加冕典礼》 这幅画是奉拿破仑的命令而作，描绘的是1804年12月2日拿破仑在巴黎圣母院举行的加冕仪式。 画面中心形象是拿破仑从教皇手中接过的王冠，赐给皇后约瑟芬。罗马教皇被请来参加仪式，想借教皇在宗教上的号召力来扩大自己的影响和肯定称帝的合法权，不过只让他坐在祭坛前作为后盾而已。受加冕的皇后长长的皇袍由宫女罗席福柯拉夫人和瓦勒特夫人牵着，中间平台上坐着皇后的母亲，围绕中心周围站立着主教、王公贵族、将军、各国大使以及前来祝贺的外国国王、王后等，画中有近百人的肖像，据说很多是请真人来到画室画的。这幅画构图宏大，气势磅礴，构思巧妙，以肖像写实手法创作而成，虽为拿破仑歌功颂德，但作为历史画卷是不朽的。
Jacques-Louis David. Consecration of the Emperor Napoleon I and Coronation of the Empress Josephine in the Cathedral of Notre-Dame de Paris on 2 December 1804. 1808. Oil on canvas. 621 x 979 cm. Louvre, Paris.
David, Jacques-LouisConsecration of the Emperor Napoleon I and Coronation of the Empress Josephine in the Cathedral of Notre-Dame de Paris on 2 Dec 1804 [DETAIL]1806 and 1807Oil on canvas621 x 979 cmMusee du Louvre, Paris
Jacques-Louis David. Napoleon in His Study. 1812. Oil on canvas. 204 x 125 cm. The National Gallery of Art, Washington, DC, USA.
David. Sappho and Phaon. 1809. Oil on canvas. 225 x 262 cm. The Hermitage, St. Petersburg, Russia.
Jacques-Louis David. Leonidas at Thermopylae. 1814. Oil on canvas. 395 x 531 cm. Louvre, Paris, France.
