The Death of Socrates by Jacques-Louis David and The Period Eye by Michael Baxandall - Essay Example

The Death of Socrates by Jacques-Louis David (1787) is one of the painter’s early productions. The painting is obviously considered a great work of art. We learn that it was taken to the Salon in 1987, which was honor. Today it is preserved in the Metropolitan Museum. The canvass presents a very emotional scene, which, as we guess, must be of some special importance. We see a group of people, who are crying and grieving. In the middle of a group there is a man emotionally telling something to them. His right arm is raised in an argumentative gesture. His left arm is leisurely reaching for a golden cup, held by a young man in red. What is happening in the picture? Is this man telling them about the death of Socrates, which makes them mourn so much? Or is it Socrates himself? Then why is he still alive? People acquainted with Socrates’ story understand that the scene takes place in a prison and that Socrates, sentenced to death, is to drink a cup of hemlock. The philosopher is sitting on the couch in the middle of the canvass surrounded by his friends and disciplines, all of them crying and grieving. Loyal to his ideas of the immortality of human soul, Socrates has decisively and calmly chosen death. He continues teaching his disciplines till his last breath. At the moment he is pronouncing his final words, reaching for a cup without looking at it, as if death is a casual and trivial event in his life. This interpretation can be done only by people, who have heard of Socrates story. However, there are still many questions to be answered. Why did the painter choose this plot for his work? What was his message? Why did he depict the scene in exactly this way? There is only one thing we may say for sure: the picture must have expressed some important ideas of the time. To understand the painting one is to look at the work with the eye of the audience for whom it was intended. The concept of “The Period Eye” serves as a useful instrument for the interpretation of the painting. It is a way of seeing things. Humans observe objects in the same physiological manner. However, the interpretation of the information varies from a person to person. “The brain must interpret the raw data about light and colour that it receives from the cones and it does this with innate skills and those developed out of experience” (Baxandall 29). Baxandall speaks of a cultural cognitive style. People living in different epochs have different experiences. It is impossible to apply meaning to a work of art without knowing the patterns and concepts peculiar for the people who lived in the time of its creation. When creating a work of art an author has some intention and the works of art are always intended for some particular audience. Moreover, Baxandall notes that we are to talk not about all the people of a certain epoch, but about “those whose response to works of art was important to the artist” (p.38). This approach defines the procedure of interpretation. Our task is to understand the intention of the author, to see the world with his eyes and know what people were important for him. Then we are to grasp the cultural experience of that period, to get acquainted with the social and economic peculiarities of the time, to learn the symbols, categories, patterns, methods of inference, and conventions of people living in that epoch. Before we come to the subject matter of the painting, let us focus on its style. Each epoch in the history of art offered some peculiar styles of painting. The Death of Socrates is a neoclassical painting. Neoclassicism arose due to the new wave of interest in classical antiquity. New archeological discoveries, particularly the exploration and excavation of the Roman cities of Herculaneum and Pompeii, a number of influential publications encouraging the interest in the classical past were a strong impetus for the change in artistic style. It was time of new ideas that prepared a rapid progress of the following century. These ideas penetrated French society and shaped the culture and the artistic heritage of Europe. It was at this time that expectations of some particular people were arousing so that painters such as David replied to those expectations by their work. Jacques-Louis David visited Italy to study art there. He was impressed by the ruins of Pompeii. The Greco-Roman artistic style resounded with the revolutionist ideas prevailing in France at the end of the 18th century, the ideas so close to David. David adopted the stirring moral subject matter from Roman history. David became the major neoclassicist in France. He developed a new style, adopted by him in Italy. French neoclassicists were interested in narrative painting, celebrating austerity, simplicity, heroism and stoic virtue associated with the Roman Republic. This way they drew parallels between the time of the Roman Republic and the struggle for liberty in France. The setting in David’s history paintings is monumental, displaying a gravity and decorum of the classical tragedy1. His figures are stark, there gestures having a certain rhetorical quality. His paintings of the early period remind us of the staged opera, where every gesture is grand and profoundly considered. All these features are displayed in The Death of Socrates. However, to appreciate the stylistic performance of the work a viewer had to possess some knowledge in painting. As we know, the picture was displayed in Salon. The audience of the Salon was patrons of the art and artists, that is, in Baxandall’s words, people whose opinion was important for David, people possessing specific experience. They were experts in painting and arts and could understand technical and compositional peculiarities of the picture. They could see the novel stylistic features and appreciate the artist’s talent. It is important for us to understand what those peculiarities were. Typical “Neo-classical” features in painting are apparent in the form of an emphasis on austere linear design of pictures with utilization of classical themes. Much attention is paid to archaeologically correct settings and costumes with as much historical accuracy as possible. The painting has a well balanced space occupied by each figure; a number of people standing on each side of Socrates bed. Notwithstanding the old age of the philosopher, his body is very strong and masculine, reminding us of the bodies of Greek sculptures. The setting of the scene takes place in a chamber that has Roman arches on the windows and an arch in the hallway. In addition, there is a Roman style lamp found behind Socrates, and there is a symbol of Athens painted on the cubical bench at the foot of the bed where Plato is sitting. Parallel to the symbol of Athens, David has signed the piece in Roman letters. The Greco-Roman features of the picture contribute to its monumentality, underline Socrates heroism and stoicism. The style of the picture was to emphasize its message – the revolutionist ideas of David. Knowledge of the social situation in France provides us with an explanation of the subject matter and ideas of the painting. The end of the 18th century was a turbulent period in the history of France and Europe, the period of rapid economic and political changes. In 1987 France was on the verge of Revolution and David wanted to inspire his compatriots to struggle for freedom and republican ideals till the end. To interpret the painting properly we should perceive it from the perspective of people living in those conditions and time. This perspective helps us to understand details of the work, or at least to approach understanding. The death of Socrates is one of a number of works devoted to the theme of heroism and stoic virtue. The figure of Socrates embodies the revolutionist ideas of David. His body is almost naked, ideally proportioned, athletic and masculine. He is depicted as a perfect man, a god-like man. David portraits Socrates as a father, a teacher and a leader. His posture and gestures express his emotions. It is the moment of truth, a triumph for the philosopher. Now he can support his teaching by his act of self-sacrifice. Socrates is aroused, but displays no fear. His face is serious; his gestures are free and grand. Socrates figure is in the ray of light, the light brighter than that falling on his disciplines. The source of light is unknown. It doesn’t look like the light from the window or the lamp. Such usage of light and shadow emphasizes Socrates’ godliness. His figure and pointing finger create a kind of a pyramid, making Socrates the centre of the picture. Socrates is portrayed with nothing supporting his back, which produces an effect of strength and freedom. By contrasting the movements of the energetic but firmly controlled Socrates, and his disciples, through the distribution of light and dark accents, David transformed what might have only been a fashionable picture of martyrdom to a clarion call for nobility and self-control even in the face of death. Socrates is taking a fatal cup but there is no fear or anxiety seen in his eyes. He faces his death with serenity and keeps adherence to his principles and ideals. David certainly intended this scene as a reproach to the fear-full souls of his contemporaries; the scene could remind memories of the recently abandoned attempt at reform, the dissolution of the Assembly of Notables in 1787, and the large number of political prisoners in the king’s jails or in exile. In particular, The Death of Socrates with its depiction of Socrates continuing to teach even during his execution struck a cord among those desiring change. The Death of Socrates speaks to the audience through different symbols. A contemporary person has stopped thinking with symbols. People of the eighteenth century perceived the world through metaphors. Metaphors needed no explanation. They were perceived at the sub-conscious, emotional level, contributing to the effect of the picture. Knowledge of symbols provides us not only with an opportunity to understand why David included certain details into his work, but also with an insight into the impression the painting produced on the viewer. For instance, Socrates’ beard symbolizes his wisdom and nobility. His left foot is standing on a small pedestal, which suggests the height of his position, his ability to rise above human fears and woes. The chain is lying at the bed, but Socrates is free, taking poison on his own will. The gold of the cup with poison emphasizes the importance of the moment. This cup plays a crucial role in Socrates’ life, helping him to prove his ideas. It is the alchemic gold, necessary for the perfect transformation and improvement. Colors also had their special meaning and were read as metaphors appealing to the viewer’s emotions. David builds the scene on contrasts. The background is depicted in dull colors, while the foreground is bright and colorful. This way the painter emphasizes the importance of the moment, producing an effect of emotional richness and intensity. The colors like warm orange, brown and red, repeated in the robes of the students, are creating conflict with the cold blues and grays, thus emphasizing the emotional content of the picture. There are two figures in red in the foreground. They are symbolizing the hot ideas of revolution and struggle. The young man holding the cup with poison is dressed in the brightest red robe. He is very young. He is unable to look at his teacher, who is going to die. However, his clothes suggest that he will continue the struggle of his teacher, bringing the light of new ideas to people. The man sitting on the right is touching Socrates’ leg, looking straight at his teacher. His clothes are completed in red tones either, yet, the color is calmer. This man is older, able to control his emotions and listen to the voice of his mind. His strong hand symbolizes the support and loyalty to his teacher. Socrates is wearing scarce white robes. White is the color of wisdom and freedom. Socrates’ belief in his immortality makes him free from fear and earthly desires. Finally, Plato has a grey robe, covering him from neck to feet. He is the follower of the great philosopher, able to grasp his wisdom and teaching, but not yet equal to him. Another motif of the painting, which becomes clear only in the historical context, is the expulsion of women. Socrates wife is out of the chamber. She is expelled for her weakness. This motif is a repeated one in David’s early works. The issue of gender roles can be traced in a number of his paintings. For instance, in Oath of the Horatii the group of women is contrasted with the group of men. Horatio is depicted with his back to his daughters, keeping them away from the oath making ritual. They are painted in a smaller scale than the male figures. David contrasts the virility and discipline of men, which is displayed through their rigid and confident stances, to the slouching and swooning female figures, where the composition is marked with softness. This position of the painter becomes clear in the light of Rousseau’s doctrines popular at that time and introducing the division of male and female qualities. Interestingly, David followed this position even in his personal life. When imprisoned for his participation in revolution, David divorced his wife, because she, being a royalist, did not share his views and ideals. Later the couple remarried. This small feature can be understood only by a person acquainted with Rousseau’s ideas and earlier works of David. Otherwise, a contemporary viewer partially loses the message of the painting. Finally, it is necessary to note how the usage of brushstroke adds to the painter’s message. The brushstrokes in the painting are invisible. This way David shows that the painting is more important than the artist. Socrates’ ideas are immortal and function even after his death. The painting is to inspire people even if the artist is dead or in disgrace. David also focuses on clear, hard details and the lack of use of the more wispy brushstrokes preferred by Rococo art is recognizable. The technique corresponds to the artistic preferences of the time and has contextual meaning. The Death of Socrates was intended for the contemporaries of David. Though the painting expressed the overall spirit of the epoch, its multiple message could be understood entirely only by a certain group of people, those whose opinion was important for David. His viewer was to understand the symbols used in the picture, be familiar with David’s political intention and views, cultural meaning behind the refined figure of Socrates, as well as to be able to appreciate the stylistic performance of the painting. The painting possesses features characteristic with French neoclassicism, such as the heroic and antique subject, strong contours, sober coloring, and clear lighting. Its subject matter is multisided. Each detail of the painting has some meaning. The modern interpreter should know things that were a part of the worldview of David’s contemporaries, especially the circle of patrons and artists for whom the painting was intended first of all. Read More