Introduction
While there were many methods used in the 18th century to achieve revolution, art paintings played a significant role in expressing the people’s ideas and rallying support for the cause. Paintings served as a medium to communicate messages and emotions that words could not express, and they captured moments in time that would be otherwise forgotten. They also stirred up emotions and provoked thought, which was especially effective in getting people to take action. These arts included Breakfast Scene (1795), Death of Marat (1793), Liberty Leading the People (1830), Third of May (1808), and The Stone Breakers (1849). Each of these paintings depicts a critical moment leading up to a revolution.
Painting Revolution Inspiration
Third of May, depicted the execution by firing squad of Spanish rebels by French troops. The painting was controversial when it was first exhibited because it showed the brutal reality of war. Its impact was such that it is thought to have inspired the revolts against Napoleon’s rule in Europe during the early 1800s (Eitner, 2021). The Stone Breakers showed two workers breaking rocks on a roadside and was an allegory of the hard labor endured by the working class. The painting was seen as a protest against social conditions.
Breakfast Scene was a painting that depicted the poverty-stricken conditions of the lower classes in 18th century England. The painting was banned for public exhibition, as it was seen as a threat to the social order (Eitner, 2021). Death of Marat was a painting that commemorated the death of French revolutionary Jean-Paul Marat. The painting became an emblem of the French Revolution and helped to rally support for the revolution among the people. Liberty Leading the People painting depicts a scene from the revolution, with Liberty (a female figure) leading the people forward over the bodies of fallen monarchy troops.
Social Factors Influenced the Revolution
It is interesting to compare Hogarth’s Breakfast Scene and David’s Death of Marat. Both paintings depict a moment of intense drama and killing of a political figure (Eitner, 2021). Hogarth was born into a wealthy family and was able to study art in Italy. David, on the other hand, was born into poverty and had to work as an apprentice before becoming a successful artist. It is possible that this social difference may have influenced their portrayals of violence. Concerning Liberty Leading the People, the social factor that influenced the creation of this painting includes the July Revolution of 1830, in which King Charles X was overthrown and replaced by Louis-Philippe I (Carrier, 2020). Conversely, The Stone Breakers painting responded to the social upheaval of the time (Nicholson, 2019). On the other hand, the Third of May was influenced by Napoleon’s invasion of Spain in 1808, during which Spanish patriots rose against French troops.
Visual Characteristics and their Meanings
The visual characteristics of each painting contributed to its meaning in a very specific way. Hogarth’s painting is meant to depict the importance of a healthy breakfast, while David’s painting is meant to depict the horrors of the French Revolution (Carrier, 2020). Hogarth’s painting is full of bright colors and cheerful images, while David’s painting is dark and stark. Hogarth wanted people to see the importance of a good breakfast, while David wanted people to see the horrors of war.
Liberty Leading the People is a Romantic painting that celebrates the spirit of revolution. The central figure of Liberty is shown as a heroic and beautiful woman, leading the people forward over the bodies of the slain. Third of May is a Realist painting memorializing the Spanish uprising against Napoleon’s troops. The Stone Breakers is one of the most notable aspects of the painting as its use of color. The sky is a bright blue, while the earth is a muted brown (Nicholson, 2019). This juxtaposition creates a visual contrast that helps to emphasize the differences between those who work under the sun and those who work in the shade.
Paintings Impacts Today
Both Hogarth’s and David’s paintings depict scenes of violence that were shocking to their audience when they were first exhibited. However, although these scenes are now more than two hundred years old, they still shock and disturb viewers today (Carrier, 2020). This is because both Hogarth and David’s paintings managed to convey a message or moral lesson about the dangers of violence. While both Delacroix’s and Goya’s paintings depict a moment of violence and strife, they are ultimately about the triumph of liberty over tyranny. Delacroix’s painting is celebrated for its stirring depiction of the French people rising up against their oppressors. The Stone Breakers painting is still relevant to the audience today because it addresses the human condition. It shows two men breaking rocks, which could be interpreted as a metaphor for the hard work and dedication required to achieve something.
Conclusion
In conclusion, Breakfast Scene was a scathing satire of the poverty and inequality in 18th century London. The painting helped to galvanize the working class and inspired them to demand change. Conversely, Death of Marat conveyed the violence and chaos of the French Revolution to viewers across France, inspiring many to join the revolution. The painting, Liberty Leading the People, showed the people of France that they could fight and win against the monarchy. This gave them hope and rallied them together to fight for their freedom. The Stone Breakers painting was considered a scandal at the time because it showed people who were not considered worthy of being painted. This led to a change in how art was viewed and eventually led to the French Revolution. Moreover, The Third of May paintings captured the brutality of war and helped to fuel the Spanish Revolution.
References
Carrier, D. (2020). History painting and its changing subjects. History and Theory, 59(3), 471-481. Web.
Eitner, L. (2021). An outline of 19th century European painting: From David through Cézanne. Routledge. Web.
Nicholson, P. (2019). Gustave Courbet, The Grain Sifters, 1855. Occupational Medicine, 69(4), 230-246. Web.