A growing number of art institutions are exploring the questions of museums as mirror of our society and are forced to challenge their relationships with cultures, sources, ethics and collaborations. In this context, it is interesting to take a look at how the New York Guggenheim handled the sadly contemporary and historical topic of police brutality against people of color in their Basquiat “Defacement”, the untold story exhibition that took place in New York in 2019 and how the murder of a young African American affected Basquiat as a black artist.

Museums lately have been addressing the fact that through their history they haven’t presented the realities (or artifacts) about colonialism in a proper way. Today, they are attempting to repair their mistake by multiple means: decolonialization, repatriation, accountability, authentic interpretation, inclusive practices, diversity within the museum, community engagement, accessibility etc.… One solution to fulfill this sadly too new responsibility is for museums to collaborate with people from a particular culture when creating an exhibition and share 50% of the decision making (The Oakland Museum exhibition “Taking Native Lands and Lives” is a successful example of that collaboration).

Last November, the Guggenheim, for the first time in its history, hired a black curator, Chaédria LaBouvier to curate Basquiat “Defacement”, the untold story exhibition that highlights the death of young artist Michael Stewart at the hands of New York city transit police in 1983. The police officers at the time claimed that Stewart was caught tagging the subway and fell while trying to escape his arrest. Actually, according to doctors, Stewart arrived brain dead at the hospital and had hemorrhaged in a way that suggested he had been strangled. Despite the family, friends, and witnesses’ protests and contradicting claims, the case has remained unsettled, many years after a grand jury’s decision not to indict several officers.

The exhibition convayed how deeply the event affected the New York artistic community at the time and painter Jean Michel Basquiat in particular (who was of Puerto Rican and Haitian descent). Within the Guggenheim’s popular and crowded exhibition, visitors first walked through a number of Basquiat’s paintings that spoke of his search of identity and then transitioned to a table where some of Stewart’s beautiful artworks were, for the first time, exhibited (which couldn’t be associated with graffiti art despite what the police claimed at the time even to an untrained eye). The exhibition ended with a strong display of paintings also dealing with discrimination: notably a large Keith Haring and several paintings by Andy Warhol. Also, on view were multiple newspaper clippings and posters of the time that showed how the East Village community (including Madonna) was crying for truth.

The incontestable highlight of the show was Basquiat’s painting “Defacement” which he painted directly on his friend Keith Haring’s studio wall and which the curator claimed to be Basquiat’s most personal work and presented in the exhibition in a gilded frame (apparently Keith Haring cut it out and framed it this way to hung over his bed) .

The artwork is “raw;” one can tell that it was Basquiat’s immediate emotional response to the murder that just occurred. What instantly draws the viewer into the painting is its central black figure. It is a fragile silhouette, a hole. It is quiet, motionless, detached, undefined. The silhouette’s contours are blurred, the painterly brushstrokes of the artist create a sense of loneliness and isolation. The stillness and vulnerability of the black silhouette contrast violently with the two monumental colorful policemen that flank and overlook their victim on each side. Unlike the silhouette that is rendered with no limb, the policemen hold threatening sticks, hitting the silhouette with strength and cruelty. With the help of multiple painterly red and blue diagonals which are two primary colors and therefore intensify each other, the artist implies speed and violence of the movements. Both policemen are depicted with red/pink faces that translate their anger and are intensified by wide scary eyes. In the case of the left policemen the addition of fangs reveals his thirst for blood. The whole scene is set on the simple white background (Haring’s plaster wall) which allows the three figures and the force of the movements to hit the viewer violently in the foreground. This effect is reinforced by the fact that warm colors (the policemen) appear closer to the eye than cool colors (the victim and the white background).

There is a strong dichotomy in the painting, a tension between the inner and outer experience. The defenseless black silhouette seems detached and somehow already gone or ready to depart leaving behind a black stain on the ground that could be blood. On the silhouette’s head, Basquiat added what seems to be spiky dreadlocks, a distinctive symbol of his popular persona he had in common with the victim. The protuberant dreadlocks can also refer to the crown symbol that he loved depicting in his art to celebrate people he admired. In this case, Basquiat even added a halo to the victim’s head, symbol of holiness. This hair detail shows that the artist identified strongly with Stewart who was an acquaintance. This painting could be his self-portrait. Basquiat famously said “it could have been me” when he heard about the tragedy. Finally, the artist included the word DEFACEMENT above the scene like a title with question marks on each side (Spanish punctuation, maybe a nod to his Puerto Rican roots) challenging the police’s claim that the victim was actually tagging the subway station (defacement meant graffiti back then) and questionning if it was worth taking the life of a man for it.

While the exhibition presented research on an event and its context, it is somehow disappointing that it did not go further than that. It felt like a missed opportunity; a chance to tackle the question of the diaspora especially with the powerful Keith Haring “Michael Stewart — USA for Africa, 1985” painting that bore almost no explanation. The subject of Basquiat himself as a black artist evolving in a white art world was not mentioned which could also have lead to discuss “Defacement” framed in a gilded traditional frame. Finally the contemporary movement of “Black Lives Matter” was completely missing. When entering the exhibition, it was mentioned on a small sign that an exhibition playlist by composer and musician Jon Batiste could be found on the museum’s website but again this fell flat and like an afterthought so easy to be missed by the visitor.

Collaborating with a black curator and such powerful work of arts was a great opportunity to ask the difficult questions and for the museum to show courage and inspire other museums to follow.

However, Ms Labouvier might allude to why those questions were not raised in her exhibition in a New York Times article: “I didn’t want to make him into a myth, or make him into a sort of trauma-porn story either. And I thought the best way to do that was to take a step back and let him speak for himself.”

The curator seems to also point at the Guggenheim’s difficulty to move in a progressive direction “Ms. LaBouvier said that assembling the show, however, exposed fault lines that she attributed to the Guggenheim’s inexperience with black curators and their perspectives, especially with regard to nuances of black life and identity.” The current widespread protests around George Floyd’s killing reveal that the country is demanding radical change and museums if perceived as receptacle of our cultures might welcome and lead the transformation.

A story about art and motherhood…

It was summer 2018, after taking a semester in Renaissance art and writing a passionate essay on the famous Renaissance master Tintoretto, I convinced my husband to take our 2-year-old son and 5-year-old daughter to Italy. I never had the opportunity to travel there before so I was beyond excited to discover Florence and Rome and see for myself the greatest masterpieces of the Renaissance.

I carefully planned our itinerary and made sure that we wouldn’t miss anything from the Uffizi museum, the Accademia, the Vatican, the Santa Maria de Novella, the Villa Borghese, and more… I was engrossed by the art revolution the Renaissance represented in history. It seemed to me that all fundamental art concepts and techniques such as three dimensionality, shading techniques like Chiaroscuro, Sfumato and ground breaking impossible architectural achievements were all originating from this era. The Renaissance was to me the time where being a scientist, a mathematician and an artist was colliding at its epitome! The names of Brunelleschi, Da Vinci, Titian, Botticelli were all spinning in my head, I was going to see them all and was going to be the perfect guide to introduce all this beauty to my family.

Well, my 2-year-old got very patient (survived over three hours at the Uffizi) but at one point in our artistic journey fully lost it. While San Franciscans were always looking at his little blond head with beloved eyes, Italians were demanding silence in the churches and could not stand him running or talking. I also wasn’t warned that visiting the Sistine Chapel in the middle of July was never a good idea until it was too late, we were trapped in endless corridors like in a flock of cows, walking with hundreds of other visitors with no exit possible for hours. I was realizing that while I was indulging in all this splendor, I probably scared my children for life of museums.

It is in this state of despair that I entered the St Peter’s Basilica in Rome and saw the Pieta for the first time. She was behind a glass (which I learned later was the result of a previous attack by some fanatic) and a large human crowd stood between us. However, she rose above the distance and the heads, and I was immediately taken. I made my way towards her and as I’m writing these words, the emotion I felt then are crushing me again… I spent my fair share of time in front of art pieces in my life and I have been moved by many but this was different. I was overwhelmed at first sight, moved beyond words by the fragility of this mother carrying her dead son on her lap.

Michelangelo carved from the heavy marble the most fragile piece I ever seen, how this heavy material could give birth to such a delicate woman? The Madonna seemed so young to the extent that her son and her could be the same age; however, there is no mistake that the pain the viewer is witnessing is the one of a mother who lost a child. The Madonna, from early motherhood lived through an impossible predicament, she knew that her baby will one day be taken from her and suffer greatly and the Pieta is representing the moment where all this lifetime of fears and turmoil have become reality and it is beyond moving. The plasticity of the piece makes the scene realistic, the right hand of the young Marie is supporting her son under his armpit and one can see her delicate fingers pressing against his flesh.

It seems that Michelangelo purposefully made the Madonna larger than her son and by so not only highlighted her immense pain but also making her the tip of the pyramidal composition. The triangular composition was a famous technique introduced during the Renaissance (by artists like Da Vinci) and created a stability effect. In the Pieta (the only work Michelangelo ever signed), the triangle seems to seal mother and son and to ground them, the Madonna and her son become one and it is incredibly beautiful.

What also retained my attention was that she is not holding on to the young corpse tightly, he is more resting on her lap, her left hand is not holding on to him, it is turned towards the ceiling (heaven) so as to say: “here is my son”. There is a sense that the Madonna is letting go. Her face is also tilted down towards her son but her eyes seem closed and resigned. The artist masterfully rendered her garment (dress and headpiece) with intricated folds contrasting with the smoothness of her face. This contrast seems to echo the dichotomy between the turmoil of her pain and the peace she is experiencing. There is a strong sense of push and pull between these two emotions that simply got to me and that I will never forget.

I will simply quote here my dear professor Leslie Simon “the mother-child bond, that knowledge that ultimately what mothers do is give their children up to the world and their own destinies, and despite one’s tension, one’s anxiety, there is peacefulness in that knowledge.”

Seneb, the Royal Scribe is an Egyptian sculpture on display at the Legion of Honor Museum of San Francisco within the Ancient Art gallery and part of the “The Future of the Past: Mummies and Medicine” exhibition. The sculpture is eleveninches (27.6 cm) in height, is dated 1938–1850 BCE and is painted wood (probably sycamore). Its provenance is unclear but most likely coming from the Rock Tombs of Meir. Rock-cut tombs were burial chambers cut into a mountain where pharaohs and important court members were buried. Unlike the pyramids, these tombs were harder to find therefore limiting the chances of robbery. The sculpture represents a scribe in the style of the Middle Kingdom; while it retains strong characteristics from the Old Kingdom style it embraces a more naturalistic representation of the human form.

Scribes in Ancient Egypt were very important individuals, most of the knowledge gathered around Ancient Egypt comes from their work. They were trained at an early age to read and write very technical and complex hieroglyphic and hieratic language and they recorded the life of Egypt and Pharaohs. They were highly respected and held a valued position within the Egyptian society. Working closely with the Pharaoh they were part of the royal court.

Wooden statuettes such as this one were found in tombs often in proximity with the mommy of the person it represented. Egyptian believed in afterlife and sculptures portraying the deceased were placed in the tomb to help the Ka (self) to travel towards the afterlife ruled by Osiris (Lord of the underworld). The scribe is standing in an upright position, wears a simple white painted kilt while the rest of his body remains bare in a brown dark wood color. His left leg is thrust forward, his elongated arms and hands are hanging down alongside his body, and his elongated hears add to a sense of verticality and is typical to the 12th dynasty. He also has elongated bare feet walking towards afterlife on holy ground (materialized by a piece of wood).

The sculpture retains numerous traits from the Old Kingdom style, the scribe is walking towards the afterlife (arrested walk), it is very frontal, has an individualized face, his body is idealized and his clothes stay very geometrical, recto linear, his arms in particular seem very stiffed. These Old Kingdom artistic canons were meant to convey solidity, strength, stability and longevity of the pharaohs. However, in this case, the upper body of the sculpture is much more curvilinear, his shaved head and skin are very smooth, it has rounded chest and arms. The curves are amplified by the wood’s grain which creates a very sensual effect. The head, torso, and legs seem to be carved from a single piece of wood, while the arms and the base of the figure seem to come from another piece of wood.

While previous statues were very static, immobile in order to convey stability, this piece creates a lot of movement and lightness. There is a lot of negative space around the figure that also creates weightlessness, air flows between his arms, between his legs, even under his left foot, and around his body. In fact, the work is three dimensional and can be seen from all sides. There are also interesting details like his white painted nails and his belly button which wasn’t seen during the previous period. The face of the scribe is individualized, meaning that it looks like the actual person it portrays, it gazes forward ready to enter the afterlife. The roundness and curvilinear lines on the face create a peaceful effect, the scribe seems young and kind, one might even catch a smile on his mouth.

Seneb, the Royal Scribe, is a precious work of art as it introduces artistic innovation after centuries of unmoved conventional Egyptian style.

Exhibition at the San Francisco Museum of Modern Art (Floor 1, Roberts Family Gallery).

New technological advancements can have dramatic effects on society which can be analyzed through art history. While populations greatly benefit from these dramatic and fast-forwarding shifts, they can also create “left behinds” and isolation for a certain category of the society. Isolation has been observed by artists as a consequence of the first Industrial Revolution for instance which they documented depicting the sadness, the sense of immobility and the unfairness of the poorest as a result of modernism. Today, experts name the incredible development and impact of new technologies: The Fourth Industrial revolution (cell phone, artificial intelligence, internet, Virtual Reality, Augmented Reality, nanotechnologies, robotics etc…). Scientists and entrepreneurs are now foreseeing in a very near future (sometime less than a decade) a world without car, robots and algorithm evolution, some even talk about solving death[1]. There is no doubt that this exponential development of new technologies benefits humanity, improves quality of life, provides communication and commerce to developing countries but there is a growing concern that it also creates isolation, lack of interpersonal connection, loneliness and a great sense that some are benefiting more than others.

As a result, a growing gap seems to form not only between people and countries who can afford and engineer technologies and those who can’t but also between human beings themselves favoring the use of their cell phones to face to face encounters. In his book Homo Deus[2], writer Yuval Noah Harari states “those who miss this train (technology) will never get a second chance. In order to get a seat on it, you need to understand 21st century technology, and in particular the powers of biotechnology and computer algorithms. These powers are far more potent than steam and the telegraph, and they will not be used merely for the production of food, textiles, vehicles and weapons. The main products of the 21st century will be bodies, brains and minds, and the gap between who knows how to engineer bodies and brains and those who do not will be far bigger than the gap between Dicken’s Britain and the Mahdi’s Sudan.”

Contemporary artists and writers (as their 18th century predecessors did) document the current events and their consequences on civilizations but one particular artist aims at re-connecting people through his art and create a more inclusive experience for his audience and society. This French artist with the enigmatic name of JR is one of the most important contemporary street artist and activist of the time. Through his young and prolific career (he is only 35) he has managed to identify areas and categories of population deeply affected by isolation, sometime even fully forgotten by the rest of the world. Through his worldwide and provocative projects, JR not only shines a new light on these populations but also tries to re-connect them with the head of the wagon. Through his groundbreaking project series, JR has created new conversations between borders (between Mexico and US, Israel and Palestine), between the French outskirts (banlieues) and Paris, between a Mayor and outlaws, between abandoned slum mothers in Brazil and the media, between countryside and cities, between art and people not exposed to art, between generations … and more. JR sees art as a powerful mean to create awareness and change perceptions. In 2018 for the first time, he decided to set camp in the heart of a city famous for its tremendous impact on new technologies (home of the world biggest startups), its liberalism, and its homelessness: San Francisco. The results of his work, a unique and groundbreaking mural entitled JR The Chronicles of San Francisco will be opening at the SFMOMA on May the 23rd 2019 and is promising to portray the city like never before and to connect people in a unprecedented manner.

A parallel can be made between JR’s artistic ambitions and the artists of the 19th century who witnessed the birth of trains, railroads, industrial automatization as well as the renovation of Paris by Haussmann. These artists were part of a new art movement called “Realism”. While previous art movements such as Romanticism and Neo-Classicism embraced idealized academic beauty, exoticism and passion within art, Realist painters decided to showcase life as it was without embellishment. For the first time, painters portrayed real people in their everyday life (the peasants, the workers, the laundresses etc.…) and shed a new light on them, depicting them with pride and dignity. Realists were also influenced by Naturalist authors like Emile Zola who in his novels (l’Assommoir (1877), Au Bonheur des Dames (1883)for example) described the hardship of Parisian workers and conveyed the emergence of a social conscience (which was a huge departure from Romantism and Neo Classicism).

However, this new art movement was received with much uproar and indignation by the critics and was a true scandal at the time. Such “Grand Manner” and historical portraits (the highest style of art in academic theory) were traditionally reserved for important people of the society, aristocrats and leaders. The French Royal Academy of Art (ruled by classical aesthetics) rejected most of the Realists’ paintings submitted to its Salon which lead some artists like Gustave Courbet to create his own personal exhibition: “Le Pavillon du Realisme” in 1855 alongsidethe official Salon of the Academy. Later in 1863, the Academy rejected so many paintings (3,000 pieces rejected out of 5,000 submissions) for its Salon that Napoleon III created the famous “Salon des Refusés” or “Salon of the Rejected” which was an immediate success. However, it was such a departure from academic canons that it created much scandal and even physical fights in front of paintings such as Le Dejeuner sur l’Herbe by Edouard Manet (1862). These controversial salons were important because it meant the opening of a new door towards modernism which saw the birth of the Impressionist movement.

Very much like the moderns, JR’s early career as a street artist embodied a fresh departure from what it meant to go to museums as JR took control of his own art exhibition and distribution. In 2001, for one of his first campaigns called Expo 2 Rue(Fig.1) or Sidewalk Gallery, JR simulated museum walls on the street of Paris spraying paint in the shape of art frames and illegally pasting black and white paper portraits of his friends from the “banlieues” (outskirts of Paris) printed with the use of a simple Xerox machine. Overtime with the weather conditions, the paper portraits would disappear but the frames remained, creating a new type of artwork and leaving the artist’s trace behind (Fig.2) as to say “I was here”. These marks are like artists’ signatures and can be traced back to the Paleolithic era, where the first cave artists left hand prints as to inform future generations of their presence in the world and consciousness of humanity. JR’s first street campaign was groundbreaking on many levels. First, it allowed JR to find a new way to showcase and promote his work and democratized access to art. Parisians were able to enjoy art without going to a regular museum and pay a fee. JR was able to exhibit his work outside of the highly criticized gallery and museum circles. He evidently did not sell any artwork but he certainly received a lot of attention and was able to launch his career. Second, it stressed philosophical art questions such as the longevity of a piece of art, its place within society, its purpose, its intent, its decaying and ephemeral aspect, etc.

These questions have tormented artists, scholars and art critics for ages. For instance, Realist Artist Gustave Courbet was influenced by his friend Charles Baudelaire (poet, art critic and philosopher) who urged him to convey the heroism of the modern life in his work, which he did by portraying workers and rural people from his village of Ornans and by portraying them with pride and dignity.

When confronted to Courbet’s The Stone Breakers(Fig 3) for the first time, critics of the time said that the artist chose and depicted ugliness. Baudelaire anticipated the scandal such a painting would produce in an article published on September the 21st, 1850 where he described Courbet’s painting as “domestic scenes as large as history paintings” and claimed that Courbet understood that art had entered a new era where paintings no longer would misguide future generations on the reality of their time[3]. Baudelaire stated “The era of Plumets is over, many are regretting Van Dyck’s garments, but Mr Courbet has understood that paintings can’t mislead future centuries on our true garment”. However, Courbet was not simply painting reality he was opening the door with Baudelaire to Modernism and what will be studied later as the philosophical concept of “reality of painting”.

So, the Realists defied the Academy’s established categories of painting and elevated regular and poor people to new ranks reserved until now to the aristocracy. Similarly, JR decided to elevate women from isolated regions to new status in his project “Women are Heroes” which was also the subject of JR’s first movie. Started in the slums of Brazil in 2008, the project was later extended to Sierra Leone, Liberia, Kenya, India, Cambodia, and France (le Havre) and paid tribute to women who are the true heroes of our societies, but are victims of abuse, war, political or religious fanaticism. The slums of Rio de Janeiro are the epitomes of isolation, often fully cut from the rest of the world, inhabitants are struggling to survive. At 26-years-old, JR and his team traveled to Favela Morro da Providencia and met with these women, got to know them and heard their stories, stories of dead children victims of gun violence. He gained their trust and photographed their faces. Working in difficult conditions, with steep hills and unsteady buildings JR covered the entire slum with these women’ eyes (Fig. 4 and 5). These gigantic black and white photographs of worried, harsh, questioning, sad, proud gazes covered the whole hill almost overnight, visible from far away. The media then wondered what was happening and tried to get in touch with JR who offered no explanation and promptly directed them to talk directly to the women from the slum. Brilliantly, as did the Realists, JR gave these women the treatment they deserved on a piece of art (they were depicted in a monumental and powerful way) but also as human beings by giving them a voice. Finally, media paid attention to their predicament and JR managed to restore a dialogue that was broken between the slum and the city. But more than anything, just like he did at the beginning of his career in the street of Paris, JR brought art in places where art didn’t have a place to exist and where people had never been exposed to art.

JR, by introducing art in these remote places raises the philosophical question of the purpose of art and what it means to be exposed or not exposed to it. It’s a vast question and scholars like anthropologist Claude Lévi-Strauss[4]have tried to establish definitions of what visual arts’ purposes are, from expression of imagination, to healing purposes, to propaganda, to social change, to legacy to future generations, to historical trace of our civilizations and more… JR seems to think that the purpose of art is to produce thinking and change perceptions. His entire body of work aims at proving it. But just like Strauss’s stated “The wise man doesn’t give the right answers, he poses the right questions” JR seems to want to raise ethical and philosophical questions and let the direct stakeholders answer them. While it is not new for an artist to travel the world to report on oversees situations; French Neoclassic painter Antoine-Jean Gros, for example, traveled with Napoleon Bonaparte during his military campaigns and was instrumental to Bonaparte’s propaganda. In contrast, JR vigorously refuses any corporate sponsorship or political affiliation.

From the beginning of his carrier JR seems to want to create art on his own terms and disrupt the establishment. First of all, as a street artist, most of his projects were executed without legal and city approvals which obliged him and this team to operate illegally. Understanding that getting authorities’ approvals would undermined the projects’ viability from inception, he acted at night or sometimes even in broad daylight to avoid suspicion. From these early years, he kept loyal to his black sunglasses and his enigmatic name making him a hero of modern times but also a symbol of the isolated Parisian “banlieues”. Proclaiming himself as an activist, now a mature artist, he is able to bring subject matter to the forefront of the media scene and recently created a cover for Time magazine (Fig 6) where he united 245 people from both sides of the American gun control debate within the same room (magazine cover). While as a youngster he created street museums walls outside the usual museums circuit, he now works with iconic museums such as the Louvre. He twice created spectacular Trompe l’Oeil for the prestigious museum and revealed his latest installation on March 29th 2019 for the museum’s pyramid 30th anniversary (Fig 7). With the help of over 400 volunteers he created a gigantic black and white paper collage of 2,000 pieces of paper. The work of art created the illusion that the Louvre’s iconic glass pyramid raised dramatically from the earth’s entrails. Immediately, visitors came and walked on the installation itself which was destroyed in less than 24 hours. Again, by doing so, JR pushes his audience to think about the nature of art, its longevity and purpose. Interestingly, in JR’s beautiful book Can Art Change the World?published in 2015 a reader would find a simple paper insert with the following bold headline: “Art is not supposed to change the world, but to change perceptions, art can change the way we see the world.” Signed by JR. The fragile insert appears to be JR’s direct answer to the question posed by the impressive heavy coffee table book.

In 2017, in his documentary Faces Places, JR and famous film maker and friend Agnes Varda (recently deceased) documented their intergenerational beautiful friendship (she was 90) and their journey through France’s countryside. During months, they went and meet the people who work in areas that are economically struggling and painted them in a new light, celebrating their heritage and pride. They pasted their monumental faces and bodies on homes, factory walls, ship containers, war bunkers etc…The results were visually stunning and the reaction of the sitters extremely moving. Coal miners, farmers, bell ringers, mailmen, dock workers are often forgotten by our society, sometimes their work (once so important) has become irrelevant, and to be elevated to new peaks and simply being seen and acknowledged on such a scale thanks to art is moving, often reducing people to tears. Loneliness is omni present during the documentary, a farmer uses the term “asocial” to describe his life, stating that a farm like his would have hired dozens of workers in the past but today, due to the use of machinery, he is alone all day on his tractor (fig 8.).

Even the most active supporters or creators of new technologies are recognizing its ill-effects on human relationships. Mark Benioff, the Salesforce founder has been quoted saying “Technology has addictive qualities that we have to address”. Evan Spiegel, the Snapchat founder was also quoted saying “the combination of social and media has yielded incredible business results but has undermined our relationships”.

Other contemporary artists have tackled the subject of loneliness in modern times. Famous Performance Art artist Marina Abramovic through her very emotional performance The Artist is Present[5]at the New York MOMA in 2010 revealed people’s extreme loneliness and intrinsic need to connect. In a large white room which contained only two facing chairs with a small table in between, she invited visitors to sit down and gaze at her without talking. The performance was a tremendous success, during three months, people of all kinds and ages started to line up to get the opportunity to sit and gaze into the artist’s eyes. What happened was one of the most emotional performances involving an audience, numerous people were simply crying, overwhelmed by emotions. The simple fact to be looked at, to connect with another human being through the eyes in silence, to be fully present seems to have touch people’s souls. Abramovic also speaks about the experience as an inner experience; in that room, with cameras and the audience watching, the person sitting in the chair staring into the artist’s eyes had nowhere to go, nowhere to escape and was forced to explore his/her inner self.

On May 23rd 2019, JR will unveil a groundbreaking mural that he claims will attempt to imagine and depict a whole city through art. The mural will be placed in the free section of the SF MOMA (Floor 1, Roberts Family Gallery) which means that everyone will be able to access it. As in all JR’s body of work, this installation appears like a gift to the people he portrays. The artist seems to say to the sitters “you trusted me and here is my gift to you”. The free access to the mural fits within JR’s ambition to democratize art by making it accessible to a wide audience and to expose people to art who usually aren’t visiting museums.

There is a great sense of “push” and “pull” in JR’s work. He pushes and imposes monumental images on people, there is simply not a chance to not be exposed to a JR’s installation when passing by, it is so extraordinary that it is unavoidable. Thanks to JR, art is for the first time entering uncharted territories, getting into the most improbable places without warning or authorizations. It becomes almost organic, like a vine that would have grown overnight on an old house’s wall.

At the same time JR’s art pulls people into places like museums where they might not usually enter. He pulls people into conversations they would have never had and forces the dialogue. During his talk at the event Night of Ideason February 2nd, 2019 in San Francisco, JR said that he hoped all Chronicles of San Francisco mural participants would visit the free exhibition, search and find themselves within the mural and to have others recognize them triggering conversations between complete strangers.

San Francisco also has a long history of murals, one if his most famous representative being Diego Rivera whose murals from 1931 inspired JR. Diego Rivera was himself very much a socialist, he loved the idea of new technologies building a more inclusive and just society. The study of JR’s career shows a similar attitude and vision of the world and he refers to Rivera by portraying a man dressed as Frida Kahlo in his Chronicles of San Francisco mural.

JR, The Chronicles of San Francisco installation is revolutionary on many levels. First, on a technical level, the mural is actually a video featuring over 1,200 people portrayed moving in slow motion. Each individual remains in its place but faintly rotates, moves or makes a slow gesture. As if a moving mural was not a technological breakthrough in itself, JR announced that he actually interviewed each individual and that the museum visitors will be able to listen and watch the interviews with the use of an application on their cellphone. This will give, for the first time in art history, the sitter of an artwork a voice. Who hasn’t wished to listen to the Mona Lisa, to hear directly from her whether she is happy, or sad, or sick? to answer those questions that have tormented and still torment scholars to this day. And what better a place than San Francisco, the heart of the world best innovations and technological advancements to introduce such a disruptive work of art.

But JR’s work is also groundbreaking in its technique. Ever since the Italian Renaissance and the artist Brunelleschi, painters have aimed at creating depth and perspective within their artwork. They consciously decided to guide the eye of the viewer within their compositions using colors, linear perspective, diminutive perspective, sfumato, subject size, cropping, overlapping, lighting effects etc… while JR still retains some of these techniques in his work, he clearly makes the decision to ignore others to create a truly innovative artistic direction. By using Black and White for example, colors don’t attract or lead the viewer’s eye through the artwork. Through color, usually the artist is able to tell the viewer’s eye where to look first and create a hierarchy of important elements within the composition, color is a tool that helps create focus. By choosing black and white, all subjects of JR’s artwork are made equal. Light has a similar purpose in art, it helps guide the viewer’s eye within an art piece. But in his mobile truck studio (Fig 9), JR has total control of the light conditions and invites each of his sitters to pose in front of a green screen and everyone is shot in the exact same light exposure, once again making them equal. But if JR controls the light, colors and composition of his artwork, he doesn’t control his sitters’ behaviors. JR doesn’t direct the individuals who voluntarily entered his studio, he tells them that they can pose in any manner they wish (and in the video they can talk about any subject for as long or short as they want). This freedom and lack of control may lead to a true representation of the city.

Thanks to JR’s artistic technique people in the mural are made equal. The Governor and former San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom for example is not depicted in a larger manner or more colorful than the homeless, no special light effect is shone on him. The audience’s eye will be free to travel around the mural with no such direction. JR also intends to not only unite these two people on the mural but also in real life as they both will be invited and celebrated (and probably meet for the first time) at the opening of the mural in the museum among the thousands other individuals who participated in the project alongside the visitors.

What strikes the audience when viewing JR, The Chronicles of San Francisco mural forthe first time (beside its monumental scale, the mural is 120 feet long) is the overwhelming and lively ocean of people descending like a powerful wave over the city of San Francisco. This human wave is made of 1,206 individuals who each lives in the city and who volunteered to meet JR in his mobile studio in 2018 and pose for the mural. This oceanic analogy (the wave) can be useful to describe the mural as it provides the reader with a sense of rhythm, harmony, dynamism and also provides a narrative to the overall composition.

The mural’s background is populated with well-known San Francisco landmarks, with iconic old Victorian homes flanking the mural on each side operating like “repoussoirs” or “parenthesis”, keeping the eye of the viewer within the artwork itself. This “repoussoir” effect is echoed by the first crowd of people located on the far left of the mural who look towards the right and the crowd of people at the end of the mural (on its far right) who look towards the left.

If the viewer’s eye starts to explore the mural as a narrative and start from its left it will therefore look at these century old homes and then travel through the more modern downtown skyscrapers and then end back on the Victorian homes again on the far right of the mural. The mural can be read as the historical tale of the city with its highs and lows, strength and weaknesses.

The first crowd that could embody the beginning of the narrative or the source of the wave high on the far left is made of a hundred of faces, appearing not unlike a school of fish or bubbles about to pour like water into the city’s first steep street. It seems relevant to read that first group of people as the beginning of the narrative because at the bottom of the crowd, one can spot a woman on a rolling bed who just delivered a baby with a doctor happily showing the newborn to her (Fig. 10). This new mother represents the beginning of the story and creates a link between the initial crowd and what comes next.

After channeling through the birth of the baby, the wave of humanity is accelerating and pouring onto a second scene. The speed of the wave is symbolized by the steep street and a group of runners that create movement and lead the eye towards the right. Now the wave has hit the ground of the mural, the people are no longer facing the same direction (some are facing the viewer, or turning their back to the viewer or facing against the current) very much like the bottom of a waterfall would behave in a splash or gush of water. Some people on top of the wave are holding blankets above their heads creating triangles like small surfs. One of the Victorian houses has caught on fire and firefighters are climbing into a dark smoke which could be the foam of the wave. This scene seems to represent the turmoil the city faces with numerous homeless paving the bottom of the sea, a police officer trying to help, a Silicon Valley entrepreneur (Michael Birch) pointing at his own head as if trying to think how to resolve the mess (Fig.11), homeless people in heavy wheelchairs are looking up but are stuck to the bottom, a bunch of police officers seem completely disheartened or clueless as of how to contain this mess.

This water metaphor seems to work as a little bit later the viewer’s eye is being pulled into a garage’s open door where swimmers are stroking in the same direction like in a fish tank (reference to the people who swim daily in the icy-cold bay water). Like a wave, the eye moves up and down the mural. At time, the gushing human wave seems to slow down, like a river changing its course and becomes quieter when the stream meets a group of people hugging each other tenderly. The watercourse seems to stop when encountering an obstacle represented by a newspaper stand for example (Fig. 12) which is square and static forming like a boulder in a river with the flow of the crowd running around it. But the quiet flow accelerates suddenly again meeting a crowd of people protesting vigorously with signs.

The mural can also be read as a melody, or a symphony, sometimes peaceful sometimes very loud (the group of protestors appears noisy against the nearby quiet group of huggers). The sound level reaches new heights with the tip of the wave and then goes low with the wave going down. The lyrical aspect is reinforced throughout the mural by the presence of numerous instruments and singers. After the noisy demonstration the wave falls down into an old-fashioned open theatre where artists perform on stage and the crowd listens or cheers in the foreground. The scene is highly participative as the viewer becomes part of the theatre’s audience. Except for a couple of individuals, the audience turns its back to the viewer, allowing the viewer to enter the scene. There is also a person filming the show and slowly turning and pointing the camera towards the viewer, pulling the viewer into the artwork.

In this “theatre scene” one of the individuals in the foreground attracts the viewer’s attention as he is not behaving like the rest of the crowd and is not looking at the stage like everyone else. The person can easily be identified as the street artist Fnnch (Fig. 13)as he is kneeling to the ground painting one of his iconic honey bear bottles onto a canvas. Fnnch has recently been painting these recognizable bottles all over the city making a political statement. Fnnch states “The bears were inspired by things children want to be when they grow up, like firefighters, artists and astronauts. […] The mural (Fnnch Mural) is intended to support children and their dreams, regardless of their origin and background. There is an incredible amount of nativism in this country and, to a shocking degree, in this city”.

JR seems to echo his fellow street artist by appearing on stage with a broom (Fig. 14). For the untrained viewer he just appears to sweep the floor. However, JR had made comments in his movies that people think of him as a photographer when most of his time is spent on scaffolders pasting pictures on walls with his broom. It is interesting that the artist decided to portrayed himself in this manner, he seems to ask the viewer whether images can be deceitful (is he sweeping floors or pasting art?). JR also portrayed himself a second time within the mural, this time pasting on the wall of a house.

After the “theatre scene”, the human river continues its flow and goes back up to meet the Golden Gate Bridge which seems to open the door to the modern and progressive aspect of the city symbolized in the background by skyscrapers and among the crowd by the presence of entrepreneurs of Silicon Valley. It is in this panel that the viewer can identify politicians, engineers, but also the famous writer and LGBT activist Armistead Maupin for example, who seems a bit defeated looking down alone in the crowd (Fig. 15), a unicorn (symbol of successful startups but also of fairytales), a famous basketball player, people exercising etc… this is also where the artist makes a statement on technology creating isolation, showcasing crowds of people fully absorbed on their laptop or taking selfies without connecting to one another (Fig.16). A woman is even wearing a VR device on her head completely absorbed and lost in a virtual world while another woman standing next to her holds a sign “I am here” (Fig 17).

Finally, the human wave seems to violently crash onto the last Victorian home (like onto cliff) with everything the city has to offer in term of performance art, from ballet (symbolized by famous French ballerina Mathilde Froustey of the San Francisco Ballet and two little girls mimicking her) Chinese dragon dance, tribal dance, Japanese drums and a group of little kids attentively listening to their professor (Fig 18).This powerful end of the human wave crashing onto the house looks like rumbles which could be caused by an earthquake, maybe the artist’s reminder that the city is always at risk.

The artist’s challenge of portraying accurately a city seems to be a success. In this one space he is able to represent the city various religious communities. In some areas he even seems to ask the viewer if the answer to turmoil is praying or texting? He touched upon lovein all its forms (family hugging, gay couple kissing, dog lovers etc…). he showcases the connection, disconnection dichotomy of the city by portraying people engaging with each other (arguing, smiling at each other) and others completely alone. JR also reflects on the city as a society in what is beautiful and ugly. A person is getting a Botox injection, another is smoking pot, homelessness, someone is getting a tatoo screaming among an army of indifferent people typing on their laptops. Grave matters such as firemen handling a fire moving into the dark smoke (leaving the viewer wondering if they will come back) are juxtaposed against frivolity (with a man impersonating a king with his wacky court on a balcony oblivious of the fire).

The artist’s intent is also to display hope, with people looking up towards a brilliant future, a pregnant woman, people caring for one another, children being cared for by their families and being inspired by adults like this little girl (Aliyah Moore) dressed up in her basketball outfit throwing a ball from one side of the mural to famous basketball player on the other side of the mural. The ball is animated and creates a beautiful bridge between both generations and again this device keeps the viewer in and holds the composition together. Hope is also displayed within the numerous protests that highlight the city political force and its influence within the country, a city that historically is progressive that doesn’t give in and will rebel against attacks on human rights.

The theme of isolation is constant within the artwork. Many individuals within the mass are unaware of one another, poverty and desolation are depicted through the presence of numerous homeless people looking down while everyone else is looking up towards the future. The viewer is also able to enter the intimacy of people’s homes through their windows and as a voyeur would do watch people’s loneliness or family in disarray looking worried and in despair (Fig 19 and 20).

If JR’s intent is to seek the truth when depicting this city by exposing its inhabitants in a very raw manner by letting them show to the viewer how they want to be perceived, he still retains control over the composition. By arbitrarily placing an individual next to another, the artist seems to make a statement and ask the viewer to think. By doing so, the artist brilliantly exposes the numerous talents and opportunities the city has to offer but also its majors challenges, extremes and lack of cohesion. The term “horror Vacuii” (fear of empty spaces) comes to mind when looking at the mural, every inch of the mural is overwhelmingly covered with details and the flow of information is such that there is nowhere for the eye to escape. Again, there is a sense of dichotomy in JR’s work, on one hand, the mural is very hopeful and joyful (especially when it comes to the young children, the art performances and education) but at the same time it is suffocating, chaotic and at times uncomfortable which could represent what the city is all about today. What remains is that each of the 1200 individuals were photographed on their own with their physical features (color of skin, age, etc…) and personal beliefs but somehow the artist managed to group them all together in a very harmonious composition as if to say that despite their differences they are all part of a same world, a same city, part of the problem but also part of the solution.

[2]Homo Deus: A Brief History of Tomorrow, byYuval Noah Harari, 2015

[3]Baudelaire et la painture realiste byYoshio Abe, Cahier de l’AIEF 1966

[4]Look, Listen, Read by Claude Levi Strauss, 1997

[5]Marina Abramovic The Artist is Present, New York MOMA, 2010

A huge thank you to Diana Scott for being a wonderful mentor

Madonna and Child (Fig 0) is an oil on canvas painting by Jacopo Robusti, (Tintoretto) from 1570–72 that can be viewed in the permanent collection of the Legion of Honor Museum of San Francisco. Tintoretto was a prominent Venetian Renaissance Master and Madonna and Child is a perfect illustration of his talent, his particular sensitivity, innovative style, and technique. Some aspects of Tintoretto’s life and work remain a mystery for scholars and are at the heart of numerous past and current debates. Many paintings originally attributed to him are now challenged by contemporary critics. In contrary, curators like Roland Krischel[1] just announced in March 2018 during the Paris Exhibit dedicated to Tintoretto’s early carrier, Tintoret. Naissance d’un génie that some work that was attributed to others are now believed to be his. Some inconsistence in quality led some to think that parts of certain paintings could be attributed to his numerous assistants. Renaissance critics like Giorgio Vasari were exasperated by his radical lack of finish “non-finito” and his irreverent attitude towards the established art canons of the time. However, his incommensurable energy, his blazing bravura brushstrokes, free handling of paint, his unique treatment of light and the new emotion his work conveys will influence and move major painters and art movements for the centuries to come. For Baroque painter Rubens, Romantic Delacroix, Impressionists and Cubist Picasso and even French writer Jean-Paul Sartre, Tintoretto opened the path to modernism. Tintoretto’s capacity for innovation and groundbreaking new approach were born from his own fiery personality and immeasurable ambition, his years of formation and social status, his rivalry with contemporary masters Titian, Veronese, and the political and social changes in Italy at the time. He is celebrated as one of the last geniuses of the prolific period of the Italian Renaissance, yet he broke many of the rules his predecessors established.

It is near impossible to discuss Tintoretto’s life and work without examining the tremendous influence of his older rival Titian, though scholars are not in agreement with the actual nature of the influence itself. When Tintoretto was only a teenager, Titian was the indisputable master of Venice and leader of the Venetian Renaissance. He was the artistic authority, internationally admired and respected. And, thanks to earlier High Renaissance painters such as Leonardo da Vinci, painters were now perceived as true geniuses (not merely artisans). Humanists scholars and patrons adopted Plato’s views on artists’ creations being guided by Muses, instruments of the Divine. Tintoretto’s father recognized his son’s talent and brought him to Titian’s workshop. According to the legend, young Tintoretto stayed only for few days and was rejected by Titian. Some believe that the older master recognized immediately Tintoretto’s gift and got jealous; others believe that Tintoretto’s style and attitude was such a departure from Titian’s that he would have not been able to work within the Master’s style. Finally, others think that Tintoretto himself decided to quit not enjoying the studio’s discipline. The reasons for his departure remain unknown but what seems certain is that this episode had a tremendous impact on the artist. It seems that Tintoretto while admiring Titian (especially his handling of color) will spend his lifetime to enfranchise himself from him. According to Tom Nichols[2], he sought early on to identify himself less with the sensual naturalism of Titian than with the intellectual and sculptural values of central Italy. Nichols also suggests that Titian’s disdain may have been enough to delay his breakthrough with higher ranking Venetian patrons. Titian even intervened in some competitions in order to exclude Tintoretto, and mediated in favor of his protégé Veronese. It was indeed the case in 1560, when Veronese painted the philosophers Plato and Aristotle for the library of San Marco while Tintoretto was barred from participating. But Tintoretto became quickly a fierce competitor to reckon with: Titian would work very slowly, making his patrons lavishly spend huge amounts of money in order to obtain a “Titian”. In contrary, Tintoretto would work quickly and ask his patrons to pay whatever they wanted or nothing, making him a serious threat to Titian’s business.

The difference between Tintoretto’s esthetic approach and Titian’s is very evident in particular paintings like The Last Supper (Fig 1.). While Titian’s depiction of the subject (Fig 2) is very classical, not dissimilar to the one’s of Leonardo da Vinci, with a very balanced composition; Tintoretto “translated the scene from the abstract classicized environment preferred by Titian into a believable “earthly” space.”[3]. Tintoretto breaks through the Renaissance classical rules by creating deeper emotions, portraying religious saints more connected to the common people, playing with new points of view and modifying the composition from the classical pyramid to a complex and asymmetrical composition using intense diagonals and light to create drama. In the Last Supper, he uses elements of the artisan’s life and give the Apostles the look of Venetian townsmen of the lower class. The effect is striking as the scene depicted is infused with passion and drama and the viewer at the time would relate to the protagonists in a deeper manner than to previous detached religious subjects of the early Renaissance.

While young artists and newcomers such as Veronese, paid homage to Titian, showing respect and deference to the older Master, Tintoretto was aggressively defying him in paintings like the Presentation of the Virgin in the Temple. Tintoretto seems to deliberately use some of Titian’s favored gold and red color palette to call for the Master’s attention but then introduces a dramatic twist in his composition to boldly provoke Titian and to demonstrate the limits of his reach. “In contrast to the static, self-contained horizontality of Titian’s composition, Tintoretto constructs an image of vertiginous verticality, realized through the use of a plunging dal sotto in su perspective which violently pulls the viewer into the picture space.”[4]

One of the reasons why Tintoretto tended to make his paintings much more “participative” and intimate than the previous Renaissance Italian masters might be due to the Catholic Counter-Reformation that began with the Council of Trent (1545–1563). The Catholic church is then attempting to “counter-reform” the Protestant faith initiated by Martin Luther who declared (with reasons) Catholics to be corrupted. As a result, the new Catholic order aims at demonstrating that it is now fully focusing on the devotional life and on a personal relationship with Christ. The Catholic religion is no longer depicted as an exclusive heavenly matter with detached enthroned Madonna’s but with saints portrayed down to earth and close to the people. Paintings are highlighting the human character of Christ and his suffering to create compassion and emotion. The religious reform also afforded the poor a new profile within Venetian culture and Tintoretto definitely felt compelled to depict the notion of sacred poverty in his work. He viewed himself as the modest “little dyer” (he was the son of a cloth dyer “tintori” from which his name derived) in contrast with the powerful high-ranking figure of Titian. He identified himself with the Venice lower class and famously worked for free or to simply cover his material cost and did not appreciate money.

Another strong influence on Venetian artists at the time were the powerful “Scuole”, religious associations governed by lay officials; their purpose was to offer assistance both spiritual and material, to their members. These influential and wealthy brotherhoods spread widely in mid-sixteenth century and their members came from all social classes[5]. Via competitions, the Scuole were helping artists to emerge, and their vast halls were ideal spaces for “grande machine” canvases such as the ones Tintoretto was a master at producing.

But the combination of strong criticism from his contemporary critics (Giorgio Vasari judged that Tintoretto’s activities had made a “joke of art”[6]) in addition to the rejection at an early age from Titian had grave consequences on Tintoretto’s professional career. It indeed threatened “to make him a kind of artistic orphan in his own city”[7]. Tintoretto would struggle to win commissions from patrons and powerful Scuole and impose himself as a true Master. However, Titian’s disdain did not affect his tremendous ambition and may even have fueled his thirst for success. In order to break through these obstacles, Tintoretto resorted in 1560 to execute two paintings for the Madonna Dell’Orto church for free to secure the bid. Again, in 1564, to win the Scuola Grande Di San Rocco commission, he surprised everyone competing by presenting a finished painting and positioned the canvas in its intended place while other contenders (including Veronese) presented merely sketches of their project. While these daring tactics created an uproar from his fellow competitors and from the commissioners who were scandalously claiming the stratagem illegal; they had no choice but to accept his work presented as a donation (the Scuole could not refuse a gift to its saint). Tintoretto succeeded with the help of some Scuole brothers sympathetic to his cause, and his case would have been helped by the fact that as many as 25 per cent of the brothers were cloth dyers like his father. In 1565, he was finally admitted to the confraternity and became the official painter of San Rocco where he worked for over twenty years (1564–1588) and painted more than sixty canvases. Some critics have gone so far as to suggest that this work is Venice’s equivalent to Rome’s Michelangelo and the Sistine Chapel. His most renowned works are to be found in the Sala dell’Albergo and the Sala Superiore. All the works in the building are by him, or his assistants, including his son Domenico.

Madonna and Child may have been painted at the same time for the Scuole and may be an inspiration for a later painting. Indeed, the Madonna’s facial traits, her veil, garment, and the presence of wheat in Madonna and Child present similarities with the ones of the Madonna depicted in The Adoration of the Shepherds painting (Fig 3) displayed on the east wall of the chapter room in the Scuola San Rocco and is dated 1578 so about eight years later. The Scuole also had an important impact on Tintoretto’s personal life, as in 1550 he married Faustina de Vescovi, daughter of a Venetian nobleman who was the Guardian Grande of the Scuola Grande di San Marco.

The early rejection from the local establishment may also have influenced Tintoretto to look elsewhere for inspiration and compelled him to reject the Venetian tradition itself.

It is known that Tintoretto did not travel much during his lifetime but nevertheless, early on, he was exposed to art imported into Venice and started to collect small copies of casts done after Michelangelo’s work. He was fascinated by the muscular splendor and plasticity of the Master’s sculptures and made frequent references to Michelangelo in his fresco work (Tintoretto was the most prolific painter of façade frescoes in mid-cinquecento Venice)[8]. He owned numerous casts including one of the Belvedere torso from antiquity, which Tintoretto studied intensively and practiced form and foreshortening. “The illusion of plasticity was what Tintoretto sought. He was no longer content with the traditional two-dimensional style of the Venetian school; he wanted the effect of the full round Figure”[9]

In Madonna and Child, these multiple influences come to life. It is the delicateness of the young sitter that first strikes the viewer. A far cry from previous sacred representations of the Virgin and Christ, the young Madonna depicted seems to be very fragile almost adolescent (the halo around her head barely visible) she could be any young mother entertaining her baby in a very intimate moment. The viewer can immediately relate to her, feel the emotion, the simple tenderness and immeasurable love between a mother and her baby. The Madonna is monumental, her full body is in the foreground and creates a strong vertiginous diagonal on the entire picture plane with her head located at the upper right of the canvas and her feet placed at the lower left end of the canvas. She is casually seated on a stack of hay, her upper body reclined towards her baby resting near her on her scattered dress, she has placed her left arm around his body as if to prevent him from falling and to keep him secure and warm. Her body is elongated in the Mannerist style and is twisted in a curvilinear “figura serpentinata” position. Where High Renaissance art emphasized proportion, balance, and ideal beauty, Mannerism exaggerates such qualities, often resulting in compositions that are asymmetrical or unnaturally elegant. Her delicate fingers are holding gracefully thin strings of hay which she agitates in front of her baby’s eyes to entertain him. She is casually playing with him like any mother would do to sooth an infant, to stimulate and to create a motherly bond.

The baby’s blue eyes are attentively gazing at the makeshift toy, he has round rosy cheeks, curly blond hair and a beautiful foreshortened nude body. His very muscular and plump figure is not without reminding the viewer of a cherub, a little cupid or Michelangelo’s Madonna of Bruges sculpture (fig 4) or even the Sleeping Cupid of antiquity that Michelangelo copied (Fig 5). The beautiful rendering of his skin through the use of chiaroscuro and the delicate porcelain white color of his flesh will definitely influence Rubens and Rococo artists later in the 18th century in their depiction of cupid.

Tintoretto’s rendering of the Madonna’s veil on her hair and shoulder is a testimony to his talent. Through the use of chiaroscuro and light painterly brushstrokes, Tintoretto conveys the delicateness of its texture, the transparency and shine of the fabric over her dark hair. Her bright red dress comes through the silky fabric in a light pink desaturated shade. The veil’s folds are rendered by curvilinear brushstrokes and stronger gold impasto application of paint reflects the light. The delicacy and minutia used to render the veil contrast vividly with the “non-finite” rough rendering of the sun behind her.

While the baby Jesus is happily entertained by his mother, his right fingers have absently reached for one of the Madonna’s index fingers. This gesture is incredibly moving and tender and again confers a more human dimension to the religious scene. The mother and her child are placed in a dark indoor setting, the wall immediately behind her is a neutral flat dark brown color that makes her bright glowing figure stand out and rise towards the viewer. The gold wheat, both figures are resting on, is scattered around their bodies rendered with billions of quick brushstrokes creating what seems like a gushing river around them.

The Early Renaissance artists greatest achievement was the invention of perspective, the ability to create three dimension and depth within a two-dimensional canvas. It seems that Tintoretto decided to challenge, once again, this established order in this painting. Indeed, the effect on the hay creates a distorted perspective and an instable composition as it is complex to understand how the figures are actually seated on the hay. It is, as if the baby Jesus would fall and be taken away by the river of wheat if the Madonna was not holding on to him. This intensive play on the hay creates movement and is dramatically contrasting with the peaceful mood and the tender relationship between mother and child. It is as if Tintoretto is pulling and pushing the viewer in opposite directions and wanted to create tension. Tintoretto is able to infuse the viewer with a tender emotion, and at the same time, ignites a sense of violent chaos. The use of multiple viewpoints creates confusion; the technique is new and won’t be celebrated until much later in the 19th century by Paul Cezanne and 20th century by Post-Impressionists and Cubists like Pablo Picasso. The gush of wheat is taking its source on the upper left of the canvas and flows down under the Virgin towards the bottom right of the canvas, intersecting with the other diagonal created by her figure.

Apart from the immediate intimate scene, the only other architectural element in the room is a window in the left middle ground. The window pane is bare and is just a rectangular hole in the wall behind the Virgin. It opens the scene to a beautiful green and blue landscape with a magnificent rising sun in the hilly horizon with a small Roman structure at its top. The striking sun is very interesting as Tintoretto applied distinctive bravura strokes of paint to render the rays of light with multiple colors without blending them or nuancing them. Very much like the impressionists like Monet later would introduce the color theories by placing two colors side by side and allowing the eye of the viewer to mix them. This technique is unheard of by Venetians when Tintoretto uses it and highly criticized it as “unfinished”. The rising sun could symbolize the birth of Jesus. The beauty of the distant landscape is also rendered by Tintoretto’s use of sfumato, a technique introduced by High Renaissance artists like Leonardo da Vinci; it creates a hazy atmospheric dreamlike effect on the nature. Tintoretto also creates depth by alternating light and shadow to pull the eye of the viewer towards the vanishing point which is the sun. The magnificent sun then literally explodes pushing its rays of light back towards the viewer. Tintoretto is also using diminutive perspective, the Madonna is monumental in the foreground while the sun, the distant Roman building and the trees are receding into space. Finally, Tintoretto uses also colors to create depth, in particular the yellow gold that is used on the foreground figures and wheat, leads the eye to the yellow of the sun in the background. Tintoretto is also contrasting the colors much more than the High Renaissance painters; the red of the Madonna’s dress is highly saturated and is brightly standing out towards the viewer; warm colors tend to appear closer than cooler colors. In color theories, the use of two primary colors side by side intensifies each other; Tintoretto applies red and blue next to each other in her garment as well as blue (sky) and yellow (sun) in the landscape to obtain the brightening effect and color intensity. The same effect is achieved by using two secondary colors side by side which is the case with the orange in the sun juxtaposed to the green of the nature in the background. Color theories will be a major aspect of the Impressionists style of the 19th century even though some principles first appeared in the writings of Leone Alberti (1435) and the notebooks of Leonardo da Vinci (1490), Tintoretto may have been aware of them.

One of Tintoretto’s greatest achievements and what he remains the most famous for, is his treatment of light. Venetian painters of the Renaissance were particularly affected by the beauty of light and its reflection on the canals of their picturesque city. They developed particular skills in depicting atmospheric effects and prompted scholars to label them as colorists, but Tintoretto started to utilize light to new heights. Indeed, he increased dramatically the contrast between light and shadow and created a new style which will be known later in the Baroque period as tenebrism. Not only does this new technique create drama, but it also creates intense movement. In the Madonna and Child, Tintoretto uses multiple light sources from opposite directions to emphasize the pull and push movement. One source of light comes from the distant sun in the background landscape. It has the softness of hopeful mornings and pushes vigorously towards the viewer using the strong diagonals of the landscape.

The second source of light comes from the opposite side and is invisible to the viewer; one can only guess the presence of a large fire next to the Madonna on the foreground right side of the canvas. By placing the light of the fire directly into the viewer’s space, Tintoretto is making the scene intimate and very participative; the viewer becomes an involuntary protagonist of the painting. The presence of the invisible fire is only revealed by the strong light and shadows it casts on the two figures.

The Madonna’s face is incredibly luminescent, almost translucent, and the shine on her nose and forehead evokes the appearance of sweat which betrays the vigorousness and close proximity of the fire. The warmth of the fire is also implied by the pinky cheeks on both figures, and its light is reflected in the gold texture of the wheat, the baby’s hair and on her fingernails. The texture of her dress and her skin are almost iridescent and glow against the dark hue of the background. The folds of her garment are picking up light and alternating with strong shadows. Tintoretto uses orange impasto strokes of paint on her red garment to emphasize the light effect on her red dress. The light is creating this warm mood of intimacy and peaceful rest.

Venice had been prosperous thanks to its commercial skills and strategic location but also thanks to a stable government. It was a Republic governed by an elected doge (preventing a dynasty situation like in Florence); State and Religion were separated which was not the case in the rest of the peninsula. But the once wealthy city, famous for its trades, beautiful fabrics and lavish parties was now under many threats. The Turks who took Constantinople in 1453 were a menace for Venice, which lost Chypre, and in 1527 the sack of Rome by Charles Quint affected the idealized Renaissance style and influences of the humanist values and theories. This period of economic and religious uncertainty was affecting art and the Catholic Church was now promoting sacrifice and devoutness; suffering becomes visible in art.

The challenges the city of Venice faces fond echo in Madonna and Child. While initially the Virgin seems to gaze at her baby with a slight smile on her lips; a closer inspection reveals that her gaze is actually lost and that she is in deep contemplation. She appears fragile, worried, even sad.

Wheat scattered upon the ground in painting symbolizes a wasted life or future. Mary knows what her baby’s great destiny is and the suffering he will have to endure; and Tintoretto magnificently renders these emotions in her face. The wheat could also refer to the sharing of the bread and the Eucharist. This painting is about the prophetic life of baby Jesus and the strong perspective on the canvas takes the viewer from Jesus’s birth to the culminating point of his life symbolized by the Roman temple. Another Tintoretto’s contribution to the Renaissance is his ability to create drama. The impossible predicament in which Mary finds herself in is almost unbearable to watch. These desperate emotions one can feel in front of the painting are reinforced by the fact that Mary seems so young and too fragile to bare such a burden. Tintoretto creates here a psychological dichotomy: the cruel situation Mary faces juxtaposed to the beauty of the overall painting itself trigger immense compassion from the viewer.

One may wonder why she is alone in this precarious position as it was very uncommon to see the Virgin represented in art without other biblical saints surrounding her at the time. She seems to have escaped a danger and found refuge in this modest stable which would be the case in The Flight into Egypt. A popular theme in the art of the Counter Reformation, The Flight into Egypt was, in fact, the invention of Christian mythologists who were eager to expand on the few references to Jesus’ early life. Art was to inspire piety and a profound religious feeling. In this biblical episode, closely after the birth of Jesus and the visit by the Magi in Jerusalem, an angel appeared to Joseph and informed him that King Herod, learning of the birth of the “king of the Jews”, ordered the murder of all infants in order to maintain his own position on the throne. Joseph and Mary escape to Egypt to save their son. However, in previous depictions of The Flight into Egypt, Mary is never alone, always depicted with Joseph, often leading her seated with Jesus on a donkey.

The setting of Madonna and Child could also recall another biblical event: The Nativity; but again, in this episode of the Bible, the Madonna and her child are traditionally depicted with Joseph, shepherds, animals and magi. This new approach of portraying the Madonna and Child alone in an intimate setting is a big departure and seems very modern. Tintoretto seems to have omitted the presence of other saints to create a sense of intimacy reinforced by the cropping of the fire and the proximity of the Madonna to the viewer. Elements of the scene being placed in the viewer’s space may even suggests to the viewer that he or she is personifying Joseph himself. The viewer then becomes part of the scene, tenderly observing his wife and child in the early morning by the fire sharing her concerns and hopes for their son. At the same time, the beauty of the rising sun seems to bring hope. The Madonna seems to be caught between two forces and two lights: hope and fear. This feeling is reinforced by the fact that she is so close to the viewer, it is a claustrophobic scene, and the only escape for the eye is the sunrise behind her.

The way Tintoretto creates this intimate setting is new, it will later influence the Dutch genre painting from the upcoming Baroque style of the seventeenths century. Major artists like Caravaggio and Rembrandt will depict everyday scenes of life in a very similar manner and will celebrate tenebrism by using strong contrast of light and shadow to create drama in their paintings. Caravaggio’s famous use of diagonal light from nearby windows will become a style of its own. Another crucial Flemish Baroque artist Peter Paul Rubens would also be tremendously seduced by Tintoretto’s painterly brushstrokes and fiercely collected his work. Scholars believe that Rubens found inspiration in Tintoretto’s Crucifixion (Fig 7) to execute his Elevation of the cross (Fig 6) and render the handling of masses, the contrast of light and shadows, and the elevation of the body on the cross (1610–11). The Spanish painter Velasquez while visiting Venice in 1605 copied two of Tintoretto’s painting that he offered to King Philippe IV[10].

It will take years for the Venetians and later the rest of the world to recognize Tintoretto’s genius when he himself knew at a young age his own value. He set his eyes early on the best masters the Renaissance had to offer and never stopped experimenting, producing a gigantic amount of work in great sizes. He found consecration at the end of his career at 70 years old with his last masterpiece the Paradise known as one of the largest oil on canvas paintings in the world for the Doge Palace in Venice; it measures 74 x 30 feet (Fig 8). Tintoretto’s ground breaking innovative technique and capacity to lead his audience from pure delight to profound sadness is revealed in Madonna and Child. The Baroque painters will admire his handling of light; the Romantics will borrow his drama and movement; the Impressionists his brushstrokes and finally the Cubists his unique compositions. Ultimately, the title of the current Parisian exhibition celebrating his early carrier “Tintoretto: Birth of a Genius” demonstrates his irrefutable legacy today and his contribution to the Italian Renaissance no longer need to be challenged.

[1] Presentation of the Tintoretto exhibition in Paris conference “Birth of a genius” Roland Krischel, Michel Hochmann and Cecile Maisonneuve. March 2018.

[2] Tintoretto tradition and identity, by Tom Nichols (loc 656)

[3]Tintoretto tradition and identity, by Tom Nichols (loc 733)

[4] Tintoretto tradition and identity, by Tom Nichols, (loc 865)

[5] Masters of Venice, Renaissance Painters of Passion and Power, by Sylvia Ferino-Pagden and Lynn Federle Orr. Fine Arts Museum of San Francisco (p119)

[6] Tintoretto tradition and identity, by Tom Nichols (loc 803)

[7] Tintoretto tradition and identity, by Tom Nichols (loc 830)

[8] Tintoretto tradition and identity, by Tom Nichols (loc 99)

[9] A study by Tintoretto after Michelangelo, by Claus Virch, Assistant Department of Paintings (Metropolitan Museum of Art)

[10] Tintoret et la fureur de peindre: du manierisme veninitien aux premisses du baroque (artistes t. 57) by Eliane Reynold de Seresin et Elisabeth Bruyns (loc 307)

Madonna and Child (Fig 0) is an oil on canvas painting by Jacopo Robusti, (Tintoretto) from 1570–72 that can be viewed in the permanent collection of the Legion of Honor Museum of San Francisco. Tintoretto was a prominent Venetian Renaissance Master and Madonna and Child is a perfect illustration of his talent, his particular sensitivity, innovative style, and technique. Some aspects of Tintoretto’s life and work remain a mystery for scholars and are at the heart of numerous past and current debates. Many paintings originally attributed to him are now challenged by contemporary critics. In contrary, curators like Roland Krischel[1] just announced in March 2018 during the Paris Exhibit dedicated to Tintoretto’s early carrier, Tintoret. Naissance d’un génie that some work that was attributed to others are now believed to be his. Some inconsistence in quality led some to think that parts of certain paintings could be attributed to his numerous assistants. Renaissance critics like Giorgio Vasari were exasperated by his radical lack of finish “non-finito” and his irreverent attitude towards the established art canons of the time. However, his incommensurable energy, his blazing bravura brushstrokes, free handling of paint, his unique treatment of light and the new emotion his work conveys will influence and move major painters and art movements for the centuries to come. For Baroque painter Rubens, Romantic Delacroix, Impressionists and Cubist Picasso and even French writer Jean-Paul Sartre, Tintoretto opened the path to modernism. Tintoretto’s capacity for innovation and groundbreaking new approach were born from his own fiery personality and immeasurable ambition, his years of formation and social status, his rivalry with contemporary masters Titian, Veronese, and the political and social changes in Italy at the time. He is celebrated as one of the last geniuses of the prolific period of the Italian Renaissance, yet he broke many of the rules his predecessors established.

It is near impossible to discuss Tintoretto’s life and work without examining the tremendous influence of his older rival Titian, though scholars are not in agreement with the actual nature of the influence itself. When Tintoretto was only a teenager, Titian was the indisputable master of Venice and leader of the Venetian Renaissance. He was the artistic authority, internationally admired and respected. And, thanks to earlier High Renaissance painters such as Leonardo da Vinci, painters were now perceived as true geniuses (not merely artisans). Humanists scholars and patrons adopted Plato’s views on artists’ creations being guided by Muses, instruments of the Divine. Tintoretto’s father recognized his son’s talent and brought him to Titian’s workshop. According to the legend, young Tintoretto stayed only for few days and was rejected by Titian. Some believe that the older master recognized immediately Tintoretto’s gift and got jealous; others believe that Tintoretto’s style and attitude was such a departure from Titian’s that he would have not been able to work within the Master’s style. Finally, others think that Tintoretto himself decided to quit not enjoying the studio’s discipline. The reasons for his departure remain unknown but what seems certain is that this episode had a tremendous impact on the artist. It seems that Tintoretto while admiring Titian (especially his handling of color) will spend his lifetime to enfranchise himself from him. According to Tom Nichols[2], he sought early on to identify himself less with the sensual naturalism of Titian than with the intellectual and sculptural values of central Italy. Nichols also suggests that Titian’s disdain may have been enough to delay his breakthrough with higher ranking Venetian patrons. Titian even intervened in some competitions in order to exclude Tintoretto, and mediated in favor of his protégé Veronese. It was indeed the case in 1560, when Veronese painted the philosophers Plato and Aristotle for the library of San Marco while Tintoretto was barred from participating. But Tintoretto became quickly a fierce competitor to reckon with: Titian would work very slowly, making his patrons lavishly spend huge amounts of money in order to obtain a “Titian”. In contrary, Tintoretto would work quickly and ask his patrons to pay whatever they wanted or nothing, making him a serious threat to Titian’s business.

The difference between Tintoretto’s esthetic approach and Titian’s is very evident in particular paintings like The Last Supper (Fig 1.). While Titian’s depiction of the subject (Fig 2) is very classical, not dissimilar to the one’s of Leonardo da Vinci, with a very balanced composition; Tintoretto “translated the scene from the abstract classicized environment preferred by Titian into a believable “earthly” space.”[3]. Tintoretto breaks through the Renaissance classical rules by creating deeper emotions, portraying religious saints more connected to the common people, playing with new points of view and modifying the composition from the classical pyramid to a complex and asymmetrical composition using intense diagonals and light to create drama. In the Last Supper, he uses elements of the artisan’s life and give the Apostles the look of Venetian townsmen of the lower class. The effect is striking as the scene depicted is infused with passion and drama and the viewer at the time would relate to the protagonists in a deeper manner than to previous detached religious subjects of the early Renaissance.

While young artists and newcomers such as Veronese, paid homage to Titian, showing respect and deference to the older Master, Tintoretto was aggressively defying him in paintings like the Presentation of the Virgin in the Temple. Tintoretto seems to deliberately use some of Titian’s favored gold and red color palette to call for the Master’s attention but then introduces a dramatic twist in his composition to boldly provoke Titian and to demonstrate the limits of his reach. “In contrast to the static, self-contained horizontality of Titian’s composition, Tintoretto constructs an image of vertiginous verticality, realized through the use of a plunging dal sotto in su perspective which violently pulls the viewer into the picture space.”[4]

One of the reasons why Tintoretto tended to make his paintings much more “participative” and intimate than the previous Renaissance Italian masters might be due to the Catholic Counter-Reformation that began with the Council of Trent (1545–1563). The Catholic church is then attempting to “counter-reform” the Protestant faith initiated by Martin Luther who declared (with reasons) Catholics to be corrupted. As a result, the new Catholic order aims at demonstrating that it is now fully focusing on the devotional life and on a personal relationship with Christ. The Catholic religion is no longer depicted as an exclusive heavenly matter with detached enthroned Madonna’s but with saints portrayed down to earth and close to the people. Paintings are highlighting the human character of Christ and his suffering to create compassion and emotion. The religious reform also afforded the poor a new profile within Venetian culture and Tintoretto definitely felt compelled to depict the notion of sacred poverty in his work. He viewed himself as the modest “little dyer” (he was the son of a cloth dyer “tintori” from which his name derived) in contrast with the powerful high-ranking figure of Titian. He identified himself with the Venice lower class and famously worked for free or to simply cover his material cost and did not appreciate money.

Another strong influence on Venetian artists at the time were the powerful “Scuole”, religious associations governed by lay officials; their purpose was to offer assistance both spiritual and material, to their members. These influential and wealthy brotherhoods spread widely in mid-sixteenth century and their members came from all social classes[5]. Via competitions, the Scuole were helping artists to emerge, and their vast halls were ideal spaces for “grande machine” canvases such as the ones Tintoretto was a master at producing.

But the combination of strong criticism from his contemporary critics (Giorgio Vasari judged that Tintoretto’s activities had made a “joke of art”[6]) in addition to the rejection at an early age from Titian had grave consequences on Tintoretto’s professional career. It indeed threatened “to make him a kind of artistic orphan in his own city”[7]. Tintoretto would struggle to win commissions from patrons and powerful Scuole and impose himself as a true Master. However, Titian’s disdain did not affect his tremendous ambition and may even have fueled his thirst for success. In order to break through these obstacles, Tintoretto resorted in 1560 to execute two paintings for the Madonna Dell’Orto church for free to secure the bid. Again, in 1564, to win the Scuola Grande Di San Rocco commission, he surprised everyone competing by presenting a finished painting and positioned the canvas in its intended place while other contenders (including Veronese) presented merely sketches of their project. While these daring tactics created an uproar from his fellow competitors and from the commissioners who were scandalously claiming the stratagem illegal; they had no choice but to accept his work presented as a donation (the Scuole could not refuse a gift to its saint). Tintoretto succeeded with the help of some Scuole brothers sympathetic to his cause, and his case would have been helped by the fact that as many as 25 per cent of the brothers were cloth dyers like his father. In 1565, he was finally admitted to the confraternity and became the official painter of San Rocco where he worked for over twenty years (1564–1588) and painted more than sixty canvases. Some critics have gone so far as to suggest that this work is Venice’s equivalent to Rome’s Michelangelo and the Sistine Chapel. His most renowned works are to be found in the Sala dell’Albergo and the Sala Superiore. All the works in the building are by him, or his assistants, including his son Domenico.

Madonna and Child may have been painted at the same time for the Scuole and may be an inspiration for a later painting. Indeed, the Madonna’s facial traits, her veil, garment, and the presence of wheat in Madonna and Child present similarities with the ones of the Madonna depicted in The Adoration of the Shepherds painting (Fig 3) displayed on the east wall of the chapter room in the Scuola San Rocco and is dated 1578 so about eight years later. The Scuole also had an important impact on Tintoretto’s personal life, as in 1550 he married Faustina de Vescovi, daughter of a Venetian nobleman who was the Guardian Grande of the Scuola Grande di San Marco.

The early rejection from the local establishment may also have influenced Tintoretto to look elsewhere for inspiration and compelled him to reject the Venetian tradition itself.

It is known that Tintoretto did not travel much during his lifetime but nevertheless, early on, he was exposed to art imported into Venice and started to collect small copies of casts done after Michelangelo’s work. He was fascinated by the muscular splendor and plasticity of the Master’s sculptures and made frequent references to Michelangelo in his fresco work (Tintoretto was the most prolific painter of façade frescoes in mid-cinquecento Venice)[8]. He owned numerous casts including one of the Belvedere torso from antiquity, which Tintoretto studied intensively and practiced form and foreshortening. “The illusion of plasticity was what Tintoretto sought. He was no longer content with the traditional two-dimensional style of the Venetian school; he wanted the effect of the full round Figure”[9]

In Madonna and Child, these multiple influences come to life. It is the delicateness of the young sitter that first strikes the viewer. A far cry from previous sacred representations of the Virgin and Christ, the young Madonna depicted seems to be very fragile almost adolescent (the halo around her head barely visible) she could be any young mother entertaining her baby in a very intimate moment. The viewer can immediately relate to her, feel the emotion, the simple tenderness and immeasurable love between a mother and her baby. The Madonna is monumental, her full body is in the foreground and creates a strong vertiginous diagonal on the entire picture plane with her head located at the upper right of the canvas and her feet placed at the lower left end of the canvas. She is casually seated on a stack of hay, her upper body reclined towards her baby resting near her on her scattered dress, she has placed her left arm around his body as if to prevent him from falling and to keep him secure and warm. Her body is elongated in the Mannerist style and is twisted in a curvilinear “figura serpentinata” position. Where High Renaissance art emphasized proportion, balance, and ideal beauty, Mannerism exaggerates such qualities, often resulting in compositions that are asymmetrical or unnaturally elegant. Her delicate fingers are holding gracefully thin strings of hay which she agitates in front of her baby’s eyes to entertain him. She is casually playing with him like any mother would do to sooth an infant, to stimulate and to create a motherly bond.

The baby’s blue eyes are attentively gazing at the makeshift toy, he has round rosy cheeks, curly blond hair and a beautiful foreshortened nude body. His very muscular and plump figure is not without reminding the viewer of a cherub, a little cupid or Michelangelo’s Madonna of Bruges sculpture (fig 4) or even the Sleeping Cupid of antiquity that Michelangelo copied (Fig 5). The beautiful rendering of his skin through the use of chiaroscuro and the delicate porcelain white color of his flesh will definitely influence Rubens and Rococo artists later in the 18th century in their depiction of cupid.

Tintoretto’s rendering of the Madonna’s veil on her hair and shoulder is a testimony to his talent. Through the use of chiaroscuro and light painterly brushstrokes, Tintoretto conveys the delicateness of its texture, the transparency and shine of the fabric over her dark hair. Her bright red dress comes through the silky fabric in a light pink desaturated shade. The veil’s folds are rendered by curvilinear brushstrokes and stronger gold impasto application of paint reflects the light. The delicacy and minutia used to render the veil contrast vividly with the “non-finite” rough rendering of the sun behind her.

While the baby Jesus is happily entertained by his mother, his right fingers have absently reached for one of the Madonna’s index fingers. This gesture is incredibly moving and tender and again confers a more human dimension to the religious scene. The mother and her child are placed in a dark indoor setting, the wall immediately behind her is a neutral flat dark brown color that makes her bright glowing figure stand out and rise towards the viewer. The gold wheat, both figures are resting on, is scattered around their bodies rendered with billions of quick brushstrokes creating what seems like a gushing river around them.

The Early Renaissance artists greatest achievement was the invention of perspective, the ability to create three dimension and depth within a two-dimensional canvas. It seems that Tintoretto decided to challenge, once again, this established order in this painting. Indeed, the effect on the hay creates a distorted perspective and an instable composition as it is complex to understand how the figures are actually seated on the hay. It is, as if the baby Jesus would fall and be taken away by the river of wheat if the Madonna was not holding on to him. This intensive play on the hay creates movement and is dramatically contrasting with the peaceful mood and the tender relationship between mother and child. It is as if Tintoretto is pulling and pushing the viewer in opposite directions and wanted to create tension. Tintoretto is able to infuse the viewer with a tender emotion, and at the same time, ignites a sense of violent chaos. The use of multiple viewpoints creates confusion; the technique is new and won’t be celebrated until much later in the 19th century by Paul Cezanne and 20th century by Post-Impressionists and Cubists like Pablo Picasso. The gush of wheat is taking its source on the upper left of the canvas and flows down under the Virgin towards the bottom right of the canvas, intersecting with the other diagonal created by her figure.

Apart from the immediate intimate scene, the only other architectural element in the room is a window in the left middle ground. The window pane is bare and is just a rectangular hole in the wall behind the Virgin. It opens the scene to a beautiful green and blue landscape with a magnificent rising sun in the hilly horizon with a small Roman structure at its top. The striking sun is very interesting as Tintoretto applied distinctive bravura strokes of paint to render the rays of light with multiple colors without blending them or nuancing them. Very much like the impressionists like Monet later would introduce the color theories by placing two colors side by side and allowing the eye of the viewer to mix them. This technique is unheard of by Venetians when Tintoretto uses it and highly criticized it as “unfinished”. The rising sun could symbolize the birth of Jesus. The beauty of the distant landscape is also rendered by Tintoretto’s use of sfumato, a technique introduced by High Renaissance artists like Leonardo da Vinci; it creates a hazy atmospheric dreamlike effect on the nature. Tintoretto also creates depth by alternating light and shadow to pull the eye of the viewer towards the vanishing point which is the sun. The magnificent sun then literally explodes pushing its rays of light back towards the viewer. Tintoretto is also using diminutive perspective, the Madonna is monumental in the foreground while the sun, the distant Roman building and the trees are receding into space. Finally, Tintoretto uses also colors to create depth, in particular the yellow gold that is used on the foreground figures and wheat, leads the eye to the yellow of the sun in the background. Tintoretto is also contrasting the colors much more than the High Renaissance painters; the red of the Madonna’s dress is highly saturated and is brightly standing out towards the viewer; warm colors tend to appear closer than cooler colors. In color theories, the use of two primary colors side by side intensifies each other; Tintoretto applies red and blue next to each other in her garment as well as blue (sky) and yellow (sun) in the landscape to obtain the brightening effect and color intensity. The same effect is achieved by using two secondary colors side by side which is the case with the orange in the sun juxtaposed to the green of the nature in the background. Color theories will be a major aspect of the Impressionists style of the 19th century even though some principles first appeared in the writings of Leone Alberti (1435) and the notebooks of Leonardo da Vinci (1490), Tintoretto may have been aware of them.

One of Tintoretto’s greatest achievements and what he remains the most famous for, is his treatment of light. Venetian painters of the Renaissance were particularly affected by the beauty of light and its reflection on the canals of their picturesque city. They developed particular skills in depicting atmospheric effects and prompted scholars to label them as colorists, but Tintoretto started to utilize light to new heights. Indeed, he increased dramatically the contrast between light and shadow and created a new style which will be known later in the Baroque period as tenebrism. Not only does this new technique create drama, but it also creates intense movement. In the Madonna and Child, Tintoretto uses multiple light sources from opposite directions to emphasize the pull and push movement. One source of light comes from the distant sun in the background landscape. It has the softness of hopeful mornings and pushes vigorously towards the viewer using the strong diagonals of the landscape.

The second source of light comes from the opposite side and is invisible to the viewer; one can only guess the presence of a large fire next to the Madonna on the foreground right side of the canvas. By placing the light of the fire directly into the viewer’s space, Tintoretto is making the scene intimate and very participative; the viewer becomes an involuntary protagonist of the painting. The presence of the invisible fire is only revealed by the strong light and shadows it casts on the two figures.

The Madonna’s face is incredibly luminescent, almost translucent, and the shine on her nose and forehead evokes the appearance of sweat which betrays the vigorousness and close proximity of the fire. The warmth of the fire is also implied by the pinky cheeks on both figures, and its light is reflected in the gold texture of the wheat, the baby’s hair and on her fingernails. The texture of her dress and her skin are almost iridescent and glow against the dark hue of the background. The folds of her garment are picking up light and alternating with strong shadows. Tintoretto uses orange impasto strokes of paint on her red garment to emphasize the light effect on her red dress. The light is creating this warm mood of intimacy and peaceful rest.

Venice had been prosperous thanks to its commercial skills and strategic location but also thanks to a stable government. It was a Republic governed by an elected doge (preventing a dynasty situation like in Florence); State and Religion were separated which was not the case in the rest of the peninsula. But the once wealthy city, famous for its trades, beautiful fabrics and lavish parties was now under many threats. The Turks who took Constantinople in 1453 were a menace for Venice, which lost Chypre, and in 1527 the sack of Rome by Charles Quint affected the idealized Renaissance style and influences of the humanist values and theories. This period of economic and religious uncertainty was affecting art and the Catholic Church was now promoting sacrifice and devoutness; suffering becomes visible in art.

The challenges the city of Venice faces fond echo in Madonna and Child. While initially the Virgin seems to gaze at her baby with a slight smile on her lips; a closer inspection reveals that her gaze is actually lost and that she is in deep contemplation. She appears fragile, worried, even sad.

Wheat scattered upon the ground in painting symbolizes a wasted life or future. Mary knows what her baby’s great destiny is and the suffering he will have to endure; and Tintoretto magnificently renders these emotions in her face. The wheat could also refer to the sharing of the bread and the Eucharist. This painting is about the prophetic life of baby Jesus and the strong perspective on the canvas takes the viewer from Jesus’s birth to the culminating point of his life symbolized by the Roman temple. Another Tintoretto’s contribution to the Renaissance is his ability to create drama and Madonna and Child is an incredibly moving painting. The impossible predicament in which Mary finds herself in is almost unbearable to watch. These desperate emotions one can feel in front of the painting are reinforced by the fact that Mary seems so young and too fragile to bare such a burden. Tintoretto managed here to create a psychological dichotomy: the cruel situation Mary faces juxtaposed to the beauty of the overall painting itself trigger immense compassion from the viewer.

One may wonder why she is alone in this precarious position as it was very uncommon to see the Virgin represented in art without other biblical saints surrounding her at the time. She seems to have escaped a danger and found refuge in this modest stable which would be the case in The Flight into Egypt. A popular theme in the art of the Counter Reformation, The Flight into Egypt was, in fact, the invention of Christian mythologists who were eager to expand on the few references to Jesus’ early life. Art was to inspire piety and a profound religious feeling. In this biblical episode, closely after the birth of Jesus and the visit by the Magi in Jerusalem, an angel appeared to Joseph and informed him that King Herod, learning of the birth of the “king of the Jews”, ordered the murder of all infants in order to maintain his own position on the throne. Joseph and Mary escape to Egypt to save their son. However, in previous depictions of The Flight into Egypt, Mary is never alone, always depicted with Joseph, often leading her seated with Jesus on a donkey.

The setting of Madonna and Child could also recall another biblical event: The Nativity; but again, in this episode of the Bible, the Madonna and her child are traditionally depicted with Joseph, shepherds, animals and magi. This new approach of portraying the Madonna and Child alone in an intimate setting is a big departure and seems very modern. Tintoretto seems to have omitted the presence of other saints to create a sense of intimacy reinforced by the cropping of the fire and the proximity of the Madonna to the viewer. Elements of the scene being placed in the viewer’s space may even suggests to the viewer that he or she is personifying Joseph himself. The viewer then becomes part of the scene, tenderly observing his wife and child in the early morning by the fire sharing her concerns and hopes for their son. At the same time, the beauty of the rising sun seems to bring hope. The Madonna seems to be caught between two forces and two lights: hope and fear. This feeling is reinforced by the fact that she is so close to the viewer, it is a claustrophobic scene, and the only escape for the eye is the sunrise behind her.

The way Tintoretto creates this intimate setting is new, it will later influence the Dutch genre painting from the upcoming Baroque style of the seventeenths century. Major artists like Caravaggio and Rembrandt will depict everyday scenes of life in a very similar manner and will celebrate tenebrism by using strong contrast of light and shadow to create drama in their paintings. Caravaggio’s famous use of diagonal light from nearby windows will become a style of its own. Another crucial Flemish Baroque artist Peter Paul Rubens would also be tremendously seduced by Tintoretto’s painterly brushstrokes and fiercely collected his work. Scholars believe that Rubens found inspiration in Tintoretto’s Crucifixion (Fig 7) to execute his Elevation of the cross (Fig 6) and render the handling of masses, the contrast of light and shadows, and the elevation of the body on the cross (1610–11). The Spanish painter Velasquez while visiting Venice in 1605 copied two of Tintoretto’s painting that he offered to King Philippe IV[10].

It will take years for the Venetians and later the rest of the world to recognize Tintoretto’s genius when he himself knew at a young age his own value. He set his eyes early on the best masters the Renaissance had to offer and never stopped experimenting, producing a gigantic amount of work in great sizes. He found consecration at the end of his career at 70 years old with his last masterpiece the Paradise known as one of the largest oil on canvas paintings in the world for the Doge Palace in Venice; it measures 74 x 30 feet (Fig 8). Tintoretto’s ground breaking innovative technique and capacity to lead his audience from pure delight to profound sadness is revealed in Madonna and Child. The Baroque painters will admire his handling of light; the Romantics will borrow his drama and movement; the Impressionists his brushstrokes and finally the Cubists his unique compositions. Ultimately, the title of the current Parisian exhibition celebrating his early carrier “Tintoretto: Birth of a Genius” demonstrates his irrefutable legacy today and his contribution to the Italian Renaissance no longer need to be challenged.

[1] Presentation of the Tintoretto exhibition in Paris conference “Birth of a genius” Roland Krischel, Michel Hochmann and Cecile Maisonneuve. March 2018.

[2] Tintoretto tradition and identity, by Tom Nichols (loc 656)

[3]Tintoretto tradition and identity, by Tom Nichols (loc 733)

[4] Tintoretto tradition and identity, by Tom Nichols, (loc 865)

[5] Masters of Venice, Renaissance Painters of Passion and Power, by Sylvia Ferino-Pagden and Lynn Federle Orr. Fine Arts Museum of San Francisco (p119)

[6] Tintoretto tradition and identity, by Tom Nichols (loc 803)

[7] Tintoretto tradition and identity, by Tom Nichols (loc 830)

[8] Tintoretto tradition and identity, by Tom Nichols (loc 99)

[9] A study by Tintoretto after Michelangelo, by Claus Virch, Assistant Department of Paintings (Metropolitan Museum of Art)

[10] Tintoret et la fureur de peindre: du manierisme veninitien aux premisses du baroque (artistes t. 57) by Eliane Reynold de Seresin et Elisabeth Bruyns (loc 307)

Originally published at medium.com on May 11, 2018.

Musicians in the Orchestra is an oil on canvas painting by Edgar Degas, from 1870, part of the permanent collection of the Legion of Honor Museum of San Francisco. It is an important painting for the Parisian artist as it is most likely what will lead to his famous ballet paintings series, it may also be a study of another painting titled the The Orchestra of the Opera, 1870 at the Orsay Museum of Paris much more colorful and detailed.

Musicians in the Orchestra is interesting as it reveals the intention of the artist, which most likely was to paint an individual portrait of his friend bassoonist Désiré Dihau while the other later painting is a group portrait of the orchestra. The painting is also revealing of Degas’s technique to create movement and intimacy. While Degas was reluctant to be labeled as an impressionist, this painting highlights many of the Impressionists’ achievements in art, notably capturing a moment in time, movement and atmospheric change.

What first comes to mind while studying Musicians in the Orchestra is that it is an unfinished painting, a sketch, a study. Indeed, a sketch is done quickly with black charcoal often on site and to be reworked later. But the overall composition reveals that this may actually have been the intention of the artist to convey speed. It seems that Degas intentionally manipulated the canvas to give the viewer the sensation that he/she is looking at a sketch. The overall painting looks very monochromatic just strokes of black paint on a grey canvas. Grey is often the color of the paper used by sketch artists but is not the natural color of a canvas, which may implies that Degas primed or used a grey underpainting to give the illusion of a sketch paper.

The painting depicts an opera orchestra in which only the bassoonist and contrabassist are discernible to the viewer while the other musicians are dissolved in the darkness of the orchestra pit. The viewer enters the painting through the large black silhouette of the contrabassist on the right foreground of the painting. The large figure is monumental, taking most of the picture plane on the right; his massive back offered to the viewer is as immense and heavy as the instrument itself and is overtaking the rest of the orchestra like a dark shadow. Then appears the much more detailed portrait of the bassoonist Désiré Dihau, friend of Degas on the left foreground. He is the only clear figure in the whole composition and is standing out, almost popping out of the canvas, as he is the only one in focus while everything around him is blurred.

Desiré Dihau is depicted playing the bassoon, his cheeks fully rounded with air blowing into the instrument. His figure is surrounded by a cacophony of black brushstrokes that let the viewer guess the presence of the rest of the orchestra. A simple horizontal line that cuts through the upper end of the canvas suggests a stage in the background.

Impressionists’ main objective was to capture a moment; an instant where everything is about to change, the effect of the light, colors and mood, they wanted to capture the atmospheric effects while painting “en plein air” out of doors. Degas, in Musicians in the Orchestra, is doing the same indoor. The bassoonist’s cheeks are going to deflate, his nostrils are going to flutter, his chest is going to lower. One can sense that the hand of the contrabassist is moving frantically up and down his instrument, as the artist seems to have painted multiple hands, unfinished hands to suggest movement. Heads and bodies are going to move in the typical musician way accompanying the instrument motion and rhythm of the music. Degas also creates movement with an intensive use of diagonals. The viewer can feel the intensity of the brushstrokes, almost frenetic. Degas applies short quick diagonals repeatedly throughout the canvas to suggest the rapid movement of the faceless violinists’ bows. The entire violinists’ figures are reduced to their bows, which is very abstract and very modern for the time. He uses longer diagonals for the Bassoon and contrabass that meet each other in a triangle shape and is echoing the short diagonals of the background and the series of small triangles of the others musicians implied heads. These quick intense diagonals are creating chaos coming from right and left and meeting in picks, almost like a war field after a battle. It is as if Degas wants to depict the chaos of the instruments working together to create the harmony. The large dark silhouette of the contrabassist is also filled with diagonal brushstrokes creating intense movement. Unlike Désiré, his body is not outlined, doesn’t have contours; it is only defined with a light white brushstroke on what could be his face and upper right shoulder suggesting that the light from the stage is fully inundating the front of his body which the viewer is unable to see. The silhouette is a large flat patch of black, almost melting with the background in certain areas, which is very characteristic of the Impressionists and realists. They were influenced by Japanese woodblock prints, which use clear contours and flatten figures. The Japanese print also influences the composition; the main character is off centered and the composition is asymmetric which gives movement, as if the viewer just turned his gaze towards the orchestra and is catching a glimpse of the action. There is also no middleground; the rest of the orchestra is raised and flat.

In this frenzy of movements only Désiré seems stable. The stability effect is created with the triangle shape of his figure, the strong impasto outlined of his body and the details in his face. Only his fingers seem to move, he seems to have two lower hands. His face is beautifully rendered with chiaroscuro light and shadows of red, brown and grey. The strong red of the instrument mouthpiece seems to dissolve into his moustache and lock the man to his instrument.

Impressionists also tended to create proximity with their subject matter. Musicians in the Orchestra is a very participative painting, the viewer feels like he is physically present in the orchestra pit. Degas uses particular techniques to suggest that proximity. First, he crops the figures; the whole lower body of the contrabassist silhouette and the feet of Désiré are in the viewer’s space. Second, he uses colors to pull the viewer in the painting.

The red of the bassoon mouthpiece is inviting the viewer in the painting. Simple pink brushstrokes in the background, which could suggest ballerinas’ legs, (themselves missing their upper bodies) are having a similar effect. The overall blackness of the painting is also making the viewer feel close to the scene as an orchestra of the Opera is always in a dark pit at the feet of the stage. The spotlights from the stage are only brushing the top of the musicians’ heads (implied by the light grey paints coming through in Désiré’s hair). The monumentality of the two figures in the foreground is also making the viewer feel close and part of the scene.

The paint used by Degas is very diluted almost translucent in some places and the under grey paint is coming through. The painting is very monochromatic with the exception of the red mouthpiece and Degas’s own signature as well as the pink ballerinas’a legs.

The paint is becoming much thicker when used on the white collar of the Bassoonist, his shirt and his instrument. The white paint on the long curvy mouthpiece suggests reflection of the light on the metal, the viewer can almost feel the texture of the piece, its hardness and coldness contrasting with the warmth of the rest the instrument made of wood (rendered in warm brown color). There is also a thick application a grey paint right under his mouth, giving the man and his instrument their stature.

Edgar Degas may have opposed to be labeled as an impressionist arguing that unlike his fellow artists he wasn’t spontaneous; however Musicians in the Orchestra shows otherwise; it is giving the viewer that “impression” that sentiment to be right there in the chaos of the pit and fully experiencing the intensity of the moment, the concentration and strength of the musicians and recognizing Désiré’s own personality.

Elizabeth Vigée-Le Brun, renowned first portraitist of French queen Marie Antoinette at the dawn of the French revolution is pushed to exile to escape the guillotine. She arrives with her daughter in Saint Petersburg in 1795. Against all odd this exceptional female painter which is a rarity at the time, French immigrant will established herself almost immediately as the new trend at the court and within the aristocratic strata. Under Catherine II, Russia is completing its westernization and French artists like Greuze and Largilliere are known and widely popular but Vigée-Le brun will have the deepest impact on Russian portraiture. She seems to impose her style and even her royalist nostalgia and longing for monarchy using a specific style against the new neoclassical trend that prevails in post revolution France. She not only produced more than fifty portraits during her seven years in Russia but also influenced major Russian artists like Vladimir Borovikovsky.

Elisabeth Vigée-Le Brun in her memoirs described at length her deep love and gratefulness for Russia. Upon her arrival in St Petersburg, the city seems flooded with western Europeans and especially French artists and aristocrats in exiled from the Revolution. As a result, Vigée-Le Brun who deeply misses France, the monarchy and in particular the late Queen Marie Antoinette (to whom she was dearly attached) is finding her new home very much to her liking. Not only Russians are celebrating a lot of the artistic trends and fashion then banished in Paris but they welcome her and pay high price for her portraits. The reign of Catherine II is very ostentatious and the royal court seems as frivolous and luxurious as Louis XVI court would have been. In her Memoirs[1] she describes: “I used to venture into society every evening. Not only because balls, concerts and plays were frequent events, but also because I enjoyed these daily reunions, where I could find all the charm of French society for, to borrow an expression from Princess Dolgourouky, it seemed that good taste had jumped from Paris to Saint Petersburg in a single bound.”

In this favorable context, Vigée-Le Brun is evolving in a very familiar environment, meeting with her compatriots and making new connections with Russians who are very found of her work. She is constantly painting portraits for the nobility and the imperial family. She feels so comfortable with her style and its positive resonance within the Russian society that she even uses techniques from her past to create new portraits. This tendency seems obvious when placing her famous portrait of Marie Antoinette she did in 1778 (fig1) alongside the portrait of Empress Maria Feodorovna, made in 1799 while in Exile (fig2).

While contemplating both portraits, one can’t ignore the similarities. Both are full-length grand manner portraits, displaying the importance of the sitter. Both queen and empress appear in low cut gown with pannier against a backdrop of roman columns and drapery. The Rococo style is predominant, the light is fleeting over the surfaces, particularly the dresses, and the artist uses a lot of curves. The only difference is that instead of using the typical Rococo pastel colors, in the Russian portrait she uses a crimson background and lots of gold tones. She explains the reasons in her memoirs[2]: “ the Emperor (Paul I) had commissioned me to paint the portrait of his wife, the empress; I painted a full length portrait of her wearing her court costume and a diamond coronet. I do not care to paint diamonds; it is impossible for a brush to achieve that brilliance. Nevertheless, I placed the empress in front of a large crimson velvet curtain and this gave me the richness of tone I needed in order to make the crown stand out, and I think I succeeded in making it shine as much as possible.” Vigée-Le Brun noticed the attraction of Russians for Marie Antoinette, which could explain why she felt entitled to mimic some of her earlier work. She brought her portrait of queen Marie Antoinette from France, and exhibited it in her own home. She explains how delighted she felt to see the great interest it was to the Russians.

Twenty-one years separate the two portraits and no artist in post revolution France would dare using such royal attributes. France, at the time is lead by artists like Jacques Louis David and is influenced by Diderot’s ideologies of neoclassicism. They call for a new art, more serious with substance and their art are political statements. History paintings are more prestigious at the French Academy than portraits and call for virtue. In 1799, France is seeing the rise of Napoleon Bonaparte, and painters like Vivant Denon or Gros are acting as reporters from the battlefield and art is used as Napoleon’s propaganda.

The contrast of style between Paris and St Petersburg is made very clear to Vigée-Le Brun upon her return to Paris, going to the theater she deplores seeing black heads and black clothes instead of the powdered wigs that everyone is still wearing abroad.

While Vigée-Le Brun talks at length of her encounters with French artists, she doesn’t mention in her memoirs meeting with Russian painters even though talents like Fedor Rokotov, Dmitri Levitski, and Vladimir Borovikovsky started to make their mark on the Russian art scene. Surprisingly, she also doesn’t mention well-known Russians poets as Pushkin, Derzhavin, Zhukovsky or Krylov who would have evolve in the same circles as hers. Until then, it was common for Russians to request international artists to do their portrait but this trend is starting to fade and Russian artists are becoming more in demand. While there always have been opponents to the westernization of Russia, the nineteenth century will see a strong return to national identity, a celebration of native Art and Craft and recognition of Russian talents in Russia and abroad.

In her style, Vigée-Le Brun was a great admirer of Rubens, she was a colorist and adopted a painterly style. She was famous for avoiding strict poses and court dresses (she made scandal in Paris by dressing Marie Antoinette in a chemise dress Fig 3); early on she liked dressing her sitter in clothing that freed the body, loose blouses, letting their hair down and unpowdered (Fig 0). She was trying to capture a more truthful persona of her sitter by adopting a more natural approach. Without altering her sitter’s likeness she would make her look more radiant, more graceful or more superb which explains why Vigée-Le Brun was so popular with women. She was also using a lot of dark or neutral backgrounds so the eye of the viewer wouldn’t be distracted by other details and the face and body would stand out more, popping out of the canvas and creating a striking effect (fig 3). By doing so she may have been a precursor of a more romantic style.

Vigée-Le Brun did not only influenced Russian art by producing an incredible number of Russian portraits or by entering St Petersburg Academy but also by leaving her mark on Russian artists. While it is unclear if they met in St Petersburg, the study of Vladimir Borovikovsky portraits reveals that he was influenced by her style. He adopted in his portraits similar outdoors settings, loose brushstrokes, capturing the beauty of the sitter in very relaxed poses. He also uses beautiful sfumato atmospheric effect in the background as she did (Fig 4 and 5). Both artists portrayed their sitter against a landscape, the background dense with Foliage. The sitters wear white tunics in the “Neo-Grecian” style and shawls. Their hair is down and their arms relaxing on a ledge with pink roses (flowers of love).

Vigée-Le Brun's time in Russia is little known and very few scholars studied this period of her life mainly because herself as an artist had a late recognition (a male dominated academy did not promote her talent). But it is clear that Russia had a tremendous effect on this resourceful, barrier-breaking artist and she left St Petersburg, her country of adoption, with great sadness. In return, she had left a great legacy to Russia, many of her paintings still in Russian private collections and recently making news in 2016 when Russia refused to lend some of her work (because of ownership issues) to the Metropolitan Museum of New York for a exhibition dedicated to her.

[1] THE MEMOIRS OF ELISABETH VIGEE-LE BRUN, p 178

[2] THE MEMOIRS OF ELISABETH VIGEE-LE BRUN, p 206

Jacques Louis David was a major painter of the early 19th century and a tremendous influence on the French royal academy of Art, the French revolution and various French rulers. Most of all, David is famous for embodying Neoclassicism.

The Oath of the Horatii painting is one of his masterpiece, his first royal commission. Painted in Rome, it was an immediate international success as it was a major breakthrough in the Rococo Style, which dominated the 18th century.

Inspired by Roman history, and a play by Corneille, the painting showcases the dilemma the Horatii family had to endured to prevail against their neighboring kingdom of Alba. Rather than going to war, the two enemies decided to resolve their conflict by sending each three of their greatest warriors to a sword fight. The Roman chose three brothers from the Horatii family, the Albans chose three brothers from the Curiatii family. However, one of the Horatii sister was married to a brother of the Curiatti. Only one of the Horatti brothers survived the fight and came back victorious. His sister, however had lost her husband and was devastated, enraged by her reaction he kills her.

David’s painting depicts the oath the three brothers take on their swords swearing they will either win or die. The women are depicted as conflicted and crying in the background.

David embraces neoclassicism by using large heroic figures based on Roman art that are frozen in their pose (frieze like composition and strong contrast inspired by Greek vases). The architecture is also roman with the three columns. He is using very strong, crisp contours, a linear work (inspired by Poussin) with a sober, simple background and very little emphasis on colors. The composition is very geometrical with a diagonal light (Caravaggio) as well as strong verticals (columns) and horizontal lines.

David also echoes Diderot’s call for a new, more serious art and grand manner style by emphasizing the heroic attitude of the brothers and their virtue (exemplum virtutis) and showing the triumph of public duty over the personal family affairs.

This painting was an immediate success because of its historical and political impact. It was exhibited at the salon of Paris in 1785, only four years before the French revolution, there was a strong public call for choosing side. This painting is considered to be propaganda for the French revolution. In the painting, the heroic men chose side, while the women didn’t. The painting calls to stand up to the aristocracy and monarchy that live frivolous lives (depicted expansively in Rococo art) and encourages the country to take side with the suffering nation, to rise and sacrifice for an ideal. After the Revolution, David will be involved in politics and join the Jacobins (opposed to the Girondins) so he himself took side and voted the death of Louis XVI and Marie Antoinette on the guillotine.