One of the problems for genius artists attempting to communicate through their work is, they over estimate their audience.  They anticipate the knowledge base and understanding of the world in their audience, to be very near their own.  Hence, they will, for the sake of; mystery, nuance, art, etc. omit direct reference to the obviously implied or referenced idea or concept.  This is often to their regret, and the source of great frustration as they observe their audience see everything but the essence of their work.

Recognized genius by others who obviously don’t truly understand, is meaningless and schizophrenic in its nature.

One man who lived through this nightmare was the artist who’s work exemplified the Neoclassical thought of the Revolutionary French Enlightenment Period: Jacques Louis David.  I am going to attempt to demonstrate this through and analysis of, what I believe to be his greatest work: The Trilogy of paintings known as: The Oath of the Horatii, The Death of Socrates, and The Lictors Bring to Brutus the Bodies of His Sons.  I believe they were conceived as one grand work, or they became that, soon after The Oath of the Horatii was put on display in 1785, and promptly misunderstood.

The work that gave him fame beyond his peers, was not fully understood.

He had been on an absolute high, both artistically and intellectually, during his time in Rome (In 1774, David was awarded the Prix de Rome.)  His eyes had been opened to the classic world that influenced him in ways he couldn’t have imagined.  He found and fell in love with ancient poems and the characters that inhabit their verse.   The tales seem devoid of the complexity heaped on the happenings of France by the opinion makers, and yet clearly demonstrated what he saw happening in his homeland.

French society was breaking under the pressure of injustice, greed, and change in most systems affecting the citizenry.  Institutions were either imploding or bursting at the seams.  David saw these things happening around him and only saw destruction and mayhem being the end of every road he looked down.  France was facing many trials, with great passions motivating a many faceted fight for blood and treasure.  David found inspiration in famous trials of the past.  Focusing on the actions taken before and after those trials and the consequences that later revealed themselves.

He created The Oath of the Horatii (and the Trilogy of works) to open a dialogue contemplating the consequences of faction based passionate action, founded on deceitfully contrived anecdotal evidence.

 

Neither side thought of its own danger, but of the nation’s sovereignty or servitude, and how from that day forward their country must experience the fortune they should themselves create.

Titus Livius (Livy), The History of Rome, Book 1 Chapter 25 Verse 3

 

The brothers are not raising their hands in an oath, they are eagerly reaching for the swords!  Not patiently waiting to have the swords handed to them.  They are passionately eager to claim their role in the moment, to grab their swords.  Those roles seem so clear, and they were, but through the clarity of hindsight, we can see the unseen consequences of the participants.  Those are what David was hoping society would ponder and slow the rush to judgement.

The father is holding the swords up to heaven seeking the god’s help, and making his fatherly oath and bargain.  His sons, eager to prove themselves and etch their names in stone, as he holds their weapons in restraint as he seeks guidance and blessing from above.  His restraining left hand clenching the swords is the actual vanishing point of the painting.

The two brothers in the back are reaching with their left hands, which reveals that they (all three brothers) are not the ones who are making an oath, and they (the two brothers in the back) are the ones who will fall in the battle to come.  Horatius, the brother who is victorious, is in the foreground using his right (correct) hand and, is also holding a spear, symbolic of the spoils of combat.

The daughters, wives, and sisters of the men sit in solemn despair in the periphery, as they face a hopeless future.  Death is coming in one devastating form or another.  Camilla (symbolically wearing the colors of the Monarchy), the one to be pitied most of all, as Sabina (wrapped in the purity of white) lovingly shows.

David, expected the viewers to know Titus Livy’s story and contemplate the lessons it conveys about both; civil duty and, the consequences of taking a singular or myopic, not fully informed position during passionate times.

 

“I Appeal!”

Horatius.  Titus Livius (Livy), The History of Rome, Book 1 Chapter 26 Verse 8

 

The Oath of the Horatii didn’t have the effect he had hoped for in one sense, but it did satisfy other needs; he now had more fame and clout.  With that power he wanted to make his communications to all strata of society more clear and effective.  He and his students: Drouais and Girodet, formed a cabal of truth, and planned to communicate that truth.

In 1786, he took on the task of recreating this work for the inclusion of further symbolism to more clearly communicate his message, and unite this work with the other two of the trilogy to come.  To aid in the recognition, in the next two works he places the symbols in the center of the paintings, here he places it at the feet of Sabina; the spindle and distaff.

I believe David is referring to Clotho, one of the three Sisters known as the Moirai or, The Fates, from ancient Greek Mythology.  Clotho determines the lives of people.   She is the sister who spins the thread of life for each man, and in this instance, all of French society.  Once she has, it is set and ready to be measured.  There is no going back if they don’t like the results of their chosen action.

Once he had finished the second version of The Oath of the Horatii, David got busy completing the second work in the trilogy; The Death of Socrates.

I have completed a much more detailed analysis of this painting (It was through this analysis that I discovered the grouping and uniting symbolism of all three.) that I will include here and reveal the symbol after.

The image must be read from right to left.  The painting is a graphical timeline, with the defining event at the center of the timeline.  The subjects to the right are before the event and the subjects to the left are after the event.  Also, the placement and symbolism of the people in the painting are paramount.  The characters are in groups of three (excluding Socrates) with each group representing a bigger concept (that communication and Da Vinci’s Last Supper being an inspiration, explain the reduction of people represented from 15 to 12.)

The first group is the three to the extreme right, and none of them are looking at Socrates.  But they each represent the current (circa 1787) ruling powers.  The furthest right character, with his back to Socrates, represents the military.  They have their right hand up in defeat or frustration, and their left hand rubbing their eyes in a manner of having a stress headache, or possibly rubbing out the dirt of North America and elsewhere.  Either way, their eyes are closed and their back is turned.  They are powerless to affect any real change in France today.

The second character is the old man who seems to be looking at Socrates but is not.  He represents the Clergy.  Even his dress is a simple one-color robe reminiscent of a monk.  His gaze is on the raised finger of Socrates and not Socrates himself.  Communicating they are focused on Heaven or the afterlife with their left eye, but they are covering the ear pointed towards the people!  They won’t listen to the cries of those seeking relief.  (I think David is also saying they should pluck out their wandering right eye for it is causing sin.  If nothing else, it isn’t being used to focus where it should.)  They too are powerless to help the people of France.

The third of the group is the man with his head in his hands.  He represents the Monarchy.  His beautiful clothes in the colors of the Royal flag.  He has his face turned from the people and his head is in his left hand almost as if he is asleep standing.  His body also carries a certain tension that communicates cringing shame, forcing the king to turn his face from his people (his shame will be discussed further when speaking of Socrates.)  Also, if you look, the way his right hand is painted, it, or his wrist is covering his mouth.  So, he is asleep standing, and even if he was awake, he isn’t clearly saying anything.  And, directly above the monarchy in the shadows that haven’t been killed by the morning light, sits a shackle chain hook, which I believe shows David’s desire to have the king jailed in some near future.  (Note, it isn’t an executioners axe, his vote for execution is still years away.) That gesture of covering his mouth also completes a see no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil concept in this first grouping.

The second grouping is the three looking directly and intently at Socrates.  They represent the middle and lower classes.  The two in the back could be Critias and Alcibiades, but either way, I think they represent the ambitious and focused middle class, who may be pushed to the back and obscured by the ruling powers, but they are engaged and aware.  The third of the group is the man sitting in front of Socrates and touching his leg, I believe, this is the man who walked Socrates through the effects of the hemlock.  His hand is almost in a pinching motion representing the process of detecting the effects of the poison as it slowly crawls up Socrates’ deadening body (some have stated that David put his signature under this man to show his connection to him.  I can accept that because I believe David did see himself as the one documenting the cold death moving towards the heart of the France he was born into, and his placement in the timeline puts him, and his awareness, just ahead of the rest of society.  If that is the case I believe David is also connecting himself with the Owl of Athena seen as a symbol of knowledge, wisdom, perspicacity and erudition.)  I think he represents both the philosophers and the Third Estate.  For the first time, the people are in front, aware and clamoring for action.  They are the ones who must hear and understand the truth of Socrates teachings.  Understand when one must act and not just speak, especially from a distance, in exile from the real world.

Those two groups of three, also comprise the whole group of those to the right of Socrates.  They represent all of French society who are before the choice is made.   Like, David, they live in a world pre-action, pre-choice.  (Here they are clearly seen by David, they inhabit his real and tangible world.  They are at odds but still tightly grouped together.)   They still have time to ready themselves with knowledge and understanding of truth.  But, he also communicates the first group is entirely self-absorbed, and the coming events will catch them off guard.

Then we come to the figure of Socrates himself.  He represents both the man and his teachings.  Aged and focused on the purity of the afterlife, and eternally youthful and alive in the now.  Most importantly he is not swayed by the flurry of emotion and fear of those around him.  He has based his decision on pure truth and logic and happily anticipates his bodily death so he can be stripped of that last anchor of fleshly desires that obscures pure truth and understanding.

I want to take a second to focus on his gaze.  It is not on the man in front of him but to the man I say represents the monarchy.  Socrates entire head evokes the classic image of a wise and judging God.  A dialogue could be; Socrates, a man who has only begun to glimpse the divine is saying, “Shame on you!  Look to pure truth in thought and action.  If you had, you wouldn’t need to hide your face in shame from your subjects.”  This evokes the story of Esau; who sold his birthright to feed his flesh.  Then later when great change was coming, he desired his blessing but was rejected, and found no place for repentance even though he sought it with tears.

As the timeline moves along we come to the area of the focal point.  In this area are many important symbols at play.  The main focus of our eyes is the chalice and the hand, but they are just a part of the communication of this area.  This is the area of decision.  This is what this work of art is all about.   The moment of action to which there is no going back. That is surprisingly represented by the shadow of the incense burner stand! That shadow reveals something very interesting; there is no burner on its top.  Because in the moment of action, everything stops!  There aren’t even prayers offered up to God, and even our faith is seemingly missing.  The modern concept of Schrodinger’s box best exemplifies the stands shadow.

That moment of action (shadow of burner stand) goes right through a lyre sitting on the bed.  It represents (of course his recent recurring dream to make music) Apollonian virtues of moderation and equilibrium, being contrasted by the Dionysian pipes which represented ecstasy and celebration, again calling back to a choice between pure and real and fleshly and temporal.

From under the lyre snakes a chain.  I think it goes under the lyre and reaches from somewhere behind Socrates, somewhere in the past, but we don’t really know where it starts.  But, we do know it moves through the moment of decision and sometimes is seen and sometimes is obscured.  It moves down into the shadows and from below, like some ancient familiar evil, it ends up an open shackle like a trap hoping to ensnare those even before the moment of decision.  It could also be viewed as; once Socrates drinks of the chalice and puts his foot down to walk until his legs are heavy, he will be locked into the reality of that decision. It could even represent justice making its way back to the monarch, who’s sins and apathy are so great even the passage of time offers no escape for them.  He was freed from the tethers of the terrestrial so he could join the celestial.

Move a little further in time and the shock of the action is over, the faith of the people is real and tangible, and their prayers are reaching to God.

We now come to the next group of figures.  I believe they are a mutated echo of the earlier groups.  But now they are confused, morphed, and dislodged from the perceived unity.  They are only speculation in David’s mind.  But, I think they represent the three that David thinks will still be relevant and present.  The first man handing the cup to Socrates represents the people and possibly the military. He is the transformed version of the man sitting with his hand on Socrates.   He is still in the forefront, but now he is young and powerful, and the catalyst for the event.  He is covering his eyes.  Why?  Is he blind to what he is doing?  Is he blinding himself to this, thus being in denial of his actions?  Or is he ashamed of what he did?  Either way, his left foot tells us he is moving away from his act (if you put the scene in motion, Socrates will catch the cup at the shadow.)

The man in blue in the background represents the new wealthy merchant/middle class who wears the beautiful robes like the monarchy.  They are in despair in their world of uncertainty and stop in the light to get their bearings before they continue down the dark hallway of the future.

The last and most important figure is the defeated man at the end of the bed.  This is Crito! (David had said his portrayal of Crito was based on this reference: Near the window sat Mr. John Harlowe, his face and his body turned from the sorrowing company; his eyes red and swelled. CLARISSA HARLOWE, or the HISTORY OF A YOUNG LADY Volume IX. LETTER XXVI.)  He has already lost his argument with his teacher and has even used his cloak to cover his mouth to keep from continuing and making his teacher upset at this moment.  He has set down his ink and scroll, there are no more words to be written down, only action to be endured.  In mere moments Socrates will drink from the chalice and Crito will become too emotional and will leave.  But for right now he represents the church and academia.  Sitting stoically in contemplation of his role in the future.  David again harkens back to Socrates past to remind us what Crito should base this contemplation upon.  So much so he is literally sitting on it!  LD.  LD refers to the year 450 BC (I also believe it stands for Leonardo Da Vinci…which means, read right to left.) One could possibly read the two stone blocks combined as a message from David.  “450 at Athens.  L. David.”

In 450 BC, Socrates traveled to Athens and met Parmenides and his Eleatic school of philosophy.  Again, David is pleading for those in power to use reason and logic based in truth to make their decisions.  And, I think David desperately hoped it could be accomplished through dialogue and discussions (like this very painting) and not bloodshed.

That leaves the last group walking up the stairs and leaving this timeline.  They are the three that will be cast out of the timeline into the outer reaches of history and be ignored by the greater society.

There is an old man with a cane who I believe represents the monarchy and possibly, what David perceives to be the evil of the church as well (connecting the two with being the only ones with an obviously open mouth and similar colored garments.)  He is old and frail.  He has had his time in the sun and has been allowed to keep his vain golden robes as he exits, but the symbolic blue he was wearing is now being worn by someone else.

The taller man beside him represents the powerful but ignorant parts of the military and others who have always blindly assisted the Monarchy maintain its power.  Even now, quite a distance from the moment of decision, he is by the king’s side as he walks in shame, the two forever linked.  Because the youthful and powerful man is so caught up in his senses and emotions his own hand blinds him as he navigates the stairs (being an example of, the consequences of basing your actions on senses and feelings, and not logic and truth.)  He continues to be led around by the old king.

Lastly, there is Xanthippe, waving good-bye.  She isn’t being pushed out as fast, and there is a fondness and comfort in her.  I think she represents the good, the loved, the traditions, and the familiar that will be a casualty of this great change.  She follows the others out into their stormy exile, but she is the one Crito and his group can’t bear to look at as she departs, and they desperately hope she will be found again soon!

 

“Crito, we owe a rooster to Asclepius. Please, don’t forget to pay the debt.”

The final words of Socrates. 399 B.C.

 

Now closer to the actual beginning of the French Revolution, David can see more clearly how society will fracture.  Again, he passionately pleads for all to be slow to action and reaction, no matter how justified they feel in the moment.  Fear the mob mentality, embrace reason and dialogue.

In, The Oath of the Horatii David reminds us of Clotho and how, our fate will be set by our action.  In, The Death of Socrates, David reminds us of Lachesis, the daughter of Necessity, with her measuring rod, (depicted by the lamp/incense burner stand) and how we can still choose the life we will lead in this coming “afterlife” that will exist after our actions are taken.

The third work is: Brutus Returning Home after Having Sentenced His Sons for Plotting a Tarquinian Restoration and Conspiring against Roman Freedom; the Lictors Bring their Bodies to be Buried or, The Lictors Bring to Brutus the Bodies of His Sons, is left with the inspiration of Atropos and her abhorred shears.

The oldest of the Sisters, she is known as the inevitable, the bringer of death, as she cuts the spun and measured life of men.  The inflexible reward of death that each man is due as consequences, once the sum of your choices has been measured.

Another way to understand both the Fates and this trio of paintings is: Clotho is the was, Lachesis is the is, and Atropos is the will be.

The Tarquinian Conspiracy was about the sons of Brutus, along with many powerful people, conspiring against the new republic and siding with the overthrown monarchy.  The actual truth of what happened or how nefarious this plot really was is a little hard to understand because the whole incident was politicized and propagandized by the writers of history.  None the less, there were severe and personal consequences for standing with the rule of law, or the rule of the mob.

Be educated and aware of the world around you.  Act only based on factual and historically proven logic and reason.  Don’t follow the mob with its passionately singular focus with no regard for the greater consequences to come.

I have chosen to interpret David as a cold calculating intellectual viewing the world, more or less, as emotionless facts.  Which brings with it a certain removal of morality and empathetic intimacy.  Yet, I know he was a passionate man.  I claim he cried out for introspection and contemplation of the long-term effects of the action taken by those in power, including himself.  But, I could also portray most communication in these works as a much more sinister communication to those in power that he perceives as being on the wrong side of history.  Either way, these works deserve our reverence and a deeper inspection of what he was trying to communicate to us all.

I hope this analysis can bring a new dialogue about David and his work, and an examination of our current times and how perfectly they match both his time, and the times he refers to in these great works of art.

I also want to stress that these interpretations are not complete or to be taken as the complete communication taking place in these works.  In fact, I believe there are three levels of communication taking place in all three paintings and all three levels need to be understood to fully appreciate the paintings.

 

 

“In all human activity the violent and transitory develops first; repose and profundity appear last. The recognition of these latter qualities requires time; only great masters have them, while their pupils have access only to violent passions.”

Jacques Louis David

 

 

MutemanDeafcat

P.S.  This is obviously not an academic paper and it will continue to evolve as I (randomly) choose to spent time on this project.  I have composed my theories on limited research material (don’t read french) and have recently purchased a book that should further my understanding considerably.  I will complete my analysis of The Lictors Bring to Brutus the Bodies of His Sons very soon and, add it to this post.  I posted this in its incomplete form as a cry in the dark for some dialogue about these topics…which I hope is forthcoming.  Thank You for reading!

 

 

All Content Copyright © 2016-2018 Mutemandeafcat and/or Mikel Brown. All rights Reserved.