In all four of these paintings, there were many similarities that I noticed after examining them thoroughly. In the first painting, George Washington comes off as a cordial, welcoming individual since his arm is fanned out and the colors around him with the books make him seem scholarly and knowledgeable. In the other paintings, Touissaint appears to be on some sort of mission, Marat is lying dead in a bath tub after a stab wound, and Bolivar is pretentiously posing. In all four paintings, some more than others however, we see a similarity in how the heroes are portrayed as strong, intelligent, determined, and revered individuals who clearly had a lot of power and control. Also, we see the recurring theme of three of the leaders with some sort of weapon, like a sword, in the hands, which makes the leader appear far more intimidating and authoritative since they clearly have a weapon which could easily harm people who stand in their way. Marat, the only one without the weapon, is holding onto his pen and paper which offers a strong message about the dedicated and devoted individual he was when it came to playing a critical role in the revolution. All of these similarities are what cause these heroes to be depicted as essential parts to the revolution and make them seem as though they were all qualified for their positions.
The artists definitely drew these leaders the way that they did because they wanted them to seem heroic and almost like ideal individuals who played a major part in shaping the world during the revolution. It makes these leaders seem like the perfect, well-rounded people who were desperately needed during this uneasy time. George Washington seems scholarly, friendly, and confident all at the same time in his picture, while Marat is depicted as a tragic hero who faced death but didn’t leave without making a statement. His pen and paper remained in his hand along with a smug look on his face, showing his dedication and devotion to trying to exploit those who did not coincide with the terms of the revolution. Bolivar and Touissaint are both portrayed as people who clearly have control over the land and are very intelligent when it comes to obtaining power and wealth in the most efficient ways. These paintings influence future generations to try and live up to the high standards set by these outstanding leaders from the past.
Revolutions need heroic figures because in order to completely change a society for a specific matter, people like these leaders are necessary who aren’t afraid to stand up for what they believe in, rebel, take action, and take risks. Heroes are needed because they act like the voice of the people who are too intimidated to actually take action and try to make a change. The only way to change a way of life, is by having certain people dedicate their lives to trying and mitigate the situation by coming up with new and innovative solutions. Their actions are heroic about them because the decisions that people like them make end up influencing and affecting the lives of all the people around them. These are the people who obtain respect and power in society and therefore, these are the people others look up to for advice and direction. Their actions are crucial because when they are able to accomplish something helpful to the situation, their heroism prevails. The artists really capture the persons of these individuals as well, like their morals and personalities, while also depicting how scholarly and strong they are at the same time.
So do you think that at the time, these men thought "I should do this because we need a hero?" or worse "I'll be the hero if I do this," or do you think that we (people coming later) are the ones who decide "yeah, that guy is heroic."? I have a hard time with this one, because they clearly had a sense that what they were doing was "great" or would have a large impact on others, and I'm generally cynical about people and their motives...
ReplyDelete