Neoclassicism and Romanticism

Often the question is posed whether art imitates life or life imitates art in the attempt to understand whether artistic expression influences culture or vice versa. In some cases, art is a reaction to contemporary issues or attitudes; in others, art influences that culture. Neoclassicism and Romanticism evolved as art movements in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, inherently influenced by both the artists and the environments in which these artists lived. By nature, or more so technique, these movements represent two very disparate popular mindsets that occurred within a small time frame. A Marat by Jacques-Louis David and The Raft of the Medusa by Theodore Gericault represent the epitome of Neoclassical and Romantic style, respectively. However, despite the stark differences in style, these works share just as much common ground as they do differences; moreover, the development of both is rooted in the same spirit of change.

   The Neoclassical movement arose as a reaction to the superficial and extravagantly ornate style of the Rococo. This new style of painters looked back to Greek and Roman copies of sculptures and paintings, using the inclination towards the perfection of the human form to express and paint their own subject matter.  A Marat represents one of David’s more famous works, but it also exemplifies some of his most poignant qualities as a painter with a political message to convey. As the Revolution took France by storm, David painted scenes with mythological and classical allegories, drawing on antiquity to express his patriotic sentiments. In the case of Marat, a close friend of David and a very prominent revolutionary writer was assassinated in his bathtub, causing much uproar among the supporters of a new French government. David’s crisp and haunting depiction of this moment served as the Neoclassical period’s answer to propaganda art in a sense.

    In the same fashion that Neoclassicism became a movement in order to counteract the useless decoration of the Rococo, Romanticism became a countermovement where color and stroke took precedence over subject and line. Nature and emotion became the focus of many painters and their work, especially since the new century brought in much change with the end of the French revolution. The Raft of the Medusa is a very relevant to understanding the concept of Romanticism because the painting plays on emotions very well. A true story of survival at sea, despite cannibalism and mental instability, was depicted in a way that incited compassion in the viewer, which to this day is regarded as powerful (Eisenmen 25).

    In light of their separate doctrines, these paintings have both similarities and differences. Both Marat and The Raft of Medusa focus on an aspect of death and sacrifice. Marat is immortalized in this painting as a martyr for his views on the revolution and for the literature which he produced. The men (or better yet wraiths) on the raft are lost at sea, forced to eat other for survival. Stylistically, Marat is much more stoic and calculated, his milky white skin reminiscent of the marble of Greek statues. The tone is very serious; his technique is very academically inclined with the crisp lines and the stark Caravaggian light. The Raft of Medusa, however, is much more expressive and dramatic, relying on emotion to convey its point. The composition is dynamic and chaotic, the proto-journalist approach is noted.

    Although both styles of art are aesthetically pleasing, they both served very different purposes in French society. Their intentions were to alert the people of change, but certain paintings were more inclined to cause feelings of unity and uplift in viewers. When comparing both movements, the Romantic movement prevailed in terms of chronological triumph. The Romantic movement succeeded Neoclassical, but it took a very long time for Neoclassical to evolve from Rococo. Essentially, these two paintings describe the two art movements, or at least represent of their most salient qualities.

CITATIONS

Eisenman, Stephen, and Thomas E. Crow. Nineteenth Century Art: A Critical History. London: Thames and Hudson, 1994. Print.