The art historian Simon Schama did a series a few years ago called, The Power of Art where he looked at the impact of a number of influential artists in Western History. One of the men he discusses is Jacques-Louis David, the man who painted many famous works, among them "The Death of Socrates", "The Oath of Horatii", "The Oath of the Tennis Court", "Napoleon Crossing the Alps", and "The Death of Marat". Schama's discusses all these works but it is "The Death of Marat" that he is most focused on. David's painting showing the radical, Jean Paul Marat, dead in his bathtub is controversial because Marat is depicted as a victim, not the bloodthirsty friend to Robespierre and the man most responsible for the thousands of arbitrary deaths during the Terror.
So, the question is why would David paint Marat as a victim? I have included the video for you to watch. Please comment on David and how he represents the dilemma historians face understanding the true meaning of the French Revolution.
Part I is below; the other parts are linked here
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
David paints Marat as a sacred martyr of the Revolution. Marat resembles Jesus in many ways, a powerful statement. While historians debate whether the terror outweighed the freedom gained from the French Revolution, David clearly believes that Marat's use of terror was virtuous and necessary in purifying France from the oppression of monarchy.
ReplyDeleteI think David painted Marat as a victim because he wanted to show how unstable and chaotic the revolution was. This shows that the man who was one of the leaders of the revolution during the radical phase ended up dead. This can be connected to Robespierre who was also killed near the revolution. They were both victims of the revolution which they both helped to create. I think David was portraying that the revolution hurt everybody, even those who helped create it
ReplyDeleteDavid believed that Marat was saint and not a monster. He painted Marat as a victum because he was mad that they didn't accept virtue during the revoulution. His art was used to show what a true citizen was, which is why he painted Marat as a paragan of virtue. By the citizens not following virtue he believed that it would lead to death because they were not accepting what he believed.
ReplyDeletei think that david portrayed marat as a saint because he wanted to show the public the tragedy of murder. It stands as irony that a man who directed so much killing could be so emotionless. Marat killed so many and never looked back, but when he was killed it was a tragedy. It shows how death was tragic.
ReplyDeleteJeff Loube
David illustrated Marat as both a victim and a saint. Marat was a man who helped create the revolution and was bloodthirsty throughout its entirety. Marat strived to attain virtue throughout his life, and he thought what he was doing in the revolution was virtuous. When Marat was killed, David portrayed Marat as a victim, because his death was tragic, just like a death of a saint would be. The revolution was also tragic, like his death because it killed many people and the revolutionaries did not attain virtue.
ReplyDeleteIn this magnitude of a revolution, there are nothing but victims. Marat was so wrapped up in the revolution and what he was supposed to do, that he could not tell right from wrong. Marat thought that what he was doing was right and in a way so did Robespierre. This painting however goes deeper than that. David was disliked by a lot of people and his mentality about the French Revolution aided in the reason he depicted Marat as a saint. This painting is more about David than Marat. There are two main reasons why David decided to depict Marat as a saint and a victim. The first is that everyone was a victim and David portrayed this in the painting. The second is that David liked the revolution and wanted to shock people like Robespierre was doing with his reign of terror. Marat is no more a victim than the people that he indirectly killed. The revolution its self is the only thing that is not a victim here. The revolution takes victims and Marat just happened to be one of them.
ReplyDeleteMarat is depicted as a saint by David, in the way that he was only carrying out his duties to the revolution. He thought that he had control over what he was doing, but in the end he was just another victim to the revolution. Any man with some sort of power was eventually destined to be killed during the French Revolution. The Revolution is the all-seeing power, no influential leaders can be safe. This is shown in the deaths of the King and Marat. Although they seem confident, their actions eventually get themselves killed. Unless every person agreed on the views of Marat, which is impossible, it is inevitable he would eventually die at the hand of the revolution.
ReplyDeleteDavid portrayed Marat as a true leader that was murdered as he was carrying out his job for the revolution. He painted Marat as a victim because he believed in the Revolution and that is a problem because the Revolution is viewed as repulsive. Just as Thomas said, his greatest downfall was him gaining to much power and this resulted in his death.
ReplyDeleteJacques-Louis David painted Marat as the victim, even though he was as bloodthirsty as Robespierre, because he probably agreed with what Marat suggested and contributed to the Revolution. The fact that he is the victim of an assasination shows us how David believes that his ideals were beneficial to society, and that we the people were the bloodthirsty ones. The dilema we face today is how to interpret the way the French Revolution was executed from the artifacts in information we have. All the painters and writers of the time had different opinions on the French Revolution, and there was never a unanimous agreement on how the Revolution should be executed. This leaves a mystery about the Revolution's actions to ultimately gain liberty.
ReplyDeleteDavid painted Marat as a victim and this represents that he thought Marat was trying to help the revolution moving forward. David believed that the thousands of deaths caused by Marat and Robespierre was necessary and by killing Marat,, the revolution took a step backwards. Historians face this dilemma on whether to describe Marat as a monster or a man just doing his job. In fact, the entire revolution gives historians problems because Marat was trying to help in his mind but not in the mind of others. Everyone has a different opinion. No one knows exctly how the revolution should have went.
ReplyDeleteJacques-Louis David painted Marat as a victim to show many different aspects about the french revolution and life in general. First, he wanted to show how violent and chaotic that era was. Being one of the most influential leaders, he later ends up dying. This clearly shows that the revolution has brainwashed many of the followers. This painting also gets across the point that a desire must be kept under control because too much desire will lead to many uncivil acts ultimately homicide. The citizens desired peace and stability that Marat has offered that when they did not achieve it, they took their anger out on Marat.
ReplyDelete-JC Lee
After revolution was in motion,David felt the spirit of the people.This spirit was bigger than the people.He saw the best direction of France in the hands of his idols Marat and Robespierre.He kept this loyalty to his idols,as the heart of the Revolution from this point on,even through the reign of Terror.Because David was faithful to the Revolution,when he painted Marat dead,David saw this as a tragedy and step in the wrong direction because Marat was a permanent symbol of freedom and revolution.He painted him as the selfless victim, because the true freedom and order(Terror) that he brought to France was being destroyed.(David#2)Because David was loyal to the leaders of the Reign of Terror, he makes the dilemma of his biased towards Marat, and not to the country.David may have felt comfort from the Reign of Terror,and this makes it difficult to say whether it was completely bad or not.Because the leaders of the French Revolution in the Radical phase,who David likes,were violent,the true feeling of the country is unclear.Although David paints Marat as selfless,others see him as destructive.
ReplyDeleteWhen Jacques-Louis David painted the famous artwork "The Death of Marat”, it was known as both his unforgettable masterpiece and his unforgivable crime. For nearly thirty years, it was hidden from the public; David dared not show his work. It delineated the bloodthirsty Marat as a victim. Normally, the death of the man who caused thousands of men throughout France to die would be depicted as a positive notion. However, through his artwork, David sees Marat as a martyr. He saw his death as a tragedy. He believed that what Marat worked for was virtuous and that he was just another victim of the revolution. Marat was only working for the benefit of society, and his death was just like any of the others during the revolution. While many saw Marat as a bloodthirsty killer, David saw him for what he worked for, as one of the many tools that worked for the eventual goal of equality and liberty.
ReplyDeleteIn his painting, David portrayed Marat as a victim, demonstrating how unstable the Revolution was. Not only did the painting display how chaotic the Revolution was, but he also displays how he believes that the reign of terror is a terrible idea since there is no security, even among the leaders. The death of Marat was a significant occasion because it demonstrated the true nature of the Revolution as an act to give the people their natural rights, but I still believe that it is impossible to discern David's feelings about the unstable topic.
ReplyDeleteI believe that David paints Marat as a victim because Marat in the eyes of David, Marat was a hero than a monster. He embodies the struggle to return to the reason and logical way of living of the ancients. In David's other paintings, such as the "Oath of Horatii" and "The Death of Socrates", he shows an intense love for the ancient way of life. He considers Marat a hero for striving against all ends to return to this way of life and overthrow the horrors of absolute monarchy. David represents that struggle to change the ways of life from the monarchy of 18th century France into a democracy.
ReplyDeleteDavid painted Marat as a victim because he believes that Marat was a victim of human desires and emotions through his lust for power and supreme domination during the Terror of the French Revolution. He is a man that had the noblest of intentions however he was overcome by the evil in all humans. He wanted to show that Marat was a man of logic but was a victim to emotion. In the picture Marat is holding a piece of paper which could be representive of a plan but then it has all gone wrong because of a human wrong in the assasination of Marat. It is an internal struggle where emotion has won out over logic.
ReplyDeleteI think David painted Marat as a victim because Marat was an actual victim of the revolution. Although he did help kill plenty of people it does not negate the fact that he was murdered because of the revolution and one persons view of it. Marats murder might be just and good for the revolution but he is still a victim of the murder happy revolution he started.
ReplyDeleteI believe that Marat was portrayed as a victim by David because he was a victim in his murder. He was killed in cold blood in his bath tub and looked very defensive. He did help kill many people throughout his life but he was also killed which may have made him a victim. But this painting does show how the revolution was very unstable because it shows the rights that the citizens had to take justice into their own hands. This shows the terror of the Revolution that the citizens portrayed. David clearly shows his opinions on this time and how he was against the revolution.
ReplyDeleteI believe that Marat was painted as a victim rather than a bloodthirsty powerhungry monster to symbolize the chaos, confusion and turmoil that these times brought about. During the time of the revolution, it was quite often hard to tell who was good and who was bad. Sure, most of the philosophes and major revolutionary thinkers were coaxing the french to revolt and go against their king, but the absolute monarchy of France had been a feared medieval power for centuries. The transition from the old France to the new one wasn't exactly the smoothest either. This is why I believe David portrayed Marat in this way; he wanted the French people, blind with anger and the promise of a better tomorrow, to stop and look at what they were doing from another point of view. Also, portraying Marat as just a victim shows that, even though he did some pretty evil things in his lifetime, he is still at heart a human being just like every one of us.
ReplyDeleteJacques-Louis David portrayed Marat as a victim instead of a villain because he believed that the revolutionaries were the real villains. He believed the leaders of the revolutionary were not creating a utopia but a distopia. This is understandable considering David was forced to hide his artwork much like Winston in Orwell's 1984 was forced to hide his journal. The revolutionaries destroyed the stability of the old regime and replaced it with terror under the guise of justice.
ReplyDeleteDavid portrayed Marat as a saint because although he was willing killer himself he was virtuous and did what he believed. He shows his support by painting Marat's death as an assasination in his own home at a table which seems to be an inhonorable way to kill. This seems like an illustration of the revolution because it is about turmoil. A murder of thousands, in his pursuit of change, was killed showing that maybe the revolution wasn't very organized or driven by one idea, people just wanted some sort of change not knowing what it really meant.
ReplyDeleteMarat portrayed as a victim by David was a way of showing the necessary evil needed to start and end a Revolution. Marat killing endless amounts of people was a necessary evil, as was the killing of Marat. The confusion created by this makes it difficult to grasp the real good and bad sides of the Revolution.
ReplyDeleteMarat is portrayed as a victim in this painting to show the ravenous appetite of the French Revolution. David depicts the idea of if you play with fire you will get burned. Marat simply put himself into the mouth of the beast and was bitten. The objective of the painting seems to be showing Marat as just as much of a victim as the monarchs being murdered. He is a victim of his emotions taking control of his judgement
ReplyDeleteThough Jacques-Louis David delineates him as a victim, Marat is a victim of his own creation. By stirring a terrifically malicious sense of patriotism among the French people, Marat ultimately set about his own demise. "L'ami du peuple" encouraged his fellow revolutionaries to always be on the lookout for corruption or treason. So as their lust for blood and power grew, the people saw Marat's seemingly harmless altruism as a facade for his own ambition. Yet did they cleanse the innocent ears of the Revolution from a rambling two-faced Jacobin, or merely cut off their last beacon of hope and truth for a pragmatic reality? David was a first-hand witness to this glooming revolution, and saw the terror and confusion that it brought. Lost amid a world of accusations and conspiracies, many lost count of who was friend or foe. In a dark yet beautiful stroke of brush David captured the turmoil and tragedy of both Jean-Paul Marat and the French Revolution.
ReplyDeleteDavid portrayed Marat as a victim because his death was tragic just like the revolution. The revolution did not go according to plan just like Marat's plan. He eventually became a victim which he never wanted to be. David tries to get the idea across that you cannot alter revolutionary thoughts and you will be a victim if you try.
ReplyDeleteDavid paints Marat as a victim instead of a villain to transform him back into the public man he once was and by doing so David hoped to strengthen the support for the revolution he supported. David's painting is an attempt by him to reinspire the public in the cause. He paints Marat as a victim of those who do not support the revolution and its path. He paints him as if he were an angel ascending to heaven, a man of exemplary humanity. Although in real life this may be a lie, the idea of a righteous leader for the revolutionaries was more important then telling the truth. David's painting is a tool to create a stronger revolution.
ReplyDeleteBy portraying Marat as a victim, Jacques-Louis David made him a hero and a symbol of the Revolution. The image of Marat goes beyond this however, as the his murder represents the chaos and confusion that was occurring in France. Whether Marat was a Jacobin or a counter-revolutionist was irrelevant. He represents the violence and confusion of the time. Further, he, in a way, describes France. Like what Matthew said above, Marat lost sight of his ideals. I mean that he wanted to be France to grow and develop, but fell victim to his ambition. France, too lost sight of its ideals, causing the people to crave stability. The stability was answered by Napoleon. The painting not only shows the parallel between the Marat and France, but also the condition of man. Just like with Caesar, Marat's ambition was his downfall. Man is not content with what he has and always wants more. This desire or need has been at the root of all conflicts.
ReplyDeleteDavid painted Marat as the sacred figurehead of the revolution, as a martyr of the people instead of a bad leader as many others saw him as. He wanted to show him as a saint and a powerful man of the people, and not the leader of a failure of a revolution. He used Marat in his painting as a ideal citizen, doing what he thought was good for his country. Also, it portrays the sacrifice, even though the revolution may be for the people, it can also work against them.
ReplyDeleteWho is John in the above comment?
ReplyDeleteDavid sees Marat as a victim of the power lust that also struck Robespierre and several other people in history. In addition to this, while many see him as a cruel monster, he was murdered like any other and depicted as an innocent bystander, doing something completely normal- bathing. He was killed in cold blood and was depicted as a human being.
ReplyDeleteDavid painted Marat as a victim to display Marat, and, on a larger scale, all of France's eventual helplessness. In the beginning, Marat was a successful leader, which is shown by the paper and work around him. Marat, however, gets taken over by his own ideas, completely unintentionally. This notion removes all blame from anyone, and puts the leaders of the French Revolutions in the positions of martyrs rather than murderers. In his painting, David shows that focuses on the abstract idea behind the revolution rather than counting the causalities.
ReplyDeleteMarat is shown by David as the good person. The way David justifies it is by saying that Marat was just fulfilling his duties to the revolution. Marat was just another leader that tried to control what happened, but was in the end a victim of the revolution. Every man with power in the revolution was killed eventually, because everyone acted with emotion and no one made rational, reasoned decisions.
ReplyDeleteBy portraying Marat as a victim David shows how chaotic the time was. This painting illustrates that during the Revolution nothing was out of the question. Marat was a leader of the Revolution and a very powerful man yet he was killed. During the revolution nothing was ever certain as it constantly went different directions and David shows that in this paiting.
ReplyDeleteas many have put before, David is portraying Marat as a victim to the power rampage that most of man kind falls into. he displays how someone as powerful as Marat is able to be killed which is an underlying meaning for the uncertainty and helplessness of the country at this time
ReplyDeleteDavid is concerned with painting Marat as a victim because he wanted to make him into a martyr. Although Marat was a perpetrator of many violent acts and may be responsible for the deaths of many people, he too was killed by the violent mob that it the revolution had become. David is trying to show that revolutions can sometimes be out of control and anyone can get caught up.
ReplyDeleteAs many have said beforehand I must agree that by portraying Marat as a victim David is able to illustrate just how crazy or out of hand the time was during the French Revolution. Marat was just following orders and just like others was mistakenly killed during the Revolution. While many others died during the French Revolution Marat unfortunately became one of those people as well.
ReplyDeleteDavid portrays Marat as the victim in his painting to illustrate the failure of the French Revolution. When first looking at the painting, the viewer questions why Marat, the man responsible for the death of thousands of people, is shown dead. Upon further investigation, the painting reveals that Marat was a martyr and was consumed by the task of reforming France, as shown by the pen and paper in his hands. Therefore, in the painting, David expresses that Marat murdered thousands and died himself for the French Revolution but did not accomplish his goal in return.
ReplyDeleteDavid shows Marat as not only a victim of the revolution, which he helped create, but a saint during it. The painting is both breathtaking and mad as the narrator puts it, shows how david led the revolution to his own death.
ReplyDeleteDavid's portrayal of Marat as a victim perhaps shows his support for Marat's ideas for the future of the Revolution as well as his principles in general. For David, it is the people who misinterpreted Marat's ideas and took them to a radical level. In a sense, Marat is a victim of his own creation. Marat warned Revolutionaries to be constantly watchful for dissenters. Therefore, when the Revolution began to get out of hand, Marat was accused of being a traitor. His own ideas had come back to hurt him unintentionally. Therefore, the leaders of the Revolution, like Marat, previously perceived as murderers, are now perceived as victims and martyrs. David portrays the chaos and turmoil that the Revolution had caused in France. Clearly, it had gotten out of hand. David credits Marat for his brilliant ideas expressed in his L'ami du peuple, blaming the crazed people for the thousands of deaths, not Marat.
ReplyDeleteDavid painted Marat as a victim. Marat had meaning and reason behind his ideas for which he fought for and David saw these ideas which Marat fought for as the right ones. Therefore he painted him as a victim and as a saint because what Marat believed in was the correct and by killing a saint it showed that the Revolution ended up killing alot of the wrong people.
ReplyDeleteDavid portrayed Marat as a victim not only because he viewed him as a saint, but also because he respected the virtuous nature of Marat. By representing his death in a tragic way, he was able to increase support for the revolution. Similarly, the death of Marat was tragic just like the revolution itself. Therefore David was able to make Marat a symbol of a the tragedy of the french revolution.
ReplyDeleteMarat is showed as a victim of the revolution and therefore, a saint. He makes him look innocent to symbolize the tragic nature of the French revolution. Marat's plan for revolution ended up killing himself, so he died in a tragic way, just like the thousands of other innocent people.
ReplyDeleteSORRY I POSTED THIS SO LATE, EVERYTHING HAS BEEN REALLY CRAZY FOR THE LAST COUPLE WEEKS.ILL PICK IT UP.
ReplyDeleteI believe that David depicted Marat how Marat saw himself. throughout the revolution, Marat was thought to be even more blood thirsty and violent than Robespierre. That didnt matter because Marat truly thought that what he was doing was right. Marat would of seen himself as a saint and a victim. because he thought he was correctly guiding France to its salvation. And obviously, Marat was a victim of what he created.
There are a few reasons why he would paint Marat in this fashion. One of which being the idea that his view on Marat's decisions changed drastically at the time of his painting. Another point one can make is that the painter does not necessarily represent the painting. He could simply have painted the painting how Marat would have. Marat definitely would have painted himself as the victim, cruelly stabbed as he was taking a bath.
ReplyDeleteDavid painted Marat as a victim because he clearly believed that Marat's use of terror in the revolution was worth getting a good end result. He painted Marat as a victim to show that many were victimized by the revolution and all people suffered during the times of the terror.
ReplyDelete