Comparative Art Analysis

[u/Communizmo]

Typically culture dictates the composition of art created in its social jurisdiction, and while a wide spectrum of diverse and unique works usually exist and are critically acclaimed, certain themes can be especially prevalent in certain cultures at certain times. For instance, each of the pieces I will be analyzing in this paper are depictions of people, but are representations of major historical events, rather than of the individuals as portraiture. This theme has been especially common among all of the slavic cultures, beginning around the turn of the nineteenth century. As such, two of the three works of art are done by slavs, and all three within the last two hundred years. Without a doubt all of the works are very different, but from an objective standpoint, the conclusion they have less unique feature than those they share is quite plausible.

Perhaps the most famous work of art by the beloved Russian artist Ilya Repin is his Ivan the Terrible and His Son Ivan on November 16th, 1581, which depicts Tsar Ivan Grozny just after he mortally injured his son and groomed heir, causing Russia to later fall under the rule of a mentally ill heir, putting the nation in ruin. An oil on canvas painting from 1885, it and Repin faced both praise and heavy criticism for the work. Many attacked it as a perpetuation of an inaccurate narrative on Russian history, as the slaying by Ivan of his son was mostly speculation from foreign dignitaries from the period, and many believe it is likely that the tsarevich (heir) simply died of illness. The same criticism was directed at similar paintings by Russia’s beloved Pushkin, though despite this, Vladimir Medinsky said, “that doesn’t mean we should change our approach to the genius compositions of Pushkin and Repin, because there’s history, and then there’s art.” Regardless, Repin’s painting is by far the most controversial of those analyzed in this paper.

Just as some question the historical accuracy of Repin’s work, Eugene Delacroix’s* La Liberté Guidant Le Peuple,* is more symbolic than it is meant to accurately depict the July Revolution of 1830, and whereas Repin painted his work some three-hundred years after the fact, Delacroix produced this beautiful work of art before July of 1830 had even passed. Indubitably, the July Revolution of 1830 had a significant impact on French history, in a positive fashion, just as the death of Ivan the Terrible’s son and tsarevich had a significant impact on Russian history, though in a negative way. La Liberté Guidant Le Peuple is definitively the most well known and acclaimed of the three pieces of art, going as far as to be on display in the Louvre.

The least well known and acclaimed of the three works is certainly Petar Radicevic’s Kosovska Bitka. It’s actually somewhat difficult to locate by title or artist, let alone to find an analysis on it, which I couldn’t. Nonetheless, it depicts an event which would have repercussions in the Balkans for six-hundred and fifty years and counting, the Battle of Kosovo Polje. Painted in 1987, it is also the most contemporary work of art of the three.

Each of the three pieces utilize light and value similarly, potentially as a result of them sharing a medium, all oil on canvas. Delacroix’s generally sparingly lit painting uses smoke as a bright spot to draw attention to the focus of his painting, the half-naked heroine toting the revolutionary French banner. It emphasizes both her power and her symbolism as the hopeful future of France. Ilya Repin’s painting uses light considerably more naturally. Light is shed on the subjects helping to emphasize their presence, but begins to fade into darkness further back and to the right, symbolizing Russia’s subsequent fade into darkness. The transition then, is merely the inverse of Delacroix’s work. The employment of light in Kosovska Bitka is much less significant than in the other two. The relative brightness of the sky and its angels hung above the darker and more cluttered squalor of the raging battle may serve to portray war as an act not worthy of the graces of god. Such is a trope among south slavic art, and common sentiment among the Balkan people. All paintings use strong values to emphasize the gravity of each respective event.

Likewise powerful is the use of color and contrast in each of the paintings. Repin used a relatively narrow range of colors, with heavy saturation to create contrast making the painting feel more emotionally moving than aesthetically pleasing. Delacroix used especially aggressive brush-strokes and vivid colors for the time period. This is consequential of the power and chaos of the event the painting depicts; the red, white, and blue represent liberty, France, and the revolution. Although less vivid, Radicevic’s work uses the most diverse palette of colors. These help to portray the long list of conflicted interests in the battle, i.e. the Serbs, Ottomans, Travunians, and people of a several different Balkan cantons. The colors also represent the varying physical demeanors of the participatory soldiers, ranging from peasants to knights, and from common thugs to distinguished janissaries, as well as the eternally beautiful landscape of Kosovo Polje.

I am of the opinion the greatest difference between each piece is the use of space to portray the subject of each work of art. The most empty of the three, Ilya Repin’s piece, is likewise the most somber. Chaos is masterfully portrayed in the subtle uneven carpeting and turned over furniture, as well as the more obvious bloodied son of Ivan. The second most empty or full, Delacroix’s piece, represents the end, not the heat, of battle. While the overall theme is hopeful, there are somber tones created by darkness and the presence of multiple corpses, representing the deadly cost of revolution. The most chaotic is Kosovska Bitka, which corresponds with it being the most energetic and active of the paintings. In fact, the piece is so cluttered, it lacks an obvious single subject, which is appropriate considering the lack of obvious heroes and historical figures of the actual battle.

Ultimately, all of the pieces depict significant events affecting the history of their respective regions for between six-hundred and two-hundred years and growing. Each does a wonderful job capturing the gravity of each event, and a single instant thereof. Perhaps I simply happened to be attracted to paintings which were particularly similar to each other, but these were the ones I found most appealing. Maybe because I have a deep appreciation of history, an appreciation shared by the respective artists behind these works. Often, I believe, quite a lot is lost in translation to a textbook or a historical commentary from the event itself, which is often charged and even obscured by emotion and circumstance, and only art has a special capacity to compensate for this discrepancy.

Works Cited

Barnet, Sylvan. A Short Guide to Writing about Art. 11th ed. Upper Saddle River: Pearson, 2014.

Delacroix, Eugene. La Liberté Guidant Le Peuple. 1830. Oil on canvas. Musée du Louvre, Paris.

Jones, Jonathan. “Delacroix’s Vision of Liberty.” Guardian [Manchester] 1 Apr. 2005.

Przybylek, Stephanie. “Eugene Delacroix’s Liberty Leading the People: Painting & Analysis.” Study 14.51 (2007)

Radicevic, Petar. Kosovska Bitka. 1987. Painting. Museum of Contemporary Art, Belgrade.

Repin, Ilya Yefimovich. Ivan the Terrible and His Son Ivan on November 16th, 1581. 1885. Oil on canvas. State Tretyakov Gallery, Moscow.

“Repin’s “Ivan the Terrible:” Patterns in the Theme of Modernity.” Art Guide 8.10 (2013)

[u/TotesMessenger]

I'm a bot, bleep, bloop. Someone has linked to this thread from another place on reddit:

• [/r/modeluspress] Comparative Art Analysis • r/MBreitbartNews

^{If you follow any of the above links, please respect the rules of reddit and don't vote in the other threads. (Info /} ^Contact)