Neo-Classical Art and Romanticism Case Study

Art has always been used as a means of expression and of confirmation of events and movements that take place in the society in that respective period of time. The Neo-Classical and Romanticist art makes no exception to this rule and the two periods have been considered in the history of artistic art as two of the most representative for the expressivity they brought to the world of the arts as well as through the painters they inspired. Jacques-Louis David and Eugene Delacroix are two of the most representative painters of the New Classical period and the Romanticist art and their paintings are significant for the symbols and ideals these two periods provided for the artistic world.
Neo-classical art must be seen in the wider context of the 18th century and the era of Enlightenment when the new perceptions on the role of reason were redefined against the concepts of the religious directions of thought or the ones of the state. In this sense, the Enlightenment period was seen as a revolutionary move particularly because of the detachment from the previous era of the Renaissance in which the religious forces played a crucial role, especially in terms of painting. Therefore, the painters followed the path opened by writers such as Jane Austen, John Milton or Daniel Defoe that provided images of humans with flaws, physical and emotional, rather than to present them as symbols of perfection. From this point-of-view, the human being became a complex individual, guided by more than emotions of religious aspiration, whose reason would eventually prevail in the face of guided external thought.
The Romantic period on the other hand, despite the fact that it was still a reaction to the Renaissance line of thought had a different approach towards literature and arts. The Romantic hero was still flawed yet guided by inner feelings that most often transformed into deep passions and emotional outbreaks. Significant writers of this period include Victor Hugo, Keats, Blake, or Wordsworth.
In the arts world the two currents were clearly defined by the two painters, David and Delacroix. Both of them, through their masterpieces, portrayed the feelings of their time. David, in “Oath of the Horatii” depicts a scene from Ancient Rome in which an oath to defend Rome and restore peace is presented. The actual story and historical background of the image is significant for a thorough analysis, one that would further provide the proof that the image in itself is not a depiction of a historical truth but rather a result of the painter’s imagination. However, it must be pointed out that the paining provides all the elements of a neo-classical work. It is inspired from a classical environment, that of ancient Rome, and it depicts in fact the feelings of bravery, honor, courage, commitment that are traditional for the neo-classical period.
By comparison, Delacroix’s painting, “Liberty leading the people” expresses fully the image of the Romanticist current. More precisely, the depiction of a strong, beautiful woman as the symbol of liberty and freedom suggests a sense of courage and bravery that is not however similar to that provided David’s painting. While the former is based on revolutionary emotions and feelings, the latter focuses on the courage that is derived from mass emotions uncontrolled by any sense of state duty. The painting reflects in a way the image of the French revolution not only through the flag that Marianne, the symbol of the Revolution is holding in her hand but also through her appearance, young, strong, determined, beautiful, and committed to the liberated people.
There is a considerable difference between the two paintings in terms of the way in which the two painters decided to depict both courage and revolution. For the first part, the driving force of the Horatii came from a deep sense of education in the spirits of the war and in the political conflicts, as Rome was a constant place for political discrepancies. In the second painting, the courage comes from the masses. There is no real account of a woman having been at the heart of the French Revolution nor having the crowds motivated by one. Yet, the courage expressed by her symbolizes the forces that stood at the core of the revolution which were the common people, uneducated, yet with a particular sense for civil rights.
In terms of the way in which the two painters saw the revolution, one in Ancient Greece and the other in 19th century France, is again significant because the two pointed out distinct elements. In the first case, the so called “revolution” was pointed out implicitly and the representatives were part of the high class of ancient Rome. The nature of their revolution had a particular sense of nobleman provided even in the background of the paining. The characters are sober and full of the emotion of the event. However, the main impression is that of rationality behind the actions of the oath. By comparison, Delacroix’s paining is rich in revolutionary stamina, in the belief that, despite the deaths that are depicted, there is hope in the lighter sky on the background and in the child that is also presented in the painting, maybe symbolizing the new generation that would be free from the oppression.
Overall, the neo-classical and romantic periods provided impressive examples of paintings that transformed the artistic thought and means in which reason and emotions alike can be depicted though paintings.