Eugene Delacroix:
Romantic Art Movement Genius
An Essay
By
Thomas W. McKay
Artistic Critique by Artist L.B. McKay
The magnificent genius of artist Eugene Delacroix is well documented in Art History. In his native France he is immortalized and considered one of the greatest masters of his trade by both historians and his peers. Historian Charles Baudelaire was quite enamored of Delacroix. He knew that Delacroix wasn’t wholly a romantic artist as it is claimed by other notable authorities. Instead, Baudelaire once said,“Delacroix was passionately in love with passion, but coldly determined to express passion as clearly as possible.” He also believed that Delacroix’s Romanticism was that of an individualist. The renowned impressionist, Paul Cezanne, was also full of praise for Delacroix. The Impressionist Movement artists were thankful that Delacroix exploited complementary contrasts, demonstrated the usefulness of separate touches, and most of all, that he dabbled insouciantly with the possibility of constructing a picture by means of individual interlacing brushstrokes and patches of color masterpieces he would paint in the future.
Raft of the Medusa
Theodore Gericault 1819
eugenedelacroix.com
Even the Symbolists found reason to praise Delacroix concerning his pictorial projection of inner, imaginative fantasies and in his abstractly expressive use of color. Delacroix himself always felt indebted to and influenced by talented persons such as Peter Paul Rubens, Rembrandt, Shakespeare, Michelangelo, Titian, Raphael, Voltaire, Alexandre Dumas, Lord Byron, Homer, Tintoretto, Faust, Constable, Richard Bonington, Paolo Verenese, Baron Gros, Poussin, even Jacques Louis David and Pierre-Narcisse Guerins, and his dear friend, Theodore Gericault. In particular, he would pay due respect to both Gericault and Gros during his career.
Gericault became an icon of romanticism with his controversial masterpiece, “The Raft of the Medusa” which he finished at age twenty seven and was exhibited at the Paris Salon in 1819. An interesting facet of the painting, a depiction of the historical wreck of the frigate Meduse off the coast of Mauritania, is the fact that Gericault used his friend Delacroix as a model for one of the ill-fated victims on the makeshift raft. More importantly, the work was a major departure from the foremost school of painting of those times, neo-classicism. It certainly inspired and influenced dramatic presentations by other artists, especially Delacroix, J.M.W. Turner, Gustave Corbet, and Eduardo Manet. However, it would be Delacroix who would fine tune his palette to that of Gericault’s romanticism, adjust it to rise to the heights of baroque, calm it somewhat to lay claim to being a master classicist, and to stir it up to create freedom, drama and fire as an individualist, and to adjust it subtly in his twenty-eight year stint of painting murals; murals that established him as a super icon in that school alone. As for his being labeled mostly a romantic, Delacroix had this to say: “I am a pure classic”, “If by romanticism they mean the free manifestation of my personal impressions…then I am a romantic and have been one since I was fifteen.” Therefore, paradoxical or not in his own judgment, a trip back in time to this splendid artists upbringing, schooling, romances, passion, and exemplary works seems a worthwhile venture.
Ferdinand Victor Eugene Delacroix was a fortunate son…for a while. He was born in Charenton-Saint Maurice, an upscale Paris suburb, in 1798, to Charles and Victoire Delacroix. Though his mother was from a family of cabinet makers, his father was a scholar who rose up in the ranks to be a member of the upper Bourgeois. As such, he also was selected as a provincial governor and a strong supporter of the revolution. When King Louis XVI was eventually ousted and put on trial, Charles was a member of the tribunal that voted to have him executed. Shortly thereafter, in 1795, he became the Minister of Foreign Affairs. Next, he was given a higher title, Ambassador of the French Republic to Holland. It was 1798 and the year Eugene was born. And therein lie’s a very strange story with all the makings of a modern soap opera.
Prior to his birth, Eugene had three other siblings. They were Charles, Henrietta, and Henri. Moreover, it was rumored around the cafes, bars, and even in higher places that Charles, age fifty seven when Eugene was born, for years had not lived together with Victoire as man and wife. It is not a contested fact, but indeed, quite well known that Charles was suffering from a testicle tumor that likely could have affected his virility. He even went public with his problem and on September 14, 1797, underwent the physician’s knife in a grueling and painful operation. According to official sources, the operation was successful. Nevertheless, the rumor mill was in fierce force when Eugene was born just seven months later. Possibly due to his honored government position along with saving family honor and grace, or even suggestively due to a cuckoo in the nest, Eugene was deemed to have been born premature. A stubborn rumor which had substance to it insinuated that Eugene’s real father was the influential aristocrat, Charles Maurice de Talleyrand.
Talleyrand was thirteen years younger then Charles Delacroix and Victoire was some seventeen years younger then her husband. More curious was the fact that Talleyrand was living in Delacroix’s home when the latter was away on official business in Holland. More startling was another suspicious fact; it was Talleyrand who had arranged the Holland ambassadorship for Delacroix in the first place. He even allowed himself to take over Delacroix’s former position as Minister of Foreign Affairs. A biographer of Delacroix, the renowned Rene Huyghe, was positive that Talleyrand was the painter’s father. He compared the two men’s features thoroughly and basically stated that it would be obvious to anyone who studied their portraits that the diplomat was the father. Nonetheless, and in spite of the doubts he surely endured growing up, Eugene would spend his formative years and later life always in praise of his father, Charles Delacroix.
Young Delacroix wasn’t always destined to be a great artist. In his early development, he showed a penchant for music. He easily learned to play the piano, violin and guitar. And then the shocker: his father died when Eugene was only seven years old. Not only that, his mother died when he was just eleven. Troubling too, Napoleon had been beaten at Waterloo and at the Battle of Leipzig and the Bourbon’s regained control of France. David was given the boot too, banished to Brussels. The Bourbons brought in the exiled brother of King Louis XVI and crowned him King Louis XVIII.
Benefitting slightly from his fathers past high position and his budding talent, young Delacroix was the recipient of a fine classical art education, first at the Lycee Imperial and in 1815 he gained a position at the studio of Pierre Narcisse Guerin. At Guerin’s studio, he first met the artist and friend to be, Theodore Gericault. It was to be a very special relationship encompassing art and brotherhood until Gericault’s untimely death in 1824. Interesting too is that Delacroix, who first exhibited ‘Bark of Dante’ at the Salon in 1822, would complete a masterful work, ‘The Massacre at Chios’ his second exhibition at the Salon in 1824. Surely, it was in many ways a tribute to his departed friend, Gericault. Too, it seems he truly was a huge fan of Constable and incorporated much of what he had gleaned from the talented Englishman’s landscapes. The artist once stated, “That Constable did me much good.”
Bark of Dante
Eugene Delacroix 1822
eugenedelacroix.com
In his ‘Bark of Dante’ aka ‘Barque of Dante’ and ‘Dante and Virgil in Hell’ large painting, Delacroix, age twenty-four, enjoyed both acclaim and criticism. Though criticized for its haste and appearing traditional in its bas-relief design, there were those persons of importance, such as Baron Gros, who were spellbound by the emotional intensity the work transmitted by the artists exceptional contorted forms and exciting vibrant tones. Though the artist was a passionate reader of classics and poetry, this work evolved from a non-classical work, ‘Dante’s Inferno.’ From that masterpiece, Delacroix chose a scene from Canto VIII to serve as his theme. He even positioned the Latin poet Virgil as the centerpiece of the panting, crowned him with a laurel and had him leading Dante, hand-in-hand, through the underworld on a raft in perilous waters. The fascinating figures of the doomed and tormented naked Florentines attempting to board the raft is cryptic in an emotional sense and dramatic in its artistic effects. No doubt, Delacroix’s influences from Michelangelo to Gericault, is ever present in the significance of the figures and the desperate yet unfortunate struggle of the inferno’s victims. There is also a Rubens flavor to the work, especially in the use of water drops with slashes of pure pigments. Altogether, the dramatic work was a smashing success that demonstrated quickly that Delacroix was a young genius in the making.
Massacre at Chios
Eugene Delacroix 1824
eugenedelacroix.com
In 1824’s ‘Massacre at Chios,’ Delacroix completed an immense canvas, some fourteen feet high which was both impressionable and questionable. An improbable retort by his patron, Baron Antoine-Jean Gros, ‘The Massacre of Painting’ must have cut deep to the quick in Delacroix’s psyche. Another critic labeled the work a ‘Veritable Daub.’ Nevertheless, it was praised by most knowledgeable viewers and purchased by the government under King Louis X. He paid Delacroix two thousand francs and had the work placed in the prestigious Louvre. The historical massacre, committed first by Greeks and then by the ruling Ottoman Turkish Empire under orders from Turkish Sultan Mahmoud II, is so disgusting in its torturous and murderous scope that few history books in the free world give it any more then a quick glance rather then a superfluous examination. It is worth noting in our own troubling and worrisome world the words of the Spanish Philosopher, George Santayana, about such evils: “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.” In retrospect, the Chios Massacre was startling reminiscent of the Spanish Inquisition.
A deeply committed and historical source for the massacre and appreciation of the work by Delacroix has been done by author Christopher A. Long of Britain. His research is of the highest value and covers the deadly and accurate details of the massacre on the Island of Chios as well as the following Chios Diaspora. Following part of his introduction from christopherlong.org.co.uk.
“Delacroix’s huge and grand exotic painting of the massacre was based on a true event in the Greek War of Independence, begun in 1821. One of history’s most tragic and comprehensive acts of genocide takes place on the island of Chios in 1822. But the orthodox population of peaceful and prosperous Chios, lying just off the east coast of Turkey, finds itself caught between the competing nationalist ambitions of the old Turkish Ottoman Empire and the fledging new state of Greece. A year later, during the massacres, around 20,000 islanders are hanged, butchered, starved or tortured to death. Untold thousands more are raped, deported and enslaved. The Greek word, Katastrofi, - also meaning destruction and ruin, - is usually used to describe these events. The island itself is devastated and the few survivors disperse throughout Europe in what is now known as the Chios Diaspora.”
The Turkish Pasha at Chios, Capitana Pasha Kara Ali, under the Sultan’s orders, was beyond the word ‘cruel.’ Not only did he burn thousands of Chios citizens to death, he went even further with his horrific acts of terror after he lost a favored battleship. Unfortunately, the ship had a few thousand Chios slaves on board. Nevertheless, as author Long points out, the Sultan issued cruel and inhumane orders after hearing the news of the loss:
“In reprisal for the sinking of the Turkish flagship, Chians remaining in Smyrna are rounded up and, to the horror of Turkish friends, subjected to systematic torture. This includes being slowly burned to death in huge ovens, the piercing of finger-nails, using screws to break limbs and joints, being suspended by hooks through the ears with weights on the feet and beatings to death after being bastinadoed and hung upside down.”
The works depicted violence and the submission or commission to death by the victims is an incredibly sad and disturbing scene. Historically, there was another poor five thousand souls on the island who sought sanctuary in the Byzantine Monastery’s of Nea Moni and Aghios Minas. They were also tortured or burnt to death. Yet the work conveys the artist’s unlimited and novel creativity, along with unrivaled value and romantic intensity. Importantly, the work depicts graphically man’s inhumanity to his fellow man.
In preparation for this work of despicable genocide, Delacroix first interviewed an eyewitness of the account before doing extensive research about the island, the Chian peoples, clothing and weapons. Next, he made numerous chalk and charcoal sketches prior to doing some of the work in watercolor. He also hired native Greek models, many of whom had moved to Paris for work and artistic opportunities, and made portraits of them as well as certain people he chose to have in the work.
Overall, Delacroix’s main reason for doing the theme of the work was human tragedy. However, there was to be changes made before his exhibit. The Salon had decided not to open until summer and Delacroix’s work was put on hold while Constable’s was the main exhibiting artist. Delacroix witnessed the Englishman’s landscapes and hustled back to his studio to do some repainting of the still unfinished Chios work. Reportedly from those who knew Delacroix well, he took to painting out some of the excess black that he had a penchant for, added Constables technique of juxtaposing colors but did it even more brilliantly. He employed a variety of colors and enhanced hues to create the proper atmosphere for the dreadful scene. When finally exhibited, the work drew this response from the critic Baudelaire; his color “thinks for itself.”
Quite a celebrity after the Chios exhibition and the six thousand francs he received for the work, Delacroix would continue to develop outstanding and important artistic work and enjoy being a respected artist. As for his personal romantic life, it was, as in the past and in the present, a gnawing problem that created quite an enigma for the budding art icon.
Likely cautious that a serious romance might jeopardize his art career, he nevertheless hungered for female companionship. Back when he was just a teenager he fell heads over heels for one Mademoiselle Villemessant. He was so struck with her beauty that he asked his friend, Achille Piron, how to go about courting her. He didn’t make much headway with the damsel but did have a romantic go with his sister’s maid, Elizabeth Salter. Unfortunately, she moved back to England in 1818 and he was lovesick up until 1820. He wrote her love letters in his poor use of the English language for two years. He wasn’t completely lost in love with Elizabeth because after he matured to manhood and had success with the ‘Bark of Dante’ he was still harking back to his romance and problems with a certain peasant girl named Lisette. That pretty lassie worked for his brother Charles near Tours and did Delacroix’s laundry when he spent time there. He wrote that she reminded him of Raphael’s Madonna in his journal. He also compared her to Elizabeth. Later on, he arrived at the conclusion that Lisette would probably make him forget Elizabeth.
Delacroix’s attempted affair with Lisette went well at first. However, she soon resisted his advances and sent him into depression. Fortunately, she later became fond of him and they danced and made merry well into the night. So he wrote in his journal. But, the very next day is when he returned to Paris to view the Bark of Dante that was now exhibited in Luxemburg Gallery. In Paris, he was apparently caught off guard by a sensuous woman. Her name is guesswork but supposedly, she was the mistress of his friend Raymond Soulier. Though the evidence is weak she was reported to be a lady of fashion and the wife of General de Coetlosquet. Soulier had to leave Paris for two years and Delacroix may have been disloyal to his friend….and even guilty of adultery. Nonetheless, he often wrote about her and called her “La Cara.” The affair was long and emotional and even continued after Raymond returned to Paris. Finally, he may have suffered a guilty conscience and bid her farewell and goodbye.
For the rest of his life, Delacroix would only engage in affairs that would not tempt him into marriage. Though he cared dearly for some of his lovers and ardently wrote, “A wife of your own stature is the greatest of all blessings,” he nevertheless avoided to share his soul with a woman for life. He once wrote his nephew, Charles de Verninac, that the delicious passion of a woman can destroy a man…in the nicest possible way. However, in order to maintain his growing status in the world of art, Delacroix preferred to establish close friendships with men and occasional affairs with women. Those friends he favored were Soulier, the brothers Felix, Louis Guillemardet, and Jean-Baptiste Pierret. One peculiar entry in his Journal mentions a one night stand he had in his studio with a nineteen year old little ‘baggage’ of a model named Marie. After the tryst he was frightened for days on end that he might have caught a venereal disease from her.
During his more mature years, Delacroix continued to have a mistress now and then, a few of which were long lasting relationships. From his nightlife activities in Paris, he could when necessary, find companionship. There was one extraordinary woman introduced to him by his friend, Richard Bonington, a voluptuous beauty named Eugenie Dalton. She was a dancer at the Opera and the wife of an Englishman. However, while her husband was in England, she became the mistress of the painter Horace Vernet. However, once Bonington introduced her to Delacroix, she was smitten. And she was bold for those times. She sent Delacroix a note that said, “We will dine together and then go to bed.” He obliged and their affair lasted some fifteen years. That is when a new little charmer got her hooks into Delacroix and sent his head a-spinning. She was his faithful servant, Jennie Le Guillou. She eventually gained full control of his passions and sent Eugenie packing. The latter died in Algiers in 1859. During Eugenie’s relationship with Delacroix, she had become a student of art and even had an exhibition at the Paris Salon.
Delacroix always longed to visit Italy but it never happened. He was also intellectually inspired by the play, ‘The Marriage of Figaro’. In 1825 he did get the opportunity to visit England. And Constable, of whom he felt indebted to, was always on his mind His trip was made ready by English friends who had visited Paris. He was first encouraged to go by the British painter, Thames Fielding. He had also met Richard Bonington in France and was excited to be in his company again. Of Bonington’s watercolor work that incorporated brilliant marine and architectural views, Delacroix wrote, “…in a certain sense diamonds, by which the eye is pleased and fascinated quite independently of the subject and the particular representation of nature.”
Delacroix crossed the English Channel and in the process caught a nasty cold that lingered on in London. At first, he was disappointed with the English lower class and their ways and means. He couldn’t stand their music either. English architecture was another dislike. Nevertheless, when he made the arts, music, and literary scene, he was duly impressed. He took in the theater and thoroughly enjoyed Edmund Kean in Richard III and Othello. He came to admire English actresses and noted their ‘divine beauty.’ Of supreme importance was a boating trip in a six - oared scull, courtesy of the Fielding’s. A noble person even took him for a pleasure trip on a yacht. Afterwards, he jotted in his journal, “un fou de la marine.” In short, he was hooked on the wonders of the sea. That experience would later lead him to paint the Work, ‘Shipwreck of Don Juan.’
He was most passionate about the plays of Shakespeare and the opera production of Faust. He was so passionate about his experience that a few years later he would do seventeen lithographs based on the production of ‘Faust’ and twenty paintings from the works of Shakespeare. He was frustrated that Constable was away on business but did get to meet the renowned English artist, J.M.W. Turner. Another artist he planned to visit in England was Henri Fuseli. Unfortunately, Fuseli, a master of ghoulish paintings, had died a few weeks prior to Delacroix’s arrival. From his meeting with Turner, much about portraiture, Delacroix was able to generate ideas for future work using only a single elegant figure with a stunning background of sky. Finally, he learned to ride horses under the guidance of a Mr. Elmore. Notably, he came to the realization of the magnificent grandeur of the horse. In the future, his experience would pay dividends in the Moroccan deserts where horseback was the main mode of transportation and he would, like Gericault, paint the animal in all its wondrous glory.
The fruitfulness of Delacroix’s English sojourn of three months would be bountiful and monetarily beneficial over the next few years. For exhibitions, he produced a variety of work, including sensuous and exquisite nudes that were strikingly done with an array of colors and splash that rivaled other titans such as Goya and Manet. The models beauty and sexuality are splendidly brought to the fore with the artist’s expertise in splashing tangerine, yellow, and violet with brush strokes softly interlacing the canvas and delicately enhancing the women’s beauty. Two intriguing pieces are ‘Woman with aParrot’ and ‘Odalisque’.
Working and producing art as if he was in a hellfire, Delacroix spent an enormous amount of time on the subject of man’s inhumanity or injustice to man. He was emotionally affected by the fate of the author Tasso. The 16 Century Italian poet who wrote ‘Jerusalem Delivered’ had been declared insane and sent to a prison for seven years. In his gloom over the poor poet, Delacroix created three paintings of ‘Tasso in the Madhouse’. While in his state of Depression, (Or was it melancholy?), he also did the fine piece, ‘Christ in the Garden of Olives’. He lamented in his journal, “How can this world, which is so beautiful, include so much horror?”
Tam O’ Shanter
Eugene Delacroix 1825
eugenedelacroix.com
Delacroix also had up-beat times of enthusiasm. His ‘Tam O’ Shanter’ is a scary melodrama concocted from the Scottish bard, Robert Burns, 1790 poem, ‘Tam O’ Shanter.’ The drunken subject attempting to get home on horseback on a dreadful night is pursued by sexy witches, one of whom catches his horse’s tail. An honest look at the painting not only demonstrates the artist’s talents, but lets one feel a little of the hilarious in the work. Departing from the scare scene of O’ Shanter, Delacroix plummets back into man’s outrages with the critically acclaimed, ‘Execution of the Doge Marino Faliero’. The scene depicts a chilling execution while at the same time enabling Delacroix to delve deeply into theatricality, a signal of his visit to England and of his own intense research.
Then there is Delacroix's ‘Still Life with Lobsters.’ Granted, Delacroix was not much into still life but this painting was done because of a commission from General de Coetlosquet. The general, whose wife ‘Cara’ may at one time have been Delacroix’s lover, decided what he wanted in the painting. Nevertheless, Delacroix used all his skills and scope, made good use of Constable’s landscape techniques and the drawing expertise gained through Guerin’s schooling to conquer the project and make it original. He did very few still life paintings in his time but not a single one of them was trite.
The Death of Sardanapulus
Eugene Delacroix 1827
eugenedelacroix.com
Delacroix roared like a lion in 1827…nearly. That year he submitted fourteen works to the Salon. Though a few were controversial, one, ‘The Death of Sardanapalus,’ based on a theme by Lord Byron, was an absolute shocker. The baroque style work, a portion of Byron’s play of the same name, depicts an Assyrian King, under siege from enemies, horrifically and inhumanely, bringing all his wealth of precious jewels, animals, royal cloth, eunuchs, and concubines, into his palace where he has built a huge pyre to burn them and his self to death. Indeed, for the Romantics, it was an exotic work and brilliantly executed. It was as if Delacroix was a violin virtuoso: The upsetting violence of the work is tempered slightly by his complete control of his colorful palette. As he dipped his brushes there, his strokes and touch seem guided to his mission just as if he had written a major opera. It was a unified work that ignored perspective laws with the result being a masterpiece that rivaled his ‘Massacre at Chios.’ But even though the salon accepted the work, it was damned by some critics and the public. There was relentless howling and gnashing of teeth from many other quarters. Some were deliriously frightened by the work and eventually the Salon took it down. Even Delacroix was frightened by his own product but still felt it had great value to it. It would be 1921 before the Louvre bought it again, having to pay a hefty sum to art collector, Baron Vitta. The Baron was a huge fan of Delacroix and had acquired the painting. He kept the magnificent work in excellent shape prior to dealing it to the state.
Still, Delacroix had a banner year in 1827 despite the woeful wounds he suffered from some critics influential with the public The Salon had been extremely generous and accepted eleven of his works. The popularity of the event led to it being extended another year and Delacroix was allowed two more paintings for a total of thirteen. Moreover, he demonstrated that he was now accomplished in a variety of media. He did a brilliant watercolor of Faust as well as a fascinating depiction of the execution of the Doge of Venice, Marino Faliero, in 1355. The work, aptly named “Execution of the Doge Marino Faliero” again showed the influence of Lord Byron on Delacroix’s trip to England. Byron had made a drama from the historical event in 1820. Years later, in 1835, Gaetano Donizetti would write an opera from the same tragic event. The English watercolorist Bonington was surely influential as well. The work, so elegant and theatrical, yet tragic, was too good for the ruling class. As with the ‘Death of Sardanapulus’ this work went against certain political decorum. Though it was historically significant and basically true to Byron’s interpretation, it was in higher quarters, deemed taboo. So, in the work, just what was the basis for the fuss and fury against Delacroix? Perhaps some perspective can be gleaned by a look back at the historical record that remains and Byron’s sordid invective given to the Nobel Class by his poem of Faliero prior to the latter’s beheading.
Marino Faliero was nearly seventy years of age when he was made the 55 Doge of Venice in September of 1354. Within a few months, he purportedly became overly ambitious and began planning a Putsch with ten other ranking officials in order for him to be the reigning prince. He also had married a very young wife which led to a quarrel with a member of the noble class. When that man slandered him and supposedly made public the following statement,” Marino Faliero of the beautiful wife, others enjoy her while he maintains her” he was furious and leveled charges. When a court made up of the nobility declared the man innocent, Faliero may have had added ammunition for his planned ‘coup d’ etat.’
Faliero was possibly a little senile and word of his plan leaked out. He and his fellow conspirators were arrested and all sentenced to death. While the others were hanged, Faliero was beheaded and his body mutilated right in front of the Doge’s palace. However, in Lord Byron’s version, the old geezer apparently had some very chilling and ruthless last words for his executioners.
“perish, but not unavenged; far ages
Float up from the abyss of time to be,
And show these eyes, before they close, the doom
Of this proud city, and I leave my curse
On her and hers for ever! –
…
She shall be bought
And sold, and be an appanage to those
Who shall despise her! — She shall stoop to be
A province for an empire, petty town
In lieu of capital, with slaves for senates,
Beggars for nobles, panders for a people!
…
Amidst thy many murders, think of mine!
Thou den of drunkards with the blood of princes!
Gehenna of the waters! thou sea Sodom!
Thus I devote thee to the infernal gods!
Thee and thy serpent seed!
[Here the Doge turns, and addresses the executioner.]
Slave, do thine office!
Strike as I struck the foe! Strike as I would
Have struck those tyrants! Strike deep as my curse!
Strike — and but once!
There have not been many curses much thorny and more chilling then Byron created for his drama of Faliero. Or did he just paraphrase the old Doge? It is no wonder that a drama and opera would eventually follow. It is a wonder for passionate artists and art patrons that Delacroix made his elaborate contribution to the tragic event. And better yet, though Delacroix suffered a severe setback from critics in France, depriving him of needed income, England came to the rescue. Sir Thomas Lawrence was captivated by his work of Marino Faliero and had it sent to London. Unfortunately, he died prior to gaining ownership of the work. Fortunately for Delacroix, the British government bought the work. Of particular note, for the rest of his career Delacroix would use English subject matter in dozens of his work, especially Byron, Goethe, and Shakespeare. As an interesting aside, Delacroix did fifteen versions of Byron’s disorderly poem ‘The Giaour.’ He also did a portrait of Goethe along with sixteen lithographs. Goethe praised him mightily.
In 1827, Delacroix’s sister, Henrietta died. Delacroix was busy with a variety of art works to stay financially stable but with her death felt dutiful to take on her son, Charles de Verninac. The young man was a near pauper and Delacroix hoped that his Faust illustrations, published in 1828, would help remedy his added financial burden. Sadly, his critics were out in force and laid waste to the exhibition, some calling it ugly. When all was said and done, he only received the paltry sum of a hundred francs for his work, later to be considered masterpieces. However, ‘Romantic Change’ was in the air and at the Theatre de l’Odeon. Delacroix was soon rubbing elbows with literary giants Victor Hugo, Alexandre Dumas, Alfred de Vigny, and Hector Berloiz during a performance of Hamlet. He cherished those friends and what were for him, happy days. For the most part, it was a mutual admiration society.
Death of Ophelia
Eugene Delacroix 1853
eugenedelacroix.com
The Irish actress, Harriet Smithson, played the role of Ophelia and gave a smashing performance. So much so that Delacroix painted her in his ‘Death of Ophelia’ and his composer friend, Hector Berlioz, so fascinated by Smithson’s charms that he eventually married her. Furthermore, Hugo defended Delacroix’s ‘Death of Sardanapulus’ by calling the work a ‘magnificent thing.’ However, they became opposites and their personalities would often clash over the years. Nevertheless, Delacroix pursued his interest with the literary romantics and even did costume designs. In short order, he made acquaintances with essayist Prosper Merimee of ‘Carmen’ fame and Beyle Stendhal who wrote ‘The Red and the Black’ Delacroix made the rounds with his new friends, many restaurants, the zoo and salons…all inspirational for his art. On more then one occasion he spent evenings with James Fenmore Cooper. He was in top company to be sure.
Delacroix rebounded from his depression over Sardanapulus with some pieces that were a tad less offensive to his critics with the 1827 masterpieces, “Murder of the Bishop of Liege”, and “Combat of the Giaour and the Pasha,” the latter a remarkable work filled with action and explosive color. His accurate equine steeds reflect his past kinship with Gericault He produced a plethora of other works in various media that would also help him regain his status and soothe a few of his critics.
Combat of the Giaour and the Pasha,
Eugene Delacroix 1827
eugenedelaroix.com
France was seemingly always in trouble during the artist’s life, leadership bouncing back and forth between the Bourbon’s and the Bourgeois Delacroix was apolitical and made his own decision about his direction in life: He would pursue his own ambitions in lieu of the political atmosphere. And that was his stance until revolutionary violence occurred right before his eyes.
As stated earlier, Delacroix’s father Charles was a provincial governor who cast a vote to execute King Louis XVI. However, the Bourbon King’s two brothers returned to power when Napoleon suffered his Waterloo. One became Louis XVIII and he was somewhat moderate in his rule. However, the good fellow died in 1824. That is when, in July of 1830, the other brother becomes Charles X with strong backing from the ultra loyalists. And all hell broke loose when Charles trashed the Charter of 1811, suspended freedom of the press, denied certain peoples the right to vote, disbanded his national guard, and rewarded the old aristocrats handsomely. Within three days the citizens, including Honore Daumier, and Alexandre Dumas, engaged in the violent revolution. Pitched fighting took place on the streets of Paris and the fighting populace, supported by the ousted National Guard, eventually whipped the King’s army. By August 3, 1830, the King realized all was lost, abdicated and fled to exile in England.
The winners of the revolution selected Citizen King Louis-Phillipe to take charge of the government. He had been supported by Marquis de Lafayette, quite notable for his role in the American Revolution. As for Delacroix, he had witnessed much of the fighting from a vantage point not far from his studio on the Quai Voltaire. Afterwards, he was motivated to do his part. He even penned a letter to his brother informing him that because he did not fight for his country at least he would paint for her. He commemorated the July revolutionary with the stunning painting, “Liberty Leading the People.”
Liberty Leading the People
Eugene Delacroix 1830
eugenedelacroix.com
The Liberty painting was a patriotic work that mainly consisted of the national French colors of red, white and blue. In the work, Delacroix used an abstract female character to represent Liberty. The allegorical female Liberty was a departure from most traditional war scenes. Standing high and proud amidst a few living patriots and dead bodies all around, Liberty holds the French colors, daringly cropped by Delacroix, high in her right hand and brandishes a musket in her left hand. It is high drama and it seems that Delacroix painted himself as one of the fighters, just to the left of Lady Liberty in a top hat. The figure is also at the position of ‘Present Arms’ with a musket. Through the mix of gunpowder and explosive skies, Paris is slightly visible as is a tricolor flag on the Cathedral of Notre Dame.
Liberty was exhibited in 1831 at the Salon and though the familiar gang of critics of Delacroix chastised the work as ignoble and even slanderous of those who fought in the five day Revolution, the government bought if for 3000 francs. After the Salon exhibit, Liberty was again in jeopardy. The rumor mill pressed the issue that the work consisted mainly of an army of the lower class and that other upper class insurgents were ignored. And then there was the uproar of the female Liberty and the tarnishing of the flag. After a few more weeks, the critics continued their verbal bombardment about the paintings message being insulting, possibly even seditious. Finally, the King’s officials had it taken down and Delacroix sent it to a relative for safekeeping. That turned out to be a smart move because in 1848 it would be exhibited again after that revolution and again in 1855 during the ‘Exposition Universelle.’ One can view the painting in present times at the Louvre in Paris.
Money for his Liberty and other works didn’t soothe Delacroix’s hurt feelings. But a new and exciting adventure suddenly came his way. King Louie-Phillipe was sending Count Charles de Mornay to Morocco as an ambassador. Morocco had been in conflict with France since 1830 and Algiers was a soft spot to defend. It was time for some good neighbor policy. The count needed an artist to capture the fruits of his trip. He stumbled upon Delacroix by pure accident. His mistress, Mademoiselle Mars, had recommended Delacroix and he was accepted.
The well-armed ship, La Perle, set sail from Toulon on January 11, 1832.with the count, an interpreter, and Delacroix aboard. Their first stop, January 231832, was at Algeciras in the Straits of Gibraltar before continuing to Tangiers on the 24. He was given a short liberty on the 25 and he was in a dream world, previously only knowing the land in his imagination. Feeling the reality of Tangiers brought to Delacroix’s mind the works of Francisco Goya. He began his diary with much enthusiasm. He also admired the Jewish women’s beauty. Luckily, final arrangements to meet Sultan Abd-er-Rahman were delayed for six weeks. In the meantime, he was invited to a Jewish wedding on February 21. He would capture a special scene in his painting “Jewish Wedding in Morroco” exhibited at the Salon in 1841. The painting was a marvelous success.
Jewish Wedding in Morocco
Eugene Delacroix 1841
eugenedelacroix.com
The Sultan had contacted Count Mornay on the 16 of February but it took three more weeks to prepare a caravan to take Delacroix, the count, and his retinue overland some two hundred miles to Meknes. Meanwhile, Delacroix, for weeks so fascinated about Algiers and the exotic Occident, would soon become deliriously tired from all the sudden exposure. He suffered sun blindness from his intense time in the sun and the reflection from the whitewashed structures. Fortunately, the caravan was readied and the count was ready to move on to meet the Sultan. On March 5, 1832, under the guidance of Tangiers Military Governor, Ben Abou, the caravan, with support from a large Calvary, set out by mule-train for Meknes. After a tortuous trip over mountains, rivers, and rough terrain for tens days, they were welcomed unceremoniously by wild troops and gunfire into the city.
However, the Sultan put them up in his palace in the finest of quarters.
The meetings with the Count Mornay and the Sultan lasted near three weeks. When all was said and done, many valuable gifts were exchanged. The King sent the Sultan a beautiful velvet saddle which was adorned in gold. In return, the King was sent many African animals, including a lioness, an ostrich, a tiger, gazelles, and four exquisite Arabian steeds. As for Delacroix, his enthusiasm was renewed until he discovered to his dismay that he could not paint the women of Islam. The religion was strict to the extreme and Delacroix didn’t fail to notice. He made note of the fact that though there was beauty throughout the land, women were denied basic human rights and he was denied the right to have them as models. Nevertheless, his excursions in Morocco and its surroundings would have a positive impact on his future work; work that would eventually and historically crown him as one of arts greatest masters. He also had a fetish about visiting a harem. It didn’t happen in Meknes but Delacroix would sure get lucky back in Algiers.
When Count Mornay and Delacroix finally made it back to Tangiers, the Count had to spend weeks working up a treaty. During the interim, Delacroix spent time in the streets, on one occasion witnessing the doings of some crazed frenzied religious zealots. Later he recalled from his notes and sketch’s those crazed acts with a series of paintings named ‘Families of Tangier.’ He also wanted to visit Spain and was allowed to ship out with La Perle for that destination. Once there, he marveled at the culture and had his ego pumped to its fullest at the museums that displayed the artists Velasquez, Murillo, and one of his art gods, Francisco Goya. But time was short and he soon was back in Tangiers where Count Mornay was done with business and ready to travel home. There was a stopover for three days at Algiers and Delacroix was to do what other artists only imagined in their work; he was invited to a real Harem.
The Women of Algiers
Eugene Delacroix 1834
eugenedelacroix.com
Delacroix should have understood one thing for certain when he was led to the Harem: the ‘Fix’ was in. At first, he didn’t. He was totally intoxicated as he observed the domestic scene of beautiful women adorned in silk and gold and apparently content to serve their master and fulfill him with sexual pleasures. Probably due to mans instinctive, political, religious and literary power over women in Europe and most of the rest of the world at that time in history, Delacroix was duped (sucked in) by the set-up. He thought it was the ‘ideal’ relationship and that the women were freed from having to engage in flirtatious acts to gain love as in Western Civilization. They were just there without any connection to the real world, just flat out sexual delicacies. For him, it seemed the perfect divine situation. Fortunately, he sketched, took notes, and did some quick watercolors of his visit. In our times change has taken place and the phrase, ‘Male Chauvinist,’ fits men who continue to see women as inferior - as is certainly the case with men and their respective harems.
In retrospect, Eugene did return to reality. He would write later about the Arab women not having human rights. And too, he did not keep the oath of secrecy he took prior to his harem visit. In his exquisite and masterful painting of ‘The Women of Algiers”, shown in 1834 at the Salon, he captures the sensuality and flavor of the harem. He kept the work exotic and sexist though he contrasted the wholesome pleasurable effect by properly depicting a Negro slave woman in the work, a fact of harem life. Another fact is that those women had children to care for and other duties their master would demand. However, reality wasn’t the issue here, a great masterpiece was. It is evident in the painting that Delacroix’s composition was stronger then in the past. His African visit would provide him many opportunities: to experiment with colored objects and shadows, work with straight lines and shadowing, make architectural use of solid masses and create vibrating pure colors placed side by side. When Renoir saw the piece, he felt that he could actually smell the incense in the room.. Nonetheless, Delacroix used his imagination and the actual harem visit to fortify his wealth for the painting and for others to follow..
Delacroix’s fascination with the exotic Occident adventure would continue to wax to its maximum for most of his life. He was enchanted by the architecture, the splendor of color, and the people. Of the Moroccan trip, the strange world he had entered rendered him ecstatic. He thoroughly enjoyed Arab horses fighting as well as learning the details of lion hunts. The Moroccan men’s wardrobe was strikingly similar to those fashions of the historic Greek and Rome. Men walked around in flowing white robes like royalty from the past. He even poked fun at the works of David, works wherein David had painted Greek and Roman heroes with, as Delacroix joked, “…cut a poor figure with their pink limbs.”
The splendor of all he surveyed would be forever imbedded in his mind and over the next three decades, he would produce dozens of magnificent Arab paintings. In a sense, one could almost call them his distinguished trademark. One inescapable violent work he produced was The Lion Hunt.
The Lion Hunt
Eugene Delacroix 1854
eugenedelacroix.com
Though the painting is Rubens influenced, that is, the paintings composition appears structured by color rather then drawing, it is nevertheless classic Delacroix: a viewer can’t help but notice the intriguing, expressive, and impressive color layers that bring various elements of primary colors and the butchery scene into harmony. Delacroix did three versions of the hunt over seventeen years and exhibited the final one in 1861. A glowing tribute to the work was made by the literary giant, Charles Baudelaire. He was captivated by the work and wrote, “Never have more beautiful, more intense colours been channeled through the eyes to the soul.” As for Delacroix, he always felt that imagination was an essential part of an artist’s oeuvre and he most certainly exercised it to the maximum in this work of grandeur.
Medea About To Kill Her Children
Eugene Delacroix 1838
eugenedelacroix.com
Delacroix was extremely intelligent in literature and from Eurypides Greek tragedy play featuring Medea and Jason, he of the ‘Golden Fleece,’ he painted one of the most horrific examples of female revenge ever concocted. Based on mythology and performed in 431 BC, it was an early lesson to man that a woman scorned could turn chillingly into a cold – blooded murderer, demonstrating female power in its most shocking darkness.
Medea had been considered barbaric or of the lower class by Jason. Yet Jason courted her and they had two children. Jason didn’t stay loyal. Given the opportunity to court King Creon’s daughter, Glavce, he jilted Medea. She tried to understand but was eventually left with only a couple of alternatives. She could be sent to exile or she could later join him as a member of his concubine. She chose to go one better, an evil better albeit: She poisoned the king and his daughter and after Jason came to visit, murdered the children so that he would suffer for all eternity. She then fled to Athens.
Delacroix captured the full essence of this macabre situation into another masterpiece of his expressive harmony of colors. His brush strokes seem alive and he demonstrates some Baroque style in this work. His passion for the macabre peruses our conscience about what is good and what is evil. He did three versions of the work.
Cleopatra and the Peasant
Eugene Delacroix 1838
eugenedelacroix.com
In an Egyptian setting, Delacroix painted a heart rendering depiction of Cleopatra prior to her suicide in lieu of being a trophy for Caesar. The piece, taken from Shakespeare’s Antony and Cleopatra demonstrates clearly that Cleopatra is in dire straits. Her anguish is expressed in the paleness of her face as she receives a basket of fruit with a deadly snake, secreted inside, which begins to raise its head. There is a sharp contrast between the peasant and the beautiful queen. He appears physically mighty and his appearance is both rugged and handsome while the queen is contemplative about how quick and painless her end will be.
Delacroix employed the perfect palette for the queen’s pending suicide. The anatomical contrasts are easily evident. Cleopatra’s attire is one proper for her nobility. The artist poignantly used his talents on her face, flesh, and dress. Besides depicting her emotional state, he made extraordinary selective use of reds, yellow and pinks and even turquoise-blue. He also made good use making his colors shimmer. In contrast, he added browns and blacks to the peasant. Considering the side-by-side juxtaposition, the colors are blended superbly and the flesh tones are exquisite.
Age creeps up quickly on humankind and Delacroix needed a steady income to face that fact of nature and to be able to continue his life’s work. Fortunately, he had one friend in high places and that friend, none other then the Adolphe Theirs, the Minister of Commerce and Public Works, was to select Delacroix over other artists for major mural works. First up was the Salon du Roi, a thirty six foot square room with treacherous architecture, broken walls, and leaking ceilings. Delacroix was grateful but also inexperienced at working on ceilings and hanging from scaffolding. To accomplish the daunting task, he had to spend some serious time studying up on Rubens and when exhausted and in need of pepping up his spirits, he turned to his long time distant cousin lover, Josephine de Forget. She was always there for him when he was tired, sick, or in need of affection. Their love affair was claimed to be quite passionate at times. Whatever, it was good karma for Delacroix and he was able to perform with excellence on his murals and enjoy the gains of his commissions.
Apollo Slays Python
Eugene Delacroix 1850 - 1851
eugenedelacroix.com
An astonishing mural by Delacroix, Apollo Slays Python, was finally completed at the Galerie d’ Apollo at the Louvre, brought Delacroix added acclaim. Some of his critics did an about face and praised the work. The torturous job sapped Delacroix’s energy but not his will. The completion was a labor of love and is distinguished by Delacroix’s knowledge and skill in the Baroque style plus his imagination and inner intrigue.
Originally, the commission to do the mural with a dedication to the sun god Apollo on his chariot was given to Charles de Brun. That was back in the 1670’s but when Louis XIV left for Versailles in 1678 the work was in its infancy. Delacroix was fond of Brun’s plan but using Ovid’s ‘Metamorphoses’ as a guide he was able to create not only a magnificent work, but used his own genius of the allegorical theses to arrange the various elements to achieve his desired effect of fusing the past with the present and future with his spiritual vision of color, line and free expression.
Delacroix’s other murals were difficult work but delight to the artist who gained the grand reputation he deserved. With the glory he was finally getting, he also gained the self assurance of meeting any difficult task he might encounter with murals.
Expulsion of Heliodorus from the Temple
Eugene Delacroix 1849-61
eugenedelacroix.com
The most impressive murals Delacroix completed while being paid handsomely are to this day recognized as works of genius. From 1833-36, he finished the murals for the Salon du Roi as the Palais-Bourbon. And from 1838-47, he decorated the ceiling of the Library of the Palais-Bourbon. He spent much of his time between 1840-47 decorating the Library of the Palais du Luxembourg; before completing the Apollo project. From 1849-53 he decorated the Salon de la Paix at the Hotel de Ville and then spent the years 1849-61 completing one of his last major projects, the incredible and fascinating decorating of the Church of Saint –Sulpice.
Over his lifetime, Delacroix was a music lover. He was especially fond of the great composer, Frederick Chopin. They even became friends and shared much valuable time together dining and shopping. Prior to Chopin’s early death in 1849, Delacroix had worked on a double portraiture of the composer and his female companion, George Sand. Sand was a famous French romantic novelist who was a dear friend of Delacroix’s but wasn’t too pleased by his portrait of her. Nevertheless, she sat to the right of the composer as he played the piano while Delacroix painted.
Delacroix never completed the work and after his own death the work was found in his studio and for some reason the oil on canvas was torn in half. Fortunately for art lovers, one can find Delacroix’s half painting of Chopin at the Louvre and Sands half at the Copenhagen Ordrupgarrd Museum.
Paganini
Eugene Delacroix 1832
eugenedelacroix.com
The most exciting performer in Delacroix’s time was a violin virtuoso by the name of Paganini. The master composer-violinist was a near contortionist in movement and frightening like the devil with his skeletal frame, starved looking body, and eccentricity. Paganini thrilled and chilled audiences across the continent. Delacroix, an amateur violinist, was enamored of Paganini’s performances and did a painting of him that captured the mans dynamic personality and his bewitched and magical performances.
Eugene Delacroix 1798-1863
Self Portrait of the Romantic Movement Master
eugenedelacroix.com
Time marches on for everyone. Delacroix knew that all too well and only wished he could return to earth in a hundred years after his death and see what people thought of his work. Well, millions of art lovers have and will continue to enjoy the works of the greatest artist of the ‘Romantic Movement. He died in Paris from weak health and being overworked. In his olden years, he did murals under the most stressful of conditions, especially cold, windy and chilly weather. At the end of each days work, he was near death from exhaustion and from the elements. Yet, he had his own self to satisfy and wouldn’t let up until his creations were finished.
Delacroix was a titanic producer of work. Over his tumultuous but illustrious career, Delacroix completed over nine thousand creations of art of which most are pure treasures. Most importantly, he is not only recognized as a master in most art circles, but rather a devoted artist who did works of genius. To accomplish his goals, he had to lead a life without marriage. He did have many affairs, some longstanding. However, as much as he craved female companionship, he preferred to be in the company of great artists, writers, actors and men of music, and in turn, motivated to do great things.
Delacroix's legacy as the King of Romanticism was well earned. He made masterful compositions that stunned the senses with the vibrant colors and our consciences with blazing themes of action; from downright disasters to man’s inhumanity to his fellow man; to women’s beauty and sorrow under the most stressful of situations; to cultural and patriotic work that displayed his interplay of line, juxtaposition and water pigment brilliance; and to the wonders of his imagination. By many experts from the past to the present, he was known as being intellectually eclectic while his art has been deemed brilliant and electric. Even in his latter years, he executed some of the largest and most exquisite murals the world has seen. Importantly too, his work was the inspiration for the arrival of newer art forms, Impressionism and Symbolism.
In the final analysis, Delacroix said it best of all, “Alas for the man who only can see a definite idea in a beautiful painting; and alas for the painting which shows nothing but finish to a man gifted with imagination. The merit of a painting is un-definable and that is exactly what precision lacks; in a word, it is what the spirit adds to color and line that appeals to the soul.”
For those of us who remember the song ‘My Way’ by Frank Sinatra, it is intriguing to note that the song was written by Paul Anka; but few know that it originated in France as the work of Claude Francois as ‘Comme d’ Habitue.’ Without a doubt, Delacroix did his art his way or more properly in accordance with the music, ‘Et l’a’ fait a ma facon.’
Finis
TWM
April 2011
All Rights Reserved © 2011 - L. B. Mckay
All images are property and copyright of L. B. Mckay. Reproduction without permission is prohibited on this site www.lbmckay.com Do not copy or distribute any of the original art here, including copying any Image, or fascimile therof. Be warned that only the artist has the right or can convey same concerning the right to reproduce, alter or distribute.
That statment also applies to sales. The copyright remains the solo property of the artist, before and after any sale.
