The biggest difference that I noticed in Schama's approach in these two films is history. In the film on David, Schama focused more on the history of the French Revolution in relation to David and his artwork, whereas in the Caravaggio film Schama focused on Caravaggio's life. In both films Schama used similar techniques of reenactment.
I chose to take a closer look at David's The Death of Marat. This painting was made in 1793 with oil paint on a canvas. The first thing my eye is drawn to is facial expression of Marat, he does not look like his is in a great deal of pain. The second thing I am drawn to is the fact that he's writing a letter in what appears to be some sort of a bath. I just find that strange.
 |
| Jacques-Louis David |
I feel that David was a good guy. He wasn't a criminal, nor do I feel that he really did anything terrible. He did however paint things that could have been seen as controversial for the time. David's paintings portray the truth how he saw it, whether or not the paintings portrays the actual truth is something only historians can really try to answer.
Discussion Question: Which elements of David's paintings do you find most effective?
No comments:
Post a Comment