Generally I applaud anything Delacroix said without hesitation.   But looking 
at this statement more critically, one can note that any time at all can be 
regarded as decadent and usually really was. And at any time all a genus is a 
genius for being an independent in some respect .  Being independent is both 
necessary to and descriptive of the genius.  So Delacroix gives us a tautology 
as self-description.  

 Fine, let's go further into the psychology of the statement.  Delacroix began 
his Journals with the idea in mind that he was in fact a genius, independent 
and misunderstood. His peers, in his mind, were people like Dante (Comedy) and 
Byron.  Although much of his Journal was lost (he left one fat volume covering 
his middle career in a cab!) what does remain shows a gradual but relentless 
effort to justify his extreme uniqueness as an artist and indeed his faith that 
he was equal to the great artists he imagined in a Pantheon of artists.  Among 
them of course was Rubens.  He worshipped Rubens as the artist to equal and 
scorned other artists who, would not, he said even dare to be Rubens, meaning 
they did not have the highest ambition which to him was to have no ambition at 
all.  But for all-around literary intellectuality combined with extraordinary 
painterly verve and technical sureness, it's hard to find another 19C artist to 
match him until Van Gogh
 who, as everybody who knows anything about him  knows, was as much a great 
writer and art-critical intellect as he was a radical painter of genius. 

To me one of Delacroix's most subtle observations was his definition of the 
classical in art.  By classical he meant the perfect frozen moment, one that 
enabled one to perceive (but not actually see)  both the immediate past and the 
immediate future.  This is exemplified in all his major works, and even in some 
other paintings of lesser historical drama.  The Yale museum has a wonderful 
earlier portrait, of whom I forget, that shows a man in a chair, but with an 
ever so slightly arched back that suggests that he is but a moment from rising 
up as if to greet a guest or speak.  Astonishing.  Not a fudged detail to be 
found, not a blur or the tiniest hint of the later impressionist era "slice of 
life" composition. Nope. Here it's a perfectly academic composition.

wc 


----- Original Message ----
From: joseph berg <[email protected]>
To: [email protected]
Sent: Sat, May 22, 2010 5:59:25 PM
Subject: Do we live in decadent times?

- In periods of decadence only very independent geniuses have a chance to
survive.

Delacroix

Reply via email to