It is correct that decadence is always with us, but degree is different in relation to progress at different times. Present time is a good example of higher degree of D in culture. I think Delacroix meant times like this. Boris Shoshensky To: [email protected] Subject: Re: Do we live in decadent times? Date: Sat, 22 May 2010 17:28:24 -0700 (PDT)
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
