In the late years of the eighteenth century, Romantic ideology began to plant its questioning seeds in the minds of the many great artists and thinkers of the era. Its impact first and most intensely reached England, France, and Germany, infiltrating Enlightenment thought with its abstraction, uncertainty, and mystic perspective. Given the revolutionary effect of its ideology, the movement was not initially as accepted or encouraged in other European countries as it was in these first three. Many surrounding nations observed the events of the revolution with scornful eyes, believing that it was problematic for their religious and political doctrine established within. Interestingly, several countries had to pass many years in the ever-expanding influence of Romantic thought before they were finally ready, whether politically or intellectually, to join the movement themselves. In the case of Spain, the country spent thirty years of intellectual separation from the movement before it was able to fully permit and accept Romantic ideas from its own population (Tarr 37). During the period in-between, however, several significant Spanish figures wrestled with the new way of thinking that was spreading across the continent, attempting to settle in their own minds the profound questions and critiques that it presented to the world.
Arguably one of the most important figures in Spain during this time was the artist, Francisco de Goya y Lucientes, who began his career in painting around 1775, perfectly situated within the pre-Romantic period (Hughes). While his later works, those created after the French invasion and the subsequent gruesome battles in Spain, depict Romantic thought more clearly, his early works show the foreshadowing signs of it through profound and subtle features. Two of his pieces, “The Flower Girls” or “Spring” and “The Snowstorm” or “Winter,” both from his series titled Seasons expertly display this occurrence, which he portrays through the presentation of nature, human expression, and symbolic imagery pictured within. By exploring the two paintings, comparing them to one another, and juxtaposing them with the ideology of the Romantic Revolution, it becomes evident that while immersed in a culture of persistent neoclassicism, internally Goya was asking the same questions as the neighboring countries in the throes of Romantic uprising.
Enlightenment and Romantic Thought, and the Spanish Perspective
Understanding the weight of the period’s transition in the eyes of the Spaniards hangs on the conception of the thoughts behind the shifting eras. The move toward Romanticism was difficult not only because of the conflict that it caused for the established structures of society, but also because of the heavy sentiment that it left with mankind as the perception of the world now centered on uninterpretable and mystical questions rather than on the absolute and balanced answers provided through logic and rationale. In the opinion of author and scholar, Jacques Barzun, this period of transition, or as he refers to it, “divergence of Classic and Romantic,” can be defined through both eras’ interpretations of mankind. He expresses that Enlightenment thought “entrusts everything to the intellect and loves Man abstractly, as an archetype.” Contrarily, Romantic thought in his opinion, “studies sensation and emotion and embraces man as he is actually found—diverse, mysterious, and irregular,” expressing that there can be no absolute interpretation of mankind without consideration for the deeper and more realistic aspects of humanity (Barzun xxi). However, often the act of considering the profound, the real, asymmetric, and imperfect parts of mankind results in inexplicable questions which, unanswerable in their nature, can tear away at the heart of mankind. These thought processes associated with Romanticism, as scholar Morse Peckham explains, left many individuals of this era feeling “utter loss of meaning and value.” In the light of this shared sentiment among those involved in the Romantic transition, it then became the central task of the period “to find a ground for value, identity, meaning, [and] order,” a very difficult and burdensome task on its own (Peckham 19).
Along with the repulsion toward this sentimental trial of Romanticism, Spain had several other factors keeping it from adopting Romantic thought into its own culture. Historical and cultural disdain for, as well as the objective horrors, of the Napoleonic wars which were imposed upon Spain by France, left a foul taste for any French ideology in the heart of Spanish citizens. As France played a significant role in the establishment and spread of Romantic perspective, it is not surprising that Spain would want no part in the acceptance or furtherance of it. Princeton scholar, F. Courtney Tarr writes that, as a whole, Spain initially viewed Romanticism as “a silly, ephemeral, and degenerate French Fad,” which he later explains was “representative of the critical attitude prevailing in Spain” and “the strong patriotic pride in the achievement of Spanish neoclassicists and the equally strong anti-French feeling inherited by the eighteenth century and …the War of Independence” (Tarr 37). It was among this “critical attitude” and environment of “patriotic pride” that Francisco de Goya lived and worked, attempting to instill deeper thought into his art, calling mankind to consider the abstract aspects of the world. As previously stated, he subtly, yet brilliantly conveys this through the interpretation of his Seasons series, foreshadowing the Romantic Movement in Spain, and demonstrating the evident tension from the culture’s reluctant transition.
“The Flower Girls” or “Spring”: Enlightenment Ideology
Goya began work on his Seasons series in 1786, during the pre-Romantic phase in Europe, by request of the Prince of Asturias who desired to use them as decoration for the dining hall at the El Pardo Palace in Madrid (Rapelli 48-49). The collection itself holds four paintings, each depicting one of the annual seasons through Goya’s personal interpretation. The artist’s inclusion of Romantic thought into the work is most visible through the comparison of the “Spring” and “Winter” pieces which, when viewed together, depict remarkable similarity and correlation, resulting in an over-arching picture of Romantic perspective.
The first painting, “The Flower Girls,” also referred to as “Spring” as it is his rendition of the vernal season, presents the observer with an ostensible appearance of Enlightenment values (see image above). There is structural balance in the placement of each object; the mountain on the left is equaled by the tall left-leaning tree on the right, which is aided by the view of tall mountains behind it, surrounding the family with a perfectly weighed image of the natural world. Peckham presents that Enlightenment thought asserts “the structure of the mind [is] identical with the structure of nature” (Peckham 17). In this image, nature itself appears not to portray any imperfection, but rather an upward-moving endeavor toward perfection, like the enlightened mind of mankind. The family, too, presents a type of icon, an ideal image of a joy-filled home, which is evidenced by their symmetrical positioning. The mother and father are the focal point of the painting and the tallest of the family members depicting their mutual authority over the family; yet the mother holds a more prominent position than the father, expressing that the woman’s role in a family is a vital piece in holding it together. The daughters are placed at equal heights on either side of the parental unit, connected to their mother through holding her hand or passing her a flower. Not one hand in the family is empty except the father’s left which he holds over his gently smiling mouth to signal quietness, a gesture indicating his promotion of peace in the home, rather than dominating authority. Symbolizing abundance and provision, all the other hands hold images of life and newness, items associated with springtime and highlighted by their facial expressions which portray the same joy, vitality, and color seen in the profusion of the blossoms surrounding them.
The house in the background demonstrates symmetry, although it becomes obscured by the vegetation in front of it, again supporting Peckham’s claim regarding the structure of nature. The perfection of nature corresponds to the perfection of humanity depicted in the painting. Referring to the aforementioned statement of Barzun, the family in this image is to be admired as an “archetype” which he explains is a hallmark of Enlightenment ideology (Barzun xxi). Through the symbolic imagery replete within the piece, Goya not only displays the idealistic picture of springtime but also of humanity itself through the lens of Enlightenment perspective. Interestingly, the spring season is associated with peacetime, hopeful mornings after long and painful nights, the overall symbolic representation of hope. In light of the over-arching picture of Goya’s Seasons series, it appears that he uses this idealistic imagery as a symbol for the incomplete and shallow perspective of Enlightenment thinking, the rose-colored glasses of the ideology, which lacks the deeper aspects of interpreting the world and mankind within it through the emotion and sentiment of the human heart. This perspective becomes strikingly evident when observing the structure, nature, expression, and symbolism in his “Winter” painting.
“The Snowstorm” or “Winter”: Shift toward Romantic Perspective
Goya’s presentation of the “The Snowstorm,” his interpretation of the “Winter” season is a remarkable contrast to the joy-filled imagery of his springtime perspective (see image above). It depicts no exciting or positive features of the cold season–the enjoyable aspects of warm fires, playful children, or the beauty of glistening snow–but rather it is a mere presentation of the reality of the biting winter cold and the brutality of its power over humanity. Structurally, the painting is left-heavy due to the tall, bending tree which characterizes the imbalance, along with the busyness of the huddling group travelling against the evident wind blowing in from the left. The strain of their movement emphasizes the heaviness on the left side as they struggle toward it. The opposing mountain on the right side adds little balance to the picture as it is nearly invisible, blending into the grey of the blizzard sky and increasing the unstable sensation produced by the image. Despite the imbalanced background, the three travelers in the middle make up the focal point of the piece, but still offer little symmetry as the other two men separate from the group disrupt the central gathering. Considering both the asymmetric structure of this work and Peckham’s claim regarding Enlightenment perspective that “structure of the mind [is] identical with the structure of nature,” it becomes clear that this image of nature is not ideal or any archetype of man, but a realistic depiction of the dark and harsh aspects of humanity (Peckham 17). In the same way, all the life and warmth of nature in this painting is gone, the vegetation, the vibrant color, and the bright sky are eradicated in darkness. The only life that is present is that of man and beast striving to maintain it. Such imagery reveals that there is another, very important side of humanity that is horrifyingly imperfect, yet deeply profound and worth exploring. A side that erases the rational sense of an intellectual mind striving for perfection through images of the ideal and, despite the bitter feeling of loss and hopelessness, forces a search for immanence–the internal value of humanity through the depths of the Romantic inclusion of sensation and emotion.
The winter image also brings mankind to a place of complete equality as every person in this situation strives only for the basic necessities of survival, regardless of class, distinctions, race or gender. There is no partiality in a place of desperation, like there is no partiality in a place of internal emotion, only man in his simplest state. The faces in the painting each present this by expressing an extreme want of sustenance and warmth. One man looks up and toward his fellow men indicating an outside perspective and concern, while the rest fix their gaze downward, representing internal pondering, the emotion and sensation in the depths of the human soul that cannot be explained through logic, but must be felt through personal and, at times, intentional experience. Here in this state, every man holds his own body with both hands, indicating the necessity for introspection and self-reflection in the pursuit of understanding humanity and the surrounding world. With this perspective, there are no rosy lenses through which to view the complexities of life, but only a clear vision of reality and a desperate yearning to fully understand its intricate pieces.
Comparison and Juxtaposition with Romantic Ideology
By observing the paintings in the light of their counterpart, many similarities arise, revealing a symbolic and intentional correlation between the two, and a necessity to view them together rather than separately. The exploration of Goya’s “Spring” piece exposes observable aspects of Enlightenment thinking through nature, human expression, and symbolic imagery. Through these aspects, however, it proves to be one-sided, portraying only the ideal, archetypal version of humanity characterized by order, balance, and the vibrancy of life, and failing to provide insight into the deeper features of human interpretation of the world. Goya’s “Winter” offers the opposite. It exposes the deepest parts of human emotion and sentiment which are often characterized by dark and looming thoughts, heavy in nature yet impartially present in every human soul. Assessing the paintings’ many similarities is the key to understanding their deeper correlation and their dependence on each other for a complete picture of understanding.
The first incidence of similarity shows that Goya again draws attention to nature through the prominent position of a tall and bending tree in both paintings. The image of “Spring” has the tree on the right, alive, vibrant, and flourishing. The “Winter” image has the tree on the left, dead, cold, and diminishing. Through mirroring the pictures, the trees become opposite images of each other, and although diversely garnished, they are the same object at the core. Like the profound questions of humanity, in order to fully understand the nature of the tree, observers must recognize that both versions are equal, and the full object cannot be entirely comprehended without grasping both sides of its existence. Second, both images hold human characters in a central position on the canvas, consistently keeping the focal point on a human face. The image of spring displays content and joyful faces whereas the depiction of winter shows only pain and sorrow in its facial expressions. This feature brings the focus of both paintings back to the central issue of the era: the question of mankind’s value and role within the expansive natural world. By placing the human figures at the center of the artwork, Goya demonstrates that this central question of humanity is the same for both Enlightenment and Romantic perspective, and that it is necessary to observe both sides of perspective, especially that of human emotion, in order to come to a complete understanding. In the opinion of scholar Matthew Craske, Goya’s work demonstrates a need for balance, “that fancy need[s] to be firmly regulated by the exercise of reason” (Craske 207). By observing these two paintings, it appears that Goya also maintains reason must be regulated by human sentiment as well; that human reason is incomplete without sentiment and emotion, just like the rosy perspective of “Spring” is incapable of defining life without the revealing lens of “Winter” to interpret it.
By viewing the two paintings together as one entity, one method of interpreting the world, and juxtaposing its entity with the rising Romantic ideology of the time, it is clear that there is a salient correlation. As Romanticism calls for “sensation and emotion” to partner with rationale, ultimately enabling a deeper understanding of the world, Goya depicts this exactly in the pairing of his “Spring” and “Winter” interpretations. He presents the Enlightenment perspective of humanity striving after an archetype of perfection through logic and symmetrical structure in “Spring;” yet subtly argues that it is an insufficient and unrealistic method of interpreting the world through the unattainable standard of perfection he presents within its imagery. Offering the resolution of Romantic inclusion, he depicts nature and man as it really is through the image of “Winter,” with realistic images, embracing the humanity of even the harshest moments of life, and claiming that the sentiment at the heart of such moments is vital to the overall conception of humanity and the surrounding world.
As one of the most prominent artistic figures in Spain during the late eighteenth century and early nineteenth century, Francisco de Goya, held significant influence in the Spanish population, especially during the unfavorable transition period from Enlightenment thought to Romantic perspective. While the Spanish culture was fundamentally opposed to Romanticism during its initial spread across Europe, Goya himself demonstrates Romantic contemplation in his own early artworks from this tense period in time. Through the intricate observations and symbolism revealed in the connection of his two pieces, “The Flower Girls” or “Spring” and “The Snowstorm” or “Winter,” Goya depicts the Romantic thought of viewing the world as it really is, and through the lens of emotion and sentiment along with the rationale of the Enlightenment. Without partnering the two paintings together, and viewing one in the light of the other, the symbolic meaning would be incomprehensible. However, through the details of similarity that Goya integrates into the contrasting scenery, it is evident that he promotes a Romantic lens with which to view these paintings, revealing the profound understanding of the world through Romantic thought. Again, this action foreshadows the immanent permeation of Romanticism in Spain, as it strongly portrays the opinion of Romantic ideology; it also, however, demonstrates the difficulties facing Spanish culture, the evident tension from the reluctant transition in the process of arriving at a Romantic end.
December 10, 2018
Works Cited:
Barzun, Jaques. Classic, Romantic, and Modern. Toronto, Little, Brown and Company, 1943.
Craske, Matthew. Art in Europe 1700-1830. Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1997.
Hughes, Robert. Goya. New York, Alfred A Knopf, 2003.
Peckham, Morse. Romanticism: The Culture of the Nineteenth Century. Ambassador Books, Ltd., Toronto, 1965.
Rapelli, Paola. Goya. Munich, Prestel Verlag, 2012.
Tarr, F. Courtney. “Romanticism in Spain.” Modern Language Association, PMLA, Vol. 55, No. 1 (Mar., 1940), pp. 35-46, https://www.jstor.org/stable/458424.
References:
Gassier, Pierre. Goya: Biographical and Critical Study. Translated by James Emmons. New York, Skira Inc., ND.
Licht, Fred. Goya in Perspective. Englewood Cliffs, Prentice-Hall Inc., 1973.