My prior Art posts can be found HERE.
How do we move away from being a civilization that produces art that causes comments like, “my five year old could make this,” back to being one that creates beauty and inspires deep questions? We must reject modernity and embrace tradition. To embrace tradition, we must first learn about it..
Let’s study art history together.
The Martyrdom of St. Denis
| Artist | Leon Bonnat |
|---|---|
| Year | 1874 – 1886 |
| Medium | Oil on canvas |
| Location | The Panthéon de Paris, France |
This work of art tells the story of one of Christianity’s strangest martyrdom legends. St. Denis was a 3rd century Christian bishop of Paris and he is the most famous cephalophore (someone who is depicted carrying around his or her own head) in the history of the Church.
According to legend, St. Denis was martyred by decapitaion, then proceeded to pick up his head and walk several miles preaching a sermon.
The scene has been depicted in Christian art for centuries upon centuries, however, this Bonnat painting might now be the most well-known. Bonnat’s painting is unique inasmuch as it treats this moment with a lot of realism. There isn’t a bright light shining down on him – though there is a hovering light in the spot where his head would be if it were attached – and there is a halo around the head. The halo is interesting because it is not drawing attention to itself. It’s somewhat dim and blends in well to its surroundings. There isn’t a notable contrast in his clothes compared to those around him. Other bodies lie on the ground beside him. The bloody axe is still lying there beside him. Everything in the scene is somewhat dark, and we have a man bending down and grasping his own severed head. It’s an eerie scene.
One of the painting’s most interesting elements if the angel observing from the top of the scene. He appears to have a crown in hand, perhaps to give to St. Denis, but he holds it and watches. He doesn’t appear to be the reason why Denis is standing. He’s observing it like the viewer is observing.
In this way, Bonnat appears to be telling the story of the legend without seeming to take a side as to whether or not he actually believes the legend.
For an interesting and well-done review of the work, I recommend the video below.
What do you think?
