Goya czy Grottger. Dwa cykle o wojnie

Abstrakt

The genious of Francisco Goya fascinated critics and inspired artists representing different attitudes and approaches, belonging to different movements and currents, impressionists as well as symbolists and expressionists. In Polish artistic circles at the turn of the 19th century it was Stanisław Przybyszewski, whose imagination Goya's art influenced the most. Nevertheless, it was another outstanding Polish art collector and critic, Feliks Manggha Jasieński, who managed to bring together all of Goya's graphic cycles. He was known for being an excellent connoisseur of Goya's oeuvre.

In November 1902 Manggha organised in the Sukiennice exhibition hall in Cracow a show presenting three cycles devoted to the subject matter of war. By juxtaposing works accomplished by Goya, Artur Grottger and Valère Bernard Jasieński brought about an intellectual war, a crucial discussion about art and aesthetic judgement. He anticipated the exhibit with two articles of his own. The first one concerned Goya's graphic output, while in the second one Jasieński questioned the established artistic standing of Grottger, a famed Polish late romantic. He realised that The War by Grottger lacked the powerfull expressiveness and emotional intensity of the other cycles executed by the artist. The critic pointed out the irrelevance of its formal qualities to the significance and tragic character of the subject matter. In his view, the imagination of the artist lost its strength in descriptive details and anegdotes, weakened thanks to allegorical devices. In the opinion of other Polish critics the episodic and concise description of the war incidents was the major weakness of Desastres.

The discussion was revived in 1903 in Warsaw when Aleksander Krywult opened in his gallery an exhibition of Goya's graphic oeuvre. In an article titled Goya or Grottger Kazimierz Broniewski summed up the conclusions of the exciting polemic: “The opinion resulting from the comparison appears to be unfavourable for Grottger”. The author opposed this, in his belief, unfair judgment: “A comparison of these two cycles has to be a comparison of two different spiritual organisations ... Goya is a thinker, who embraces all the social problems, from ethics to economy. Grottger is a poet, who enclosed his ideas in the sphere of emotions”.

These remarks seem to be especially intriguing to a contemporary scholar who focuses on forms of visual narration in art. It is typical of Goya's graphic cycles that the arrangement of prints appears to be deprived of a logical and consistent pattern. In Los Desastres de la Guerra (1810 – c.1820), Goya transformed the type of late 18th century “capriccio” series in prints into an original form of cyclical expression. He abandoned the idea of a conventional narrative based on a plot in favour of irregular sequences built of several variants of recurring images; clustering of similar motifs treated in a multifaceted way is interrupted by juxtaposition of contradictory ones. The repetition of images in Desastres reflects a persistent returning of shattering memories which overwhelm a witness of the war atrocities; variations of motifs reinforce the ghastly expressiveness of the cycle and intensify its devastating message – a condemnation of humanity. Both the obsessive penetration of a few themes and the rapid changes of subject matter imply an episodic vision of the war, reveal the chaos and confusion of isolated events. The irregular arrangement of prints seems to deliver impressions of a terrified witness confronted with the horrors of war rather than a report of an objective observer. Such a form of narration, along with the formal synthesis of depiction, enhances the symbolical message of Desastres, creates a timeless paraghrase on the subject matter of war rather than an exact record or chronicle.

The structure of Artur Grottger's cycle entitled The War (1866-67) is utterly unlike the one of Desastres. A thorough study of the forms of visual narration employed by Grottger proves that the sequence of eleven scenes which constitute The War lends itself to an overall symmetrical arrangement which enhances the poetical aspects of the cycle.

The War is heterogenous in terms of style and expression; a sentimental vein and theatrical rendering of the scenes are quite unsuccessfully combined with realistic handling of details; classical stylization and allegorical devices appear not to be suitable for conveying romantic contents. Nevertheless, a coherent literary concept prevails over the lack of formal harmony. The particular episodes are not related to each other in terms of a developing plot. According to Grottger's remarks, the structure comprises two images serving the role of a prologue and epilogue, an introduction and two thematic parts of four links each, complementing each other. The drawing opening the cycle, captioned Follow me through the vale of tears and the one concluding the work, titled You Mankind, descendants of Cain!, represent the act of artistic creating itself. The viewer observes the artist in his studio, first when he conceives the idea of depicting war, being inspired by a Muse, and in the end, when he provides the cycle with a powerful final accent – an image of an angry God.

Also, the drawing captioned Comet fulfills a peculiar role within the cycle. Its idyllic scenery and warm family mood are to be contrasted with the confusion of the war incidents and destruction of established ethical values. The sequence of eight scenes illustrating the subject of war is opposed to the Comet and at the same time subdivided into two thematic parts named Sadness and Demoralisation. The first one presents the dramatic dimensions of war exemplified by scenes of conscription (Drawing of a Recruit), separation from family (Farewell), fleeing a town on fire (Conflagration), as well as wandering and starvation (Famine). The sufferings of the war victims are contrasted with depiction of moral depravation in episodes of betrayal (Betrayal and Punishment), stripping the dead (Men or Vultures?), brutal massacre (It is only misery to remain) and profanation of churches (Sacrilege). The ordering of the scenes within the two parts reflects the increase of disasters and intensification of dramatic tension.

The overall structure of The War is meant to provide the work with monumental symbolic dimensions and reinforce its pathetic tones. The symmetrical arrangement of the cycle modifies the epic narration of the particular episodes in order to enhance the symbolic universal message of the work as a whole. Nevertheless, we have to agree with Feliks Jasieński that Grottger was not fully successful in this respect. It was Goya who achieved a synthesis of the subject matter of war. A thorough examination of the both cycles, however, shows the common artistic intention to present the lunacy of war both in its historical setting and in its universal symbolic dimension.