Bar in the Folies Bergere where the signature is. Description of the painting by Edouard Manet “Bar in Folies – Bergères. X-ray of the painting

Jacques Louis David's painting "The Oath of the Horatii" is a turning point in history European painting. Stylistically, it still belongs to classicism; This is a style oriented toward Antiquity, and at first glance, David retains this orientation. "The Oath of the Horatii" is based on the story of how the Roman patriots three brothers Horace were chosen to fight the representatives of the hostile city of Alba Longa, the Curiatii brothers. Titus Livy and Diodorus Siculus have this story; Pierre Corneille wrote a tragedy based on its plot.

“But it is the Horatian oath that is missing from these classical texts.<...>It is David who turns the oath into the central episode of the tragedy. The old man holds three swords. He stands in the center, he represents the axis of the picture. To his left are three sons merging into one figure, to his right are three women. This picture is stunningly simple. Before David, classicism, with all its orientation towards Raphael and Greece, could not find such a harsh, simple male tongue to express civic values. David seemed to hear what Diderot said, who did not have time to see this canvas: “You need to paint as they said in Sparta.”

Ilya Doronchenkov

In the time of David, Antiquity first became tangible through the archaeological discovery of Pompeii. Before him, Antiquity was the sum of the texts of ancient authors - Homer, Virgil and others - and several dozen or hundreds of imperfectly preserved sculptures. Now it has become tangible, right down to the furniture and beads.

“But there is none of this in David’s picture. In it, Antiquity is amazingly reduced not so much to the surroundings (helmets, irregular swords, togas, columns), but to the spirit of primitive, furious simplicity.”

Ilya Doronchenkov

David carefully orchestrated the appearance of his masterpiece. He painted and exhibited it in Rome, receiving enthusiastic criticism there, and then sent a letter to his French patron. In it, the artist reported that at some point he stopped painting a picture for the king and began to paint it for himself, and, in particular, decided to make it not square, as required for the Paris Salon, but rectangular. As the artist had hoped, the rumors and letter fueled the public excitement, and the painting was booked a prime spot at the already opened Salon.

“And so, belatedly, the picture is put back in place and stands out as the only one. If it had been square, it would have been hung in line with the others. And by changing the size, David turned it into a unique one. It was a very powerful artistic gesture. On the one hand, he declared himself to be the main one in creating the canvas. On the other hand, he attracted everyone’s attention to this picture.”

Ilya Doronchenkov

The painting has another important meaning, which makes it a masterpiece for all time:

“This painting does not address the individual—it addresses the person standing in line. This is a team. And this is a command to a person who first acts and then thinks. David very correctly showed two non-overlapping, absolutely tragically separated worlds - the world of active men and the world of suffering women. And this juxtaposition - very energetic and beautiful - shows the horror that actually lies behind the story of the Horatii and behind this picture. And since this horror is universal, then “The Oath of the Horatii” will not leave us anywhere.”

Ilya Doronchenkov 

Abstract

In 1816, the French frigate Medusa was wrecked off the coast of Senegal. 140 passengers left the brig on a raft, but only 15 were saved; to survive the 12-day wandering on the waves, they had to resort to cannibalism. A scandal broke out in French society; The incompetent captain, a royalist by conviction, was found guilty of the disaster.

“For liberal French society, the disaster of the frigate “Medusa”, the death of the ship, which for a Christian person symbolizes the community (first the church, and now the nation), has become a symbol, a very bad sign of the emerging new regime of the Restoration.”

Ilya Doronchenkov

In 1818, the young artist Theodore Gericault, looking for a worthy subject, read the book of survivors and began working on his painting. In 1819, the painting was exhibited at the Paris Salon and became a hit, a symbol of romanticism in painting. Géricault quickly abandoned his intention to depict the most seductive thing - a scene of cannibalism; he did not show the stabbing, despair or the moment of salvation itself.

“Gradually he chose the only right moment. This is the moment of maximum hope and maximum uncertainty. This is the moment when the people who survived on the raft first see the brig Argus on the horizon, which first passed by the raft (he did not notice it).
And only then, walking on a counter course, I came across him. In the sketch, where the idea has already been found, “Argus” is noticeable, but in the picture it turns into a small dot on the horizon, disappearing, which attracts the eye, but does not seem to exist.”

Ilya Doronchenkov

Géricault refuses naturalism: instead of emaciated bodies, he has beautiful, courageous athletes in his paintings. But this is not idealization, this is universalization: the film is not about specific passengers of the Medusa, it is about everyone.

"Gericault scatters on foreground dead people. It was not he who came up with this: French youth raved about the dead and wounded bodies. It excited, hit the nerves, destroyed conventions: a classicist cannot show the ugly and terrible, but we will. But these corpses have another meaning. Look what is happening in the middle of the picture: there is a storm, there is a funnel into which the eye is drawn. And along the bodies, the viewer, standing right in front of the picture, steps onto this raft. We're all there."

Ilya Doronchenkov

Gericault's painting works in a new way: it is addressed not to an army of spectators, but to every person, everyone is invited to the raft. And the ocean is not just the ocean of lost hopes of 1816. This is human destiny. 

Abstract

By 1814, France was tired of Napoleon, and the arrival of the Bourbons was greeted with relief. However, many political freedoms were abolished, the Restoration began, and by the end of the 1820s the younger generation began to realize the ontological mediocrity of power.

“Eugene Delacroix belonged to that layer of the French elite that rose under Napoleon and was pushed aside by the Bourbons. But nevertheless he was treated kindly: he received gold medal for his first painting at the Salon, “Dante’s Boat”, in 1822. And in 1824 he produced the painting “The Massacre of Chios,” depicting ethnic cleansing when the Greek population of the island of Chios was deported and exterminated during the Greek War of Independence. This is the first sign of political liberalism in painting, which concerned still very distant countries.”

Ilya Doronchenkov

In July 1830, Charles X issued several laws seriously restricting political freedoms and sent troops to destroy the printing house of an opposition newspaper. But the Parisians responded with fire, the city was covered with barricades, and during the “Three Glorious Days” the Bourbon regime fell.

On famous painting Delacroix, dedicated to the revolutionary events of 1830, presents different social strata: a dandy in a top hat, a tramp boy, a worker in a shirt. But the main one, of course, is young a beautiful woman with bare chest and shoulder.

“Delacroix succeeds here in something that almost never succeeds in artists of the XIX century, increasingly more realistically thinking. He manages in one picture - very pathetic, very romantic, very sonorous - to combine reality, physically tangible and brutal (look at the corpses beloved by romantics in the foreground) and symbols. Because this full-blooded woman is, of course, Freedom itself. Political development Since the 18th century, artists have faced the need to visualize what cannot be seen. How can you see freedom? Christian values are conveyed to a person through a very human thing - through the life of Christ and his suffering. But such political abstractions as freedom, equality, fraternity have no appearance. And Delacroix is ​​perhaps the first and not the only one who, in general, successfully coped with this task: we now know what freedom looks like.”

Ilya Doronchenkov

One of political symbols in the picture it is a Phrygian cap on the girl’s head, a permanent heraldic symbol of democracy. Another telling motif is nudity.

“Nudity has long been associated with naturalness and with nature, and in the 18th century this association was forced. The history of the French Revolution even knows a unique performance when in the cathedral Notre Dame of Paris nudie French theater depicted nature. And nature is freedom, it is naturalness. And that’s what it turns out, this tangible, sensual, attractive woman denotes. It denotes natural freedom."

Ilya Doronchenkov

Although this painting made Delacroix famous, it was soon removed from view for a long time, and it is clear why. The viewer standing in front of her finds himself in the position of those who are attacked by Freedom, who are attacked by the revolution. The uncontrollable movement that will crush you is very uncomfortable to watch. 

Abstract

On May 2, 1808, an anti-Napoleonic rebellion broke out in Madrid, the city was in the hands of protesters, but by the evening of the 3rd, mass executions of rebels were taking place in the vicinity of the Spanish capital. These events soon led to a guerrilla war that lasted six years. When it ends, the painter Francisco Goya will be commissioned two paintings to immortalize the uprising. The first is “The Uprising of May 2, 1808 in Madrid.”

“Goya really depicts the moment the attack began - that first blow by the Navajo that started the war. It is this compression of the moment that is extremely important here. He seems to be bringing the camera closer, from a panorama he moves to an exclusively close up, which also did not exist to such an extent before. There is another exciting thing: the sense of chaos and stabbing is extremely important here. There is no person here whom you feel sorry for. There are victims and there are killers. And these murderers with bloodshot eyes, Spanish patriots, in general, are engaged in the butcher’s business.”

Ilya Doronchenkov

In the second picture, the characters change places: those who are cut in the first picture, in the second they shoot those who cut them. And the moral ambivalence of the street battle gives way to moral clarity: Goya is on the side of those who rebelled and are dying.

“The enemies are now separated. On the right are those who will live. This is a series of people in uniform with guns, absolutely identical, even more identical than David’s Horace brothers. Their faces are invisible, and their shakos make them look like machines, like robots. These are not human figures. They stand out in black silhouette in the darkness of the night against the backdrop of a lantern flooding a small clearing.

On the left are those who will die. They move, swirl, gesticulate, and for some reason it seems that they are taller than their executioners. Although the main central character- a Madrid man in orange pants and a white shirt is kneeling. He’s still higher, he’s a little bit on the hill.”

Ilya Doronchenkov

The dying rebel stands in the pose of Christ, and for greater persuasiveness, Goya depicts stigmata on his palms. In addition, the artist makes him constantly relive the difficult experience of looking at the last moment before execution. Finally, Goya changes understanding historical event. Before him, an event was depicted with its ritual, rhetorical side; for Goya, an event is a moment, a passion, a non-literary cry.

In the first picture of the diptych it is clear that the Spaniards are not slaughtering the French: the riders falling under the horses’ feet are dressed in Muslim costumes.
The fact is that Napoleon’s troops included a detachment of Mamelukes, Egyptian cavalrymen.

“It would seem strange that the artist turns Muslim fighters into a symbol of the French occupation. But this allows Goya to turn a modern event into a link in the history of Spain. For any nation that forged its identity during the Napoleonic Wars, it was extremely important to realize that this war is part of an eternal war for its values. And such a mythological war for Spanish people There was the Reconquista, the reconquest of the Iberian Peninsula from the Muslim kingdoms. Thus, Goya, while remaining faithful to documentary, modernity, puts this event in connection with national myth, making us realize the struggle of 1808 as the eternal struggle of the Spaniards for the national and Christian.”

Ilya Doronchenkov

The artist managed to create an iconographic formula for execution. Every time his colleagues - be it Manet, Dix or Picasso - addressed the topic of execution, they followed Goya. 

Abstract

The pictorial revolution of the 19th century took place in the landscape even more palpably than in the event picture.

“The landscape completely changes the optics. A person changes his scale, a person experiences himself differently in the world. Landscape is a realistic representation of what is around us, with a sense of the moisture-laden air and everyday details in which we are immersed. Or it can be a projection of our experiences, and then in the shimmer of sunset or in joyful sunny day we see the state of our soul. But there are striking landscapes that belong to both modes. And it’s very difficult to know, in fact, which one is dominant.”

Ilya Doronchenkov

This duality is clearly manifested in German artist Caspar David Friedrich: his landscapes tell us about the nature of the Baltic, and at the same time represent philosophical statement. There is a languid sense of melancholy in Frederick's landscapes; the person in them rarely penetrates further than the background and usually has his back turned to the viewer.

on his last picture“Ages of Life” depicts a family in the foreground: children, parents, an old man. And further, behind the spatial gap - the sunset sky, the sea and sailboats.

“If we look at how this canvas is constructed, we will see a striking echo between the rhythm of the human figures in the foreground and the rhythm of the sailboats at sea. Here are tall figures, here are low figures, here are large sailboats, here are boats under sail. Nature and sailboats are what is called the music of the spheres, it is eternal and independent of man. The man in the foreground is his ultimate being. Friedrich’s sea is very often a metaphor for otherness, death. But death for him, a believer, is a promise eternal life, about which we do not know. These people in the foreground - small, clumsy, not very attractively written - with their rhythm repeat the rhythm of a sailboat, like a pianist repeats the music of the spheres. This is our human music, but it all rhymes with the very music that for Friedrich fills nature. Therefore, it seems to me that in this painting Friedrich promises not an afterlife paradise, but that our finite existence is still in harmony with the universe.”

Ilya Doronchenkov 

Abstract

After the Great french revolution people realized that they had a past. The 19th century, through the efforts of romantic aesthetes and positivist historians, created modern idea stories.

"The 19th century created historical painting, as we know it. Not abstract Greek and Roman heroes, acting in an ideal setting, guided by ideal motives. History XIX century becomes theatrically melodramatic, it comes closer to man, and we are now able to empathize not with great deeds, but with misfortunes and tragedies. Each European nation created a history for herself in the 19th century, and by constructing history, she, in general, created her portrait and plans for the future. In this sense, European historical painting XIX centuries are terribly interesting to study, although, in my opinion, she did not leave, almost no, truly great works. And among these great works, I see one exception, which we Russians can rightfully be proud of. This is “The Morning of the Streltsy Execution” by Vasily Surikov.”

Ilya Doronchenkov

19th-century history painting, focused on superficial verisimilitude, usually follows a single hero who guides history or suffers defeat. Surikov’s painting here is a striking exception. Its hero is a crowd in colorful outfits, which occupies almost four-fifths of the picture; This makes the painting appear strikingly disorganized. Behind the living, swirling crowd, some of which will soon die, stands the motley, undulating St. Basil's Cathedral. Behind the frozen Peter, a line of soldiers, a line of gallows - a line of battlements of the Kremlin wall. The picture is cemented by the duel of glances between Peter and the red-bearded archer.

“A lot can be said about the conflict between society and the state, the people and the empire. But I think there are some other meanings to this piece that make it unique. Vladimir Stasov, a promoter of the work of the Peredvizhniki and a defender of Russian realism, who wrote a lot of unnecessary things about them, said very well about Surikov. He called paintings of this kind “choral.” Indeed, they lack one hero - they lack one engine. The people become the engine. But in this picture the role of the people is very clearly visible. Joseph Brodsky in his Nobel lecture he said beautifully that the real tragedy is not when the hero dies, but when the choir dies.”

Ilya Doronchenkov

Events take place in Surikov’s paintings as if against the will of their characters - and in this the artist’s concept of history is obviously close to Tolstoy’s.

“Society, people, nation in this picture seem divided. Peter's soldiers in uniforms that appear to be black and the archers in white are contrasted as good and evil. What connects these two unequal parts of the composition? This is an archer in a white shirt going to execution, and a soldier in uniform who supports him by the shoulder. If we mentally remove everything that surrounds them, we will never in our lives be able to imagine that this person is being led to execution. These are two friends returning home, and one supports the other with friendship and warmth. When Petrusha Grinev in „ The captain's daughter“The Pugachevites hung them up, they said: “Don’t worry, don’t worry,” as if they really wanted to cheer you up. This feeling that a people divided by the will of history is at the same time fraternal and united is an amazing quality of Surikov’s canvas, which I also don’t know anywhere else.”

Ilya Doronchenkov 

Abstract

In painting, size matters, but not every subject can be depicted on a large canvas. Various painting traditions depicted villagers, but most often - not in huge paintings, but this is exactly what “Funeral at Ornans” by Gustave Courbet is. Ornans is a wealthy provincial town, where the artist himself comes from.

“Courbet moved to Paris, but did not become part of the artistic establishment. He did not receive an academic education, but he had a powerful hand, a very tenacious eye and great ambition. He always felt like a provincial, and he was best at home in Ornans. But he lived almost his entire life in Paris, fighting with the art that was already dying, fighting with the art that idealizes and talks about the general, about the past, about the beautiful, without noticing the present. Such art, which rather praises, which rather delights, as a rule, finds a very great demand. Courbet was, indeed, a revolutionary in painting, although now this revolutionary nature of him is not very clear to us, because he writes life, he writes prose. The main thing that was revolutionary about him was that he stopped idealizing his nature and began to paint it exactly as he saw it, or as he believed that he saw it.”

Ilya Doronchenkov

In the giant painting, almost full height about fifty people are depicted. They are all real people, and experts have identified almost all the funeral participants. Courbet painted his fellow countrymen, and they were pleased to be seen in the picture exactly as they were.

“But when this painting was exhibited in 1851 in Paris, it created a scandal. She went against everything that the Parisian public was accustomed to at that moment. She insulted artists with the lack of a clear composition and rough, dense impasto painting, which conveys the materiality of things, but does not want to be beautiful. She frightened the average person by the fact that he could not really understand who it was. The breakdown of communications between the spectators of provincial France and the Parisians was striking. Parisians perceived the image of this respectable, wealthy crowd as an image of the poor. One of the critics said: “Yes, this is a disgrace, but this is the disgrace of the province, and Paris has its own disgrace.” Ugliness actually meant the utmost truthfulness.”

Ilya Doronchenkov

Courbet refused to idealize, which made him a true avant-garde of the 19th century. He focuses on French popular prints, and a Dutch group portrait, and ancient solemnity. Courbet teaches us to perceive modernity in its uniqueness, in its tragedy and in its beauty.

“French salons knew images of hard peasant labor, poor peasants. But the mode of depiction was generally accepted. The peasants needed to be pitied, the peasants needed to be sympathized with. It was a somewhat top-down view. A person who sympathizes is, by definition, in a priority position. And Courbet deprived his viewer of the possibility of such patronizing empathy. His characters are majestic, monumental, they ignore their viewers, and they do not allow one to establish such contact with them, which makes them part of the familiar world, they very powerfully break stereotypes.”

Ilya Doronchenkov 

Abstract

The 19th century did not love itself, preferring to look for beauty in something else, be it Antiquity, the Middle Ages or the East. Charles Baudelaire was the first to learn to see the beauty of modernity, and it was embodied in painting by artists whom Baudelaire was not destined to see: for example, Edgar Degas and Edouard Manet.

“Manet is a provocateur. Manet is at the same time a brilliant painter, the charm of whose colors, colors very paradoxically combined, forces the viewer not to ask himself obvious questions. If we look closely at his paintings, we will often be forced to admit that we do not understand what brought these people here, what they are doing next to each other, why these objects are connected on the table. The simplest answer: Manet is first and foremost a painter, Manet is first and foremost an eye. He is interested in the combination of colors and textures, and the logical pairing of objects and people is the tenth thing. Such pictures often confuse the viewer who is looking for content, who is looking for stories. Manet doesn't tell stories. He could have remained such an amazingly accurate and exquisite optical apparatus if he had not created his last masterpiece already in those years when he was in the grip of a fatal illness.”

Ilya Doronchenkov

The painting "Bar at the Folies Bergere" was exhibited in 1882, at first earned ridicule from critics, and then was quickly recognized as a masterpiece. Its theme is a café-concert, a striking phenomenon Parisian life second half of the century. It seems that Manet vividly and authentically captured the life of the Folies Bergere.

“But when we start to take a closer look at what Manet did in his painting, we will understand that there are a huge number of inconsistencies that are subconsciously disturbing and, in general, do not receive a clear resolution. The girl we see is a saleswoman, she must use her physical attractiveness to make customers stop, flirt with her and order more drinks. Meanwhile, she does not flirt with us, but looks through us. There are four bottles of champagne on the table, warm - but why not in ice? IN mirror image these bottles are not on the same edge of the table as they are in the foreground. The glass with roses is seen from a different angle than all the other objects on the table. And the girl in the mirror does not look exactly like the girl who looks at us: she is thicker, she has more rounded shapes, she is leaning towards the visitor. In general, she behaves as the one we are looking at should behave.”

Ilya Doronchenkov

Feminist criticism drew attention to the fact that the girl’s outline resembles a bottle of champagne standing on the counter. This is an apt observation, but hardly exhaustive: the melancholy of the picture and the psychological isolation of the heroine resist a straightforward interpretation.

“These optical plot and psychological mysteries of the picture, which seem to have no definite answer, force us to approach it again every time and ask these questions, subconsciously imbued with that feeling of beautiful, sad, tragic, everyday modern life, which Baudelaire dreamed of and which Manet left before us forever.”

Ilya Doronchenkov 

"... At the Salon of 1881, Manet received a long-awaited award - a second medal for the portrait of Pertuise, the lion hunter. Now Manet becomes an artist “out of competition” and has the right to exhibit his works without the consent of the Salon jury.

Manet hopes to do "something" for the 1882 Salon - for the first Salon, where his paintings will appear with the mark "V.K." ("out of competition"). He won't miss this!

But now, when fame, won with such difficulty, has finally come to him, will its gifts really fall into powerless hands?

Is it really just when he will finally be rewarded for his labors and hardships? will it all be over?.. Manet’s illness is progressing inexorably; he knows this, and sadness gnaws at him, and his eyes become clouded with tears. Live! Live! Mane resists. Will his will really not be able to overcome the disease?.. Mane gathers all his will.

They want to bury him too early. And now you can meet him in the cafe “New Athens”, at Tortoni’s, in the cafe Bad, in the Folies Bergere; with friends, I'll give you half the world. And he always jokes, ironizes, and has fun about his sore leg, his “infirmities.” Manet wants to implement a new plan:

new scene Parisian life, view of the Folies Bergere bar - the lovely Suzon at the counter lined with wine bottles; Suzon, who is well known to all regular visitors to this place. moving forward with difficulty. Mane fights over it, redoing it many times. In May 1882, he knows happiness, contemplating in the Salon "Spring" and "Bar at the Folies Bergere", accompanied by a sign "V.K." People no longer laugh at his paintings.

If some people still allow themselves to criticize them, if, for example, the construction of the “Bar” with its mirror and the play of reflections is considered too complex and is called a “rebus,” then all the same, MAnet’s paintings are considered seriously, carefully, they are argued about as works of art, to be taken into account. However, the sign "V.K." inspires respect from the public. By the will of these two letters, Manet becomes a recognized artist; These letters call for reflection, encourage sympathies (previously they did not dare to express them out loud), silence hostile mouths..." “In his last great work, “The Bar at the Folies Bergere,” the artist seemed to say goodbye to the life that he valued so much, about which he thought so much and which he never tired of admiring. Perhaps never before has the master’s worldview expressed itself in a separate work with such completeness. It contains love for man, for his spiritual and pictorial poetry, and attention to his complex relationships with others that are invisible to a superficial glance, and a feeling of the fragility of existence, and a feeling of bright joy when in contact with the world, and the irony that arises when observing it." The bar at the Folies Bergere" absorbed everything that Manet, with such persistence and conviction, sought, found and affirmed in an unremarkable life. Best images , included in his work, intertwined together to be embodied in this young girl standing behind the counter of a noisy Parisian tavern. Here, where people seek joy in contact with their own kind, where apparent joy reigns, the sensitive master rediscovers the image immersed in sad loneliness. The world surrounding the girl is hectic and multifaceted. Manet understands this and, in order to listen to only one voice, especially close to him, makes this world sound again “mutely” - to become an unsteady reflection in the mirror, to turn into an unclear, blurry haze of silhouettes, faces, spots and lights. The illusory duality of vision revealed to the artist physically, as it were, introduces the girl to the tinsel atmosphere of the bar, but not for long. Mane does not allow her to merge with this world, to dissolve in it. He forces her to internally switch off even from a conversation with a random visitor, whose prosaic appearance is also taken in by the mirror located right behind the counter, where the barmaid herself is seen from the back at an angle. As if starting from that reflection, Manet returns us to the only true reality of this entire ghostly spectacle of the world. The slender figure wrapped in black velvet is surrounded by the light glow of mirrors, a marble counter, flowers, fruits, sparkling bottles. Only she, in this color-light-air flicker, remains the most tangibly real, the most beautiful and irrefutable value. The artist’s brush slows down and rests more tightly on the canvas, the color thickens, and the contours are defined. But the feeling of physical stability of the heroine of the canvas that has finally arisen is not finite: the sad, slightly absent-minded and perplexed look of the girl, immersed in dreams and detached from everything around, again evokes a feeling of the fragility and elusiveness of her condition. The value of her concrete reality should, it seemed, be reconciled with the duality of the world around her. But no, the far from fully exhausted structure of her image continues to excite the imagination, evoke poetic associations in which sadness is mixed with joy.

It's hard to believe that "Bar" was created by a dying man, to whom every movement caused severe suffering. But it is so. Even before his death, Edouard Manet remained a fighter, just as in life he was a fighter against bourgeois vulgarity, philistine laziness of thoughts and feelings, a man of rare soul and intelligence. He passed hard way

, before he discovered the true beauty that he was looking for in modern life: he wanted to discover it and discovered it in simple, inconspicuous people, finding in them that inner wealth to which he gave his heart." Based on materials from the book “Edouard Manet” by A. Perryucho and the afterword by M. Prokofieva. - M.: TERRA - Book club

Today we’ll talk about a painting by Edouard Manet BAR IN THE FOLIES BERGÉRE 1882, which became one of famous masterpieces world art.

In 1881 at the French Salon E. Manet presents the long-awaited second award for the portrait of a lion hunter. Pertuise. After which Manet becomes out of competition and can exhibit his paintings without any permission from the Salon jury.

E. Manet Portrait of a lion hunter.

The long-awaited glory comes, but his illness progresses simply inexorably and he knows about it and therefore, he is gnawed by melancholy.

In September 1879, Manet suffered his first acute attack of rheumatism. It soon turned out that he was suffering from ataxia - a lack of coordination of movements. The disease progressed rapidly, limiting the artist’s creative capabilities.

Mane is trying to resist a serious illness. Will he really not be able to overcome the disease?

WORK ON THE PICTURE.

Mane decides to gather all his strength and will; they are still trying to bury him. He can be seen at the New Athens Café, at the Bud Café, at Tortoni's, at the Folies Bergere and at his girlfriends'. He always tries to joke and be ironic, has fun about his “infirmities” and jokes about his leg. Manet decides to carry out his new idea: to paint a scene from everyday Parisian life and depict the view of the famous Folies Bergere bar, in which the lovely girl Suzon stands behind the counter, in front of numerous bottles.

The girl is known to many regular visitors to the bar.
Painting "Bar at the Folies Bergere"is a work of extraordinary courage and picturesque subtlety: a blond girl stands behind the bar, behind her is a large mirror in which is reflected Big hall establishments with a public seated in them. She wears a black velvet decoration on her neck, her gaze is cold, she is bewitchingly motionless, she looks indifferently at those around her.
This complex plot the canvas moves with great difficulty.

The artist struggles with it and remakes it many times. At the beginning of May 1882, Manet completed the painting and became happy contemplating it in the Salon. Nobody laughs at his paintings anymore; in fact, his paintings are viewed with great seriousness, and people begin to argue about them as real works of art.
Yours last piece“The Bar at the Folies Bergere” was created as if he was saying goodbye to the life that he valued so much, which he admired so much and about which he thought a lot. The work absorbed everything that the artist had been looking for and finding for so long in an unremarkable life.

The best images are woven together to be embodied in this young girl who is standing in a noisy Parisian tavern. In this establishment, people seek joy by contacting their own kind, apparent fun and laughter reign here, a young and sensitive master reveals the image of a young life that is immersed in sadness and loneliness.
It is hard to believe that this work was written by a dying artist, to whom any movement of his hand caused pain and suffering. But even before his death, Edouard Manet remains a real fighter. He had to go through a difficult life path before he discovered the true beauty that he had been searching for all his life and found it in ordinary people, finding in their soul an inner richness to which he gave his heart.

DESCRIPTION OF THE PICTURE

The canvas depicts one of the most famous cabarets in Paris at the end of the nineteenth century. This is the artist's favorite place.

Why did he love going there so much? Bright life the capital was Manet's preference over the calm regularity of everyday life. He felt better in this cabaret than at home.

Apparently, Manet made sketches and preparations for the painting right in the bar. This bar was located on the first floor of the variety show. Sitting to the right of the stage, the artist began to make blanks for the canvas. Afterwards, he turned to the barmaid and his good friend, asking her to pose for him in her studio.

The basis of the composition was to be Manet's friend and the barmaid, facing each other. They should be passionate about communicating with each other. Found sketches by Manet confirm this master's plan.

But Manet decided to make the scene a little more significant than it was. On background there was a mirror displaying the crowds of customers filling the bar. Opposite all these people, the barmaid stood, she was thinking about her own things, being behind the bar counter. Even though there is fun and noise all around, the bartender has nothing to do with the crowd of visitors, she is soaring in her own thoughts. But on the right you can see, as if her own image, only she is talking with one visitor. How to understand this?

Apparently, the picture in the mirror is the events of the past minutes, but in reality what is depicted is that the girl was thinking about the conversation that happened a few minutes ago.

If you look at the bottles standing on the marble bar counter, you will notice that their reflection in the mirror does not match the original. The barmaid's reflection is also unreal. She looks directly at the viewer, while in the mirror she is facing the man. All these inconsistencies make the viewer wonder whether Manet depicted a real or imaginary world.

Although the picture is very simple in plot, it makes every viewer think and come up with something of their own. Manet conveyed the contrast between a cheerful crowd and a lonely girl among the crowd.

Also in the picture you can see a society of artists, with their muses, aesthetes and their ladies. These people are in the left corner of the canvas. One woman is holding binoculars. This reflects the essence of a society that wants to look at others and expose itself to them. At the top left corner you can see the acrobat's legs. Both the acrobat and the crowd of people having fun can’t brighten up the loneliness and sadness of the barmaid.

The date and signature of the master is displayed on the label of one of the bottles, which is in the lower left corner.

The peculiarity of this painting by Manet is its in a deep sense, many characters, and secrecy. Usually the artist’s paintings did not differ in such characteristics. This same picture conveys many depths of human thoughts. There are people in the cabaret of different origins and provisions. But all people are equal in their desire to have fun and have a good time.

And what do you think? What are your impressions of this picture?

Edouard Manet - Bar at the Folies Bergere, 1882

Un bar aux Folies Bergère

Canvas, oil.

Original size: 96 × 130 cm

Courtauld Institute of Art, London

Description: “Bar at the Folies Bergère” (French: Un bar aux Folies Bergère) - painting by Edouard Manet.

Folies Bergere is a variety show and cabaret in Paris. Located at 32 Richet Street. late XIX century this establishment was very popular. Manet often visited the Folies Bergere and ended up painting this painting, the last one he presented at the Paris Salon before his death in 1883. Manet made sketches for the painting right in the bar, located on the first floor of the variety show to the right of the stage. Then he asked barmaid Suzon and his friend, war artist Henri Dupray, to pose in the studio. Initially, the basis of the composition should be a barmaid and a client standing opposite each other, engrossed in conversation. This is evidenced not only by surviving sketches, but also by x-ray photographs of the painting. Later, Manet decided to make the scene more meaningful. In the background you can see a mirror, which reflects a huge number of people filling the room. Opposite this crowd, behind the counter stands a barmaid, absorbed in her own thoughts. Manet managed to convey the feeling of incredible loneliness in the midst of a drinking, eating, talking and smoking crowd, watching the trapeze acrobat, who can be seen in the upper left corner of the painting.

If you look at the bottles standing on the marble bar counter, you will notice that their reflection in the mirror does not match the original. The barmaid's reflection is also unreal. She looks directly at the viewer, while in the mirror she is facing the man. All these inconsistencies make the viewer wonder whether Manet depicted a real or imaginary world. The mirror, which reflects the figures depicted in the painting, makes “Bar at the Folies Bergere” similar to “Las Meninas” by Velazquez and “Portrait of the Arnolfini Couple” by van Eyck.

Description of the painting by Edouard Manet “Bar in the Folies-Bergere”

This work of art has gained immense fame. It conveys daily life, taking place in a French metropolitan bar from the 19th century. The artist himself visited here quite often, which made him take up his brush.

What explains Manet’s desire to spend idle time in this cabaret? The whole point is that the creator did not like peace and quiet. He liked more to have fun, communicate, have intimate conversations, and meet people. That is why he was so attracted by the riotous lifestyle of the Parisian brasserie.

It seems that the artist began to paint his picture right inside the establishment. At first, he sat not far from the stage, on the right side, and outlined the sketch. Then he asked the barmaid to stand in front of him in her usual position - behind the bar, but in Manet’s creative workshop.

After the artist's death, his first works from this cabaret were discovered. It turns out that the original idea for the painting was somewhat different. It was supposed to depict a barmaid and a young man - Manet's friend. They stood opposite each other and talked.

The end result is different: the barmaid is standing in front of a crowd of customers who are visible in the mirror hanging behind her. She is thoughtful, absent-minded, does not listen to people, but dreams of her own. However, we immediately see her on the right, as if the girl was having a conversation with a person who came into the bar. Is it her or another bartender? This question remains unclear.

Perhaps what is in the mirror is what is in the head of the cabaret worker. That is, a reflection of her thoughts, memories of what just happened. The viewer understands: the girl is lonely, but life is teeming around her. The acrobat, drunken faces, cheerful clients do not please the girl, she is completely immersed in her sad thoughts. But she can’t leave here either, because this is her job. Disharmony of existence.

Edouard Manet. Bar at the Folies Bergere. 1882 Courtauld Institute of Art, London.

Edouard Manet painted his painting “Bar at the Folies Bergere” towards the end of his life, being already a very sick man. Despite his illness, he created a painting that is different from all his previous works.

Basically, his work is unambiguous and concise. “The bar at the Folies Bergere, on the contrary, contains a number of mysteries that haunt the caring observer.

The painting depicts a bar saleswoman in the still famous cafe-variety show “Foli Bergere” (Paris, rue Richet, 32).

The artist loved to spend time here, so the environment was very familiar to him. This is what the cafe looks like in reality:

The girl is real and through the looking glass

Main mystery lies in the difference between how the bar and saleswoman appear in the foreground of the painting compared to their appearance in the rear mirror.

Notice how thoughtful and even sad the saleswoman is. It seems that she even has tears in her eyes. In a variety show environment, she is expected to smile and flirt with visitors.

By the way, this is what happens in the reflection of the mirror. The girl leaned slightly towards the male buyer and judging by the slight distance between them, their conversation was intimate.

Unusual signature of the painting

The bottles on the bar counter also differ in their location from those displayed in the mirror.

By the way, Manet put the date of the painting and his signature right on one of the bottles (the leftmost bottle of rose wine): Manet. 1882.

What did Manet want to tell us with these riddles? Why does the girl in front of us even have a different figure from the one shown in the mirror? Why do objects on the bar counter change their position in reflection?

Who posed for Manet?

A real saleswoman named Suzon from the Folies Bergere cafe posed for the artist. The girl was well known to Mana. 2 years before painting the original painting, he painted her portrait.

It was common practice for artists to have a portrait of the model in case she refused to pose. So that there is always an opportunity to finish the picture.

Perhaps Susan shared her life story, and Manet decided to portray her internal state and the role of a coquette that she is forced to play behind the bar?

Or maybe what is happening in the present time is captured in front of us, and the girl’s past is reflected in the reflection, and therefore the image of the objects is different?

If we continue this fantasy, we can assume that in the past the girl became too close to the depicted gentleman. And she found herself in a position. It is known that saleswomen in such variety shows were called girls who “serve both drinks and love.”

The gentleman, of course, did not break off his legal marriage because of the girl. And as often happens in such stories, the girl found herself alone in her arms with a child.

She is forced to work in order to somehow survive. Hence the sadness and sadness in her eyes.

X-ray of the painting

Another unusual and hidden detail We can see the pictures thanks to x-rays. It can be seen that in the original version of the picture the girl keeps her arms crossed on her stomach.