Historical investigation of Jacques-Louis David's Marat À son ...

How did Jacques-Louis David’s Marat à son dernier soupir influence
the popular mindset in France during the French Revolution from 1793-1870?
Jessica Ryan
Loveland High School
Loveland, Colorado, USA
Contents
Plan of the Investigation 2
Summary of Evidence 2
Evaluation of Sources 3
Analysis 4
List of Sources and Word Count 5
Appendix A – Marat à son dernier soupir by Jacques-Louis David 6
Appendix B – “The Divine Marat,” Charles Baudelaire 7

David‟s Marat and the French Revolution Ryan 2
A
Plan of the Investigation
The purpose of this investigation is to determine how Jacques-Louis David‟s
painting, Marat à son dernier soupir, influenced the popular mindset during the French
Revolution. The two main sources for this investigation are the painting itself and “The
Divine Marat,” a review of the painting by Charles Baudelaire. Also included in this
investigation will be essays analyzing the painting, reviews of the painting by people
seeing it for the first time, and works containing biographical information about the artist
and the painting‟s subject. Both sides of how the painting influenced the general
populace, both for and against the revolution, will be taken into account. Also investigated
will be the history of the scene depicted in the painting, as well as the artist‟s relationship
with Marat and the revolution.
B
Summary of Evidence
Marat à son dernier soupir is more than just a painting; it tells the story of a man
“à son dernier soupir”- at his last breath. Jean-Paul Marat was a journalist, a politician,
and, finally, a murder victim. Murdered while taking a medicinal bath at his Parisian
apartment by a woman from Normandy named Charlotte Corday, Marat‟s place as l’ami
du people (the friend of the people) came to an end, one day short of the fourth
anniversary of the Storming of the Bastille. Marat‟s close friend, Jacques-Louis David,
was commissioned in August of 1793 by members of the National Convention to paint the
deceased‟s likeness, “which reveals an interesting faith in the power of the image to
create a likeness so believable that the subject‟s actual presence might be felt” (Vaughan
et al. 6). The painting shows Marat as David might have seen him, but “the artist has in
fact been extremely cavalier with the evidence” (Vaughan et al. 16). Upon examination of
the actual murder scene, one can see the great deal of artistic license used by David.
Yes, the Marat portrays a murdered man in the bath, but everything else about the scene
is different from how it actually happened- from the shape of the bathtub to the
appearance of the murder weapon (Vaughan et al. 16).
After its completion, Marat à son dernier soupir was placed on display at the
Louvre alongside another commemorative portrait by David, a visual ode to Le Peltier de
Saint-Fargeau. A month later, David showed the Marat to the Convention, making a
speech regarding his compliance of their requests to “Avenge Marat.” David‟s speech
was “greeted with applause” and Marat à son dernier soupir was displayed opposite
David‟s painting of Le Peltier. (Schama 224). Noting the opportunity for the Marat to
become a piece of Revolutionist propaganda, “arrangements were made for 1000 printed
reproductions to be made so that it could be circulated through all the departments of
France” (Schama 226). The propaganda was effective, as “zealous parents renamed
their children Marat; and even towns changed their names to immortalize the fallen
sainted Friend of the People” (Schama 227).
However, the Marat and Le Peltier were exhibited only for a short amount of time;
as political ideals began to shift, the main concepts of the paintings became taboo
(Vaughan et al. 68). Worried it would encourage people to focus on matters outside the
home (the antithesis of the government of the Republic‟s ideal man), the Marat was
“banished from public view” until after David‟s death (Halliday 69). The artist himself was
also seen as a threat to the new government and was “denounced in the Convention as a
„tyrant of the arts‟ and a traitor” (Schama 227).

David‟s Marat and the French Revolution Ryan 3
Although Marat à son dernier soupir had been hidden for many years, the
painting‟s intended message had a revival in the middle of the nineteenth century:
Even after the first Republic began to be rehabilitated in the 1840s,
Marat remained condemned as a monster. Jules Michelet, in his classic
study, used Marat‟s physical repulsiveness to enhance repugnance:
„from what swamp has come this shocking creature?‟ he asked. Not
surprisingly, Michelet exalts Corday‟s character and beauty in his work.
However, in the 1860s, when republican sympathies were beginning to
revive, Marat began to be seen by some in a more sympathetic light.
Alfred Bougeart, in Marat, l’ami du peuple, considered that Marat had
been a check on unlicensed authority and felt that he would have saved
the Revolution had he lived.
(Vaughan et al. 18)
In 1846, Charles Baudelaire viewed the Marat for the first time, writing a review of it
entitled “The Divine Marat.” Baudelaire‟s description of the painting may have played a
role in the movement toward the people‟s sympathy of Marat.
C
Evaluation of Sources
The two main sources for this investigation are Jacques-Louis David‟s painting,
Marat à son dernier soupir, and Charles Baudelaire‟s critique of the work. These are the
main sources because the painting is the basis of the investigation, and Baudelaire‟s
critique thrust the painting into the spotlight by creating a reputation of an unusual and
complex work (Vaughan et al. 20). The painting and Baudelaire‟s critique can be found in
Appendices A and B, respectively.
As David‟s painting is the basis for this investigation, its origin, purpose, value,
and limitations must be evaluated and discussed. Marat à son dernier soupir, as
mentioned in part B of the investigation, began as a commissioned work to honor the
“Friend of the People,” Jean-Paul Marat. The painting is a primary document in the sense
that it records the event of Marat‟s last breath, regardless of the portrayal‟s accuracy.
Simon Schama writes, “[David‟s] first obligation was to make Marat … into a neoclassical
quasi-biblical hero; someone whose face and body were transfigured into the
highest ideal of humanity by sheer force of inner virtue” (221). Aside from having been
requested to paint the image of his friend‟s dying moments, Jacques-Louis David created
the Marat to display a martyr of the Revolution and to immortalize the journalist in the
form of an object to which mourners and descendants of the Revolution could pay tribute
(Halliday 56). The painting itself is incredibly valuable to historians studying how David
wanted people to see Marat, assuming the researcher had a background in art history
and art analysis. Despite its importance as the first portrayal of Marat‟s murder, Marat à
son dernier soupir has its limitations. David is clearly biased in his representation of
Marat, hoping to make him appear an innocent martyr. David completely transforms the
scene of the crime, changing the color and decoration of the walls, adding a letter and
other writing utensils to the scene, even changing the texture of Marat‟s skin, ignoring the
psoriasis which caused him to be in the bath to begin with (Schama 221). People viewing
the work as an account of the murder must take care not to assume its total unbiased
accuracy.

David‟s Marat and the French Revolution Ryan 4
Charles Baudelaire‟s critique of the Marat, entitled “The Divine Marat,” also must
be assessed in the ways of origin, purpose, value, and limitations, as it is often regarded
as “the most famous description of the picture” (Vaughan et al. 19). Baudelaire‟s critique
is a primary document, originating from an exhibition of works by David and Ingres in
1846, half a century after the painting‟s original creation. Baudelaire intended to describe
the painting as he saw it and to reflect on his own personal beliefs about the “conflict
between the real and the ideal” (Vaughan et al. 20). “The Divine Marat” can be incredibly
valuable to historians studying the effect Marat à son dernier soupir had on the art scene
fifty years after its conception because it has been widely accepted as the “classic
formulation” of the painting (Vaughan et al. 19). Biographers of Baudelaire could also find
“The Divine Marat” valuable in deciphering how he was influenced by the painting. But as
with any critique, Baudelaire‟s is incredibly biased and therefore has just as many limits in
its credibility. Baudelaire even makes a plea to the people of France to “give way to
emotion before David‟s masterpiece” (Baudelaire). Anyone reading “The Divine Marat”
will be able to clearly distinguish Baudelaire‟s favor of the painting – even upon
examination of the title, one can discern how the writer feels. Due to its slanted approach
to describing the painting, historians must take care to avoid assuming Baudelaire spoke
for the masses in his reaction to the work.
D
Analysis
David clearly took advantage of his artistic license while painting Marat, taking
every detail of the scene of the murder and simplifying it (Gretton 35). Instead of being
distracted by the cluttered walls in the background of the painting, the viewer sees a
black wall which takes up nearly half the canvas. The parallels created by the bathtub
and the writing crate, as well as the diagonal lines created by Marat‟s arms and face help
the viewer focus on the body‟s position- strikingly similar to that of Michelangelo‟s Piéta
(Schama 221). David simplified the scene not only to emphasise the horror of the murder,
but also to make it linger permanently in the people‟s minds. “Somehow, without robbing
the history of its particulars, he had to make it seem a moment of eternity, pregnant with
destiny not just for France but for all mankind” (Schama 223). With the obvious
connections to Michelangelo‟s image of Christ, David successfully paints (quite literally)
Marat as a martyr to the cause of the people.
David‟s masterpiece fulfilled one of its duties in allowing the members of the
Convention to have one of their own with them again, if only for a short while. Additionally,
Marat à son dernier soupir served as a way to further the cause of revolution:
This…was part of a deliberate campaign to use pictures of revolutionary
martyrs to replace religious imagery. It was done quite literally at times;
new images actually took the place in some churches of old religious
ones. From September 1793 to March 1794 there was a strong „culte de
Marat.‟
(Vaughan et al. 17)
Among the 1000 copies sent throughout France as propaganda (Schama 224) were
copies produced by David‟s students from inside his studio. Many copies lacked the
inscription on the crate (“À MARAT, DAVID.”) altogether, while some had a new phrase-
N’AYANT PU ME COMPRIMÉ, ILS ON M’ASSASSINÉ (“Unable to corrupt me, they assassinated

David‟s Marat and the French Revolution Ryan 5
me”). This message clearly served David‟s propagandist ideals and helped to strengthen
the “culte de Marat.”
Along with the banishment of his efforts to honor his friend, David was also
banished- to prison, five days after the execution of Jean-Jacques Robespierre (Schama
227). During his (two) stints in prison, David spent time crafting a new image for himself.
Instead of the politics-driven propagandist responsible for the Marat, David painted a self
portrait, turning himself “into the man he was before the Terror; younger, more innocent,
untouched by politics” (Schama 228). David‟s newly rediscovered past self, in addition to
the disappearance of the Marat allowed people to easily forget the “martyr” portrayed by
David. With the disappearance of the “culte de Marat,” the new Republic was able to turn
him yet again into a monster, and until the time of Baudelaire‟s critique, David‟s victim
remained seen as such.
E
Conclusion
Beginning with David‟s Marat and ending with Baudelaire‟s critique of it, the
popular mindset regarding Marat and the Revolution went through phases of favor and
disfavor. From the “culte de Marat” created right after the painting‟s first exhibition, to the
renewal of pre-Marat ideas of the subject as a monster, to yet another period of sympathy
for the victim of the woman from Normandy, Marat à son dernier soupir greatly influenced
the popular mindset of the French people. The absence of David‟s painting in the public
eye produces hostility toward the murderous beast, while its presence generates
compassion for the martyr. From this observation, one can conclude David successfully
portrayed Marat appropriately in the painting, making him l’ami du peuple for eternity.

David‟s Marat and the French Revolution Ryan 6
F
List of Sources
Baudelaire, Charles. “Le Musée classique du Bazar Bonne-Nouvelle,” Le Corsaire-Satan,
21 January 1846 ; reprinted in Ouvres complètes. Paris :Gallimard, Pléiade
edition, 1976, 410.
David, Jacques-Louis. Marat à son dernier soupir (The Death of Marat). 1793. Musées
royaux de Beaux-Arts, Brussels.
Delécluze, E. J. Louis David, son école et son temps. Paris, 1855 ; reprint ed. Jean
Pierre Mouilleseaux. Paris: Editions Macula, 1983.
Gretton, Tom. “Marat, L’ami du Peuple, David.” David’s The Death of Marat. eds. William
Vaughan and Helen Weston. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2000.
Halliday, Tony. “David‟s Marat as Posthumous Portrait.” David’s The Death of Marat. eds.
William Vaughan and Helen Weston. New York: Cambridge University Press,
2000.
Norton, Anne. Bloodrites of the Post-Structuralists: Word, Flesh, and Revolution. New
York: Routledge, 2002.
Schama, Simon. The Power of Art. New York: HarperCollins Publishers, 2006.
Vaughan, William. “Terror and the Tabula Rasa.” David’s The Death of Marat. New York:
Cambridge University Press, 2000.
Vaughan, William, Helen Weston, Tom Gretton, and Tony Halliday. David's The Death of
Marat. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2000.
Weston, Helen. “The Corday-Marat Affair.” David’s The Death of Marat. eds. William
Vaughan and Helen Weston. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2000.

David‟s Marat and the French Revolution Ryan 7
Appendix A – Marat à son dernier soupir by Jacques-Louis David
Jacques-Louis David, Marat à son dernier soupir (The Death of Marat),
1793, oil on canvas, 165x128 cm. Musées royaux de Beaux-Arts,
Brussels. (Copyright IRPA, Musées royaux de Beaux-Arts, Brussels).

David‟s Marat and the French Revolution Ryan 8
Appendix B – “The Divine Marat,” Charles Baudelaire
The divine Marat, one arm hanging out of the bath, its hand still loosely holding
on to its last quill, and his chest pierced by the sacrilegious wound, has just
breathed his last. On the green desk in front of him, his other hand still holds the
treacherous letter: „Citizen, it is enough that I am really miserable to have a right
to your benevolence.‟ The bath water is red with blood, the paper is bloodstained;
on the ground lies a large kitchen knife soaked in blood; on a wretched
packing case, which constituted the working furniture for the tireless journalist we
read: „À Marat, David‟. All the details are historical and real, as in a novel by
Balzac; the drama is there, alive in all its pitiful horror, and by a strange stroke of
brilliance, which makes this David‟s masterpiece and one of the great treasures
of modern art, there is nothing trivial or ignoble about it. What is most astonishing
in this exceptional poem is the fact that it is painted extremely quickly, and when
one considers the beauty of its design, it is all the more bewildering. It is the
bread of the strong and the triumph of the spiritual; as cruel as nature, this
picture has the heady scent of idealism. What has become of that ugliness that
Death has so swiftly erased with the tip of its wing? Marat can henceforth
challenge Apollo; Death has kissed him with loving lips and he rests in the peace
of transformation. There is in this work something both tender and poignant, a
soul hovers in the chilled air of this room, on these cold walls, around the cold
and funereal bath. May we have your permission, politicians of all parties, even
you, ferocious liberals of 1845, to give way to emotion before David‟s
masterpiece? This painting was a gift to a tearful nation, and our own tears are
not dangerous.