Note: This is an undergraduate visual analysis I wrote for an assessment. I am sharing this for educational reasons. Although factually correct, this should not be used a source for university assignments. You will see there is no reference to a bibliography, that is for this reason.
Nineteenth-century Europe experienced several shifts caused by industrialisation. The delicate socio-political, economic and cultural fabrics for both societies were impacted. Communities were torn by the abrupt end of benign paternalism and feudalism leaving many peasants without secure housing, work or food. Some artists witnessed how capitalism was either pleasant or harsh depending on the social class. The increase in agricultural trade and industrial production meant transportation needed to be improved. From 1760 to 1830, England invested in waged labour. In France, the French Revolution caused many roads to be destroyed. The French used forced labour until 1830, which meant roads were either slow to upgrade or poorly made. To fulfil the need for roads some peasants became stonebreakers. This became the subject matter of many paintings. Aristocratic British-born Animalier painter, Sir Edwin Landseer, appeased the wealthy through the use of Romanticism by illustrating stonebreakers in a pleasant way. Contrastingly, French painter Gustave Courbet depicted stonebreakers within the context of reality using Realism. This essay examines how nineteenth-century industrialisation disrupted the Academic art while challenging classism and shifting realistic representation of contemporary peasant life.
Within Landseer’s small Romanticism oil painting, The Stonebreaker and His Daughter, (Figure 1) we see two main figures: a man and his daughter. In the background, there is a village where smoke is coming from a chimney. Grey clouds indicate a storm may be brewing. A weathered man is sitting against a large moss rock with his legs out and a basket of small stones is in front of him. One hand is relaxed on the ground holding a hammer and the other hand is resting on his leg. He is wearing an outfit which is reminiscent of a shepherd; a hat with long thick fabric covering his neck and back which is laying over his torso and lap. He is looking up at his porcelain-skinned daughter. She is catching his gaze while kneeling with one hand on her waist. Between them both is a basket of food, a satchel, a small jug of wine and a Fox Terrier, who is fixated on her hand. The foreground is filled with earthly tones of green, cream, onyx and varying dark tones of navy, brown and black.
At first glance, this looks like a lunch break soon disturbed by bad weather. However, the painting’s narrative has deep religious iconography and Academic infiltration. Landseer demonstrates five aspects of Academic art which he learnt at the prestigious Royal Academy in London. It is a small canvas, typically reserved for unimportant paintings. The use of Romanticism is an and an ode to Raphaelitism and the incredible skills and abilities of the painter. He is by virtue trying to appease the upper class of pleasant imagery. The religious iconography is heavily influenced by Raphael; the dog is reminiscent of a lamb and his outfit is to signifying a flock and the leather bag and the stones are referencing David in the Bible. However, most notably the Father is looking at his daughter with love, she is his Madonna; her presence suggests this. She is virgin-like; clean, pure and plump in figure, signifying her good health, which would not have been reminiscent of their class. His clothes are only seen torn at one edge and his socks are held up with leather straps. He is a hard worker with little money. Yet, he is not dirty like the shovel next to his daughter. This soft representation lessens the blow that industrial fallout had detrimental effects to the lower class.
Thirty-years after Landseer’s painting Courbet created, The Stonebreakers (Figure 2). The two oil paintings are vastly different. Courbet’s is considerably larger than Landseer’s, suggesting a greater importance of the work. Although rejected from the 1855 Paris Salon Courbet’s disdain for Academic art and his rebellious representation of peasants was considered frightening when presented to the bourgeoisies at his ‘Pavilion of Realism’. As discussed by Facos, before 1840 peasants were represented within art “to be either dramatic or sentimental… as they posed no serious threat to social stability” (Facos 2011: 249). However, by now there had been several political issues, such as the French Revolution, which caused these men in the painting to be reminders of peasant uprisings.
In the foreground we see two male figures; old and young. They are concentrated with their faces concealed. You get a sense that you don’t want to disturb these men; they are hard at work. The young man is moving a large heavy rock and the old man is kneeling in motion to break a rock with a sharp hammer. The background is predominantly dark with a hint of blue in the left corner. The foreground is well lit with hues of brown, white, and greens. There are some shrubs and rocks around their feet. Food is behind the older man’s shoulder, the placement of utensils suggests lunch was finished hastily. Both men’s clothes are dirty and torn in multiple places.
Through the use of Realism, Courbet depicted life for peasants as it was; hard and laborious. The use of strong lines, harsh shadowing and natural colour palette intentionally makes the viewer feel as though they are in the trenches with them. The concealed faces wielding heavy and dangerous objects paired with sharp tools scattered around encourages an essence of unsafety, anyone can get hurt here. Courbet’s painting suggests that this life is destined for the young boy carrying the rock, he may never escape it. The concealment of faces suggests to the bourgeois that these men are people they don’t know and may never know, a simple fact of classism within the nineteenth century.
With thirty years between both paintings, Landseer and Courbet represent stonebreakers and peasant life in vastly different ways. Landseer’s use of Romanticism and Raphaelitism evokes a sense of ease to the life that peasants had; anyone could do it with no complaints and it was a good life. The use of a small canvas gives reference to the unimportance of the subject and thus could be easily missed or disregarded as worthy. His soft colour palette suggests that this is an idyllic life. In comparison, Courbet’s use of Realism depicts how difficult life must have been; this was not a life you wanted to have. The large canvas signifies the importance of the subject and work. You could not miss this in a Salon. The use of earthly and dark tones suggest an ominous undertone to the painting.
Figure 1: Sir Edwin Landseer, The Stonebreaker and His Daughter, 1830, oil, 45 x 58 cm, Victoria & Albert Museum.
Figure 2: Gustave Courbet, The Stonebreakers, 1850, Oil on Canvas, 160 x 259 cm. Destroyed in 1945.