What is the meaning behind Goya’s horrifying painting?
>>8027975prolly Saturn devouring his son.
>>8027979So it’s just a flat representation of a myth? Why?
>>8027975this video about that series of paintings was pretty goodhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UOkscKuXP4k
>>8027981do you think its horrifying?
>>8027984fuck youtube
>>8027985Sure but why is it more horrifying than any other painting of Saturn eating his children? Because of the form. Even the use of red as a stark contrast to the rest of the nearly monochromatic dark tones and browns and shadows, shows that Goya was trying to create visual hierarchy and narrativity through just one facet of visual form. Add to that the collapse of realistic perspective and the reliance of gestural flow, and it seems he is actually trying to make a claustrophobic scene of space collapsing into itself. He’s a master of highlights and shadow, but always creates a deep darkness despite this.
>>8027981Not everything has got to have a particularly deep meaning. A painting of two lovers can really just mean nothing more than 'love is nice'. A landscape painting often means nothing more than 'nature is cool', its meaning is the aesthetic and nothing more.Most portraits are still considered art, but they're nothing more than capturing representations of a person at a moment in time.Back to this painting, given that it was scribbled on his wall, it was likely not a piece intended to be view by the public, and I doubt Goya thought it would be removed from his wall for all to view.It likely was nothing more than an illustration of a moment from the legend -- though clearly was trying to capture the crazed sad horror of the moment.You could look into the context of the time the painting was made, like what Goya was going through, or what the political landscape of the time was, but I always thought such interpretations of art were dogshit -- let the art speak for itself.
>>8027995Portraits are often deeper than just depicting someone’s attributes, they tap into perception and how interrelated physicality is, in terms of how we take in someone’s personality through their mere face or body. To think a landscape of nature is just about how nature is cool dismisses how we come to understand nature thorough culture and art. The same goes for a romantic painting of lovers; it is actually a cultural production of how love is understood through social mediation. Likewise, a Goya painting is not just a flat representation of a myth or a scene; it is a conduit into how we understand themes of war, despair, beauty, death, and witchcraft: it is the imaginary horizon of ourselves.
Test
>it has been claimed that the mural originally depicted Saturn with an erect penis, and that this detail was removed on the request of Cubells' client, Frédéric Émile d'Erlanger.>The art historian John J. Ciofalo writes that "the victim appears to be an adult and, given the curvaceous buttocks and legs, a female. Moreover, in other versions, the sons are alive and struggling or at least have heads, so the viewer can identify or sympathize. The victim is not struggling in Saturn's vice-like, blood-oozing grip, which literally cuts into her body, because she is already dead, not to mention headless. She does not, to say the least, encourage identification. The identification here flows toward Saturn. The overwhelming feeling of the image is one of violent and insatiable lust, underscored, to put it mildly, by the livid and enormously engorged penis between his legs. Utter male fury has hardly before or since been captured so vividly."much to think about
>>8027975That son so yummye...yeahe
>>8027975>What is the meaning behind Goya’s horrifying painting?Average sight of what happend in Spain circa 1820 (they discover the f*****).
>>8028074Discover the French faggots?
>>8027975https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g15-lvmIrcg
>>8028088The f**nch, the fags (imported by f**nch) and the f**nch fags
>>8028088What’s with linking video essays of a painting? Can’t you just explain how the work makes you feel?
>>8028120Meant for >>8028113
>>8027975Saturn devouring his son (female)
>>8027991uh i ve never found goya that scary
>>8027975symbolic representation of eating the last peach your wife left for the kids.
>>8027975dont worry about it. literally made by a guy named GOYIM
>>8027975Like all art, it is autobiographical. Goya had eight children but only one survived to adulthood. He also disapproved of the retreat towards Medievalism happening at the time. Goya was also terrified of aging.The depiction of Saturn parallels authority: national, parental, etc.
>>8028054I hate censorshipfags so fucking much.
GOYA DID NOT NAME THIS PAINTING.The Saturn implication was added by someone else.
He was a vorefag but no one made vorn yettruly, the cruelest fate.
>>8027975>What is the meaning behind Goya’s horrifying painting?boomers ft. gen x killing zoomers and gen alpha
>>8028054>given the curvaceous buttocks and legs, a femaleI'm not convinced
>>8029517Energetic
>>8027975Eating people is cool and based?
>>8027975Child sacrifice and cannibalism
>>8027975>>8028054It looks more scary in those black and white sketch.
>>8029668*This
>>8027975Goya being le big sad and schizoing over an old painting of a dancing man
>>8027975Senile old fucks consuming their children’s futures.
>>8028054>>8028172>Saturn devouring his son (female)The name was given to the painting posthumously right? So I suppose it may have never been Saturn devouring his son at all, and really could be a crazed giant man eating a woman.Looking it up quickly, there has been some debate over whether it was ever depicting Saturn, as it lacks any of the traditional iconography to explicitly show it's him... BUT, given that they immediately assumed that's what it was, shows it was a famous enough scene from legend that they all immediately agreed it was such, which is as good as any iconography in my opinion.Also, if there were meant to be a penis depicted originally, they would have probably already confirmed that -- we've already discovered so many underpaintings, and changes to paintings, and undersketches to classic works, are you telling me that they wouldn't have been salivating at the change to see Goya's depiction of Saturn's massive dong? Please.
>>8031148who's they? paintings have owners.
>>8031175The museum that owns and maintains the painting.
>>8031192i am telling that they are not salivating at the thought of uncovering goya's depiction of saturn's penis
>>8031254Did you? Doesn't appear to be the case?>who's they? paintings have owners.Almost seems like you're making shit up.Regardless, I disagree. General museum procedure of caring for and maintaining older paintings, from what I understand, includes the methods of scanning that would show the underpaintings and such.They also tend to include restoration methods that remove older overpaints that try to censor or change a painting from the artist's original vision.Assuming Goya's Saturn Devouring his Son is receiving the same level of care as other paintings, the Saturn cock would have likely already been discovered.
>>8027975I've always liked his facial expressions. Saturn looks traumatized by what he's doing.
>>8031269you are extremely low iq oh my god
>>8031322>You're dumb.Wow, good retort, really made me second guess my opinion... (that was sarcasm, since I believe you need to be told that)Maybe you should actually try to say something of substance, rather than just being a retarded sperg, making little retarded sperg quips.Am I incorrect about museum preservation techniques? What do you disagree with?
>>8031360>Am I incorrect about museum preservation techniques? What do you disagree with?Not him, but you are aware that artists used to draw dozens if sketches and small format preliminary paintings of the real thing? The cock could have been censored weeks before the first brush stroke on the final canvas occured.
>>8031401Oh sure, but an anon above (>>8028054) posted about how it was changed when taken off Goya's wall. Not to mention, that's not how the 'black paintings' Goya made were supposedly done (which was impromptu style directly on his wall, during Goya's mental decline). So a sketch probably never existed, as the painting itself IS the sketch.I'm not saying it wasn't initially painted with a cock, or that I'm correct about that particular museum's style of preservation (hell, maybe I thought the scans were more common than they are)... but if I am correct, then the cock should have been found. Since the cock hasn't sprung up, I guess it was never there, and it was just speculation.Regardless, to simply respond 'you dum' like the retard above did doesn't disprove anything, it's basically just ragebait, because they didn't have anything better to respond with.Call me dumb when you actually have a reason to do so, otherwise it just comes across as annoyingly limp.
not reading all of that, dimwit
>>8031448Very sassy.
>>8031418Convincing.Curious to hear what u-dumb-anon has to say to this
are you guys arguing about if goya painted a cock?
>>8033069It's important /ic/ business.
>>8028483>Like all art, it is autobiographical.lol no.>>8028412william carlos williams bro?>>8031418scans arent very common. something usually has to come up for some serious maintenance for museums to pull a piece and clean it and take samples, let alone xray and whatever types of photos they do.im not in the business. ive done some laser scanning and have a few good books about paintings that have gone thru the imagery works. def not standard practice.this art historical question i think would be "did goya draw a lot of cocks?"that ll likely lead you to answer
>>8027975I've heard theories that it's about the horror of warfare, and the way fathers send their young children off to perish on a battlefield so they can live on the glory and riches that all consuming war brings. And Goya was very involved in the penisular war (part of Napoleons conquest of Spain - which was full of all kinds of horrific shit like torture, civilian massacres, starvation as a means of subjugating regions -- Goya himself actually worked on a series of prints covering the horrors of the war thatm might actually be the first iteration of something akin to war correspondence we have: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Disasters_of_War) But it's also evident that Goya had this idea going back to 1797 where he maybe a preliminary sketch of the piece (more than a decade before the peninsular war started) There is another theory though lol >Licht offers the alternative explanation that the painting is an inversion of antisemitic artistic depictions of Jewish figures eating children, a reference to the alleged blood libel.[7] In this view, the larger figure represents the fears of Jews manifesting in real violence against them, as "real bestiality is born of imagined bestiality," although he concedes this is impossible to prove, and like the Saturn interpretation, demonstrates the varied intent of Goya in the compositionSaturn could literally be Goya venting about the jews lol. It's a fascinating piece. Also never meant to be seen by the public, which makes discussion on it even more interesting.Anyway here's a parody piece I made on it for a Do Art Daily badge lol
>>8033098also that preliminary sketch if you're interested. This one looks a lot more jewy IMO
>>8033098no cockfuck off
>>8033100oh my b. Let me fix that for you
>>8027991What makes it most terrifying is Goya's disillusionment and isolation as he unravels a disconcerting epiphany that the government, who is supposed to act as a paternal entity that protects its citizens is instead a machine that feeds on the suffering of their sons because it's profitable.Or that a venerated concept of a flawless god conveniently obfuscates that the nature of life its supposed to personalise has been an everlasting plane of bloodshed and absurd horror.You see what could be your grandfather, a man you thought you could trust, nude and so grotesque that they look as if they were concealing their true form for all this time from everyone. He stares at you in a frenetic surprise as if you were never supposed to know. That that musky darkness was an area no-one else should ever be able to access, where he feeds on his own children and he can't stop.
He was probably just hungry at the time.
>dad when the fridge is empty.jpg
>>8033098>>8033099goya was a member of the court, he was involved or at least closely spectated politics. He certainly had some interesting opinions about our friends from the levant, and was probably a freemason so no stranger to the esoteric and the occult
>>8027975It ain't easy being pink.
>On March 1815 the tribunal of the Inquisition issued a subpoena for Goya to appear, “that he might acknowledge and declare the works to be his, why he created them, at whose request and to what end.” The questions posed to the Aragonese painter concerned two enigmatic paintings: The Maja desnuda and the Maja vestida. His reply, if any, remains unknown.
It’s a political commentary on the Spanish government that was essentially devouring its people. His other works emphasize this fact emphatically.> You can already see it happening in the US OP
>>8027975One interpretation I heard was that Saturn was himself and it represents the guilt he felt because of all of children died very young.
>>8027975to answer your question, (because >>8027995is a retard), the meaning of saturn eating his son is about a person in power doing absolutely horrible things to delay his inevitable loss of power (usurped by his son), which inevitably causes his downfall in the first place. the myth teaches us that yes, one day we will all lose our status, but by being kind and accepting the inevitability, we can make sure that the people under us won't gut us like fish when they usurp us.
>>8027975How did they get it off his wall and onto a canvas, I don't get that part
>>8043085nothe "myth" tells us about narcissistic violent cunts who do not and cannot even fathom valuing relations such as "parent/child" and will fuck you over immediately if it seems profitable.enjoy your bubble
>>8027984wow, just checked 3 minutes of the video>Goya was a typical left wing revolutionary loser>Goya's income was all from Crown commissions patronizing his scribbles however>Goya was therefore hit by massive cognitive dissonance (like any leftist) and went into major depression over realizing he was a loser unfit for reality, mentally stuck in a la-la land reality subsidized by actual adults>Begins painting gory edgelord paintings because shopping at Target and cutting yourself aren't a thing yetWhat a beautiful video, i'm all smiles
>>8045728shit goya sounds based now
>>8045728>Goya was a staunch liberaldifferent meaning in the 18th/19th century. Liberal in that context means something closer to what a libertarian is today. The original meaning that came out of the enlightenment was that man should be liberated from control by the state or a monarchy. Goya was anti-monarchy, but that doesn't necessarily make him leftwing. He just didn't wanted to be told what he could or couldn't do with his life and his work.
>>8046556also to add on to that, many of the industrialists and ultra-capitalist of the industrial revolution considered themselves liberal by their own 19th century standards. They were from a world where the monarchy/state had the final say on any enterprise or project. You couldn't just run a printing press or open a factory without getting the express permission of the King or a committee appointed by the King, which would presumably be members of a royal court. Which is why in Goya's time, the majority of people in positions of power would've been relatives or friends of the court. So keeping in the court's good books was ESSENTIAL to surviving as an artist, even though he severely disliked the court. His liberalism was less about wanting a left wing revolution, and proletariat power, and more about wanting to be free of state control. The Liberals were in opposition to both the traditionalists (monarchists/pro-state) and the socialists (pro-working class or "woke" in the contemporary sense)
i dislike old paintings being memefied but in a way it also keeps them alive this way, bringing the past into the future
>>8046556>>8046561COPE
