“Black Paintings” by Francisco Goya. How to go to another world Goya witches in the air history of the painting

Goya's Witches Francisco Jose de Goya y Lucientes (Spanish: Francisco Jose de Goya y Lucientes, March 30, 1746, Fuendetodes, near Zaragoza - April 16, 1828, Bordeaux) - a great Spanish artist and engraver. One of the most brilliant masters of the romantic movement and art.

1797 The painting, Flight of the Witches, depicts scenes of witchcraft. Three hatted figures grabbed a naked man out of the air. In addition to them, you can see the poor fellow covering his ears and a running man in a white cloak, with his right hand reproducing a gesture intended to protect against the evil eye. This painting was acquired by the Prado Museum in 1999.

Great goat, Date of creation: 1798. Type: fresco. One of the images from the “Dark Pictures” series. The canvas was painted during the most difficult period of the artist’s life, when he began to lose his hearing and suffer from monstrous visions that haunted him in his dreams and in reality. He transferred these incredible hallucinations to the walls of his own home. “The Sabbath of Witches” was located along the wall of the room and, with its incredible surrealism and gloomy coloring, it drove everyone into the room into a stupor.

Painting, Witches' Sabbath, Date of creation: 1797–1798. Location: Lazaro Galdiano Museum. The magnificent painting is part of a series of six works created by Goya, commissioned by the Duke of Osuna, to decorate his estate, near Madrid. The main character of the scene is the devil. He is represented in the form of a large goat, ready to sacrifice two babies. The work is considered satirical and critical of the superstitions of an uneducated society. Francisco Goya, although he created many works on mystical themes, treated it with humor and distrust, probably seeing only interesting scenes and images in mysterious rituals and beliefs.

Painting "Have a nice trip!" (Series "Caprichos"). Date of creation 1799. Biography: The famous artist Francisco de Goya was born on March 30, 1746 in Fuendetodos in Spain. He began his studies of art as a teenager and even spent some time in Rome to further his skills. In the 1770s, Goya worked in the Spanish royal court. In addition to commissioning portraits of nobles, he created works that criticized the social and political problems of his era. The political situation in the country subsequently became so tense that Goya voluntarily went into exile in 1824. Despite his poor health, he thought he would be safer outside Spain. Goya moved to Bordeaux, where he spent the rest of his life. Here he continued to write. Some of his later works are portraits of friends and life in exile. The artist died on April 16, 1828 in Bordeaux in France.

“I am Goya! The eye sockets of the craters were pecked out by a raven, flying naked onto the field. I am Sorrow." This is what Andrei Voznesensky wrote in his famous poem, confirming the existing opinion that modern man perceives the great Spaniard, first of all, as the creator of dark, frightening and difficult to comprehend creations.

Meanwhile, Francisco Goya is not only about hunger and hanged women. First of all, he is the first modernist artist to change the classical idea of ​​composition in painting. Goya is rightly considered the link between old and new art, the heir of Velazquez and the predecessor of Manet. His paintings contain both the sensuality and clarity of past centuries, and the flat anti-illusionism of the modern era.

Goya did not have a favorite genre. He painted landscapes and still lifes. He was equally good at the faces of pompous nobles and the alluring features of women's bodies. His brushes include vivid historical canvases and paintings that brilliantly convey the content of biblical stories. But there is one feature in Goya’s work that you will not find in other artists. No one has ever portrayed cruelty, superstition and madness so convincingly and authentically. Goya was able to show the most extreme and repulsive properties of human nature with maximum realism and honesty. This feature of his artistic nature was most clearly manifested in the so-called “Black Paintings,” a complex of frescoes with which Goya covered the walls of his house located on the outskirts of Madrid.

In 1819, Goya moved from Madrid to a country house and estate known as Quinta del Sordo (House of the Deaf).

Quinta del Sordo (House of the Deaf). Drawing by Saint-Elma Gautier in 1877. Goya's house is a small building on the left. The right wing was erected after the artist's death.

By this time, the artist had experienced a series of personal tragedies: the death of his wife and several children, separation from close friends, and a serious illness that caused his deafness. Having settled outside the city, in a quiet place across the Manzanares River, Goya hopes to find peace of mind and avoid gossip surrounding his relationship with Leocadia Weiss, a young beautiful woman who at that time was married to a wealthy merchant Isidoro Weiss.

But the difficult situation in the country, which the artist is acutely worried about, and a severe heart attack, have a devastating effect on his health and psyche. Goya begins to feel depressed. He does not see anything joyful and bright in the world around him. Trying to cope with internal chaos and melancholy, Goya painted fifteen oil paintings on the walls of the rooms of his house, which were later called “black” for their anxious mood and the predominance of dark tones in the palette. Some of them are dedicated to biblical or mythological subjects, but mostly “Black Paintings” are dark creations of the artist’s imagination.

There are many explanations for the philosophical and symbolic meaning of the paintings from “The House of the Deaf.” Some researchers of Goya’s work believe that the “Black Paintings” are generally incomprehensible. What are these frescoes? Projections of nightmares, captured hallucinations of a sick mind, or encrypted prophecies of future troubles awaiting both Goya himself and all of humanity? There is no clear answer.

However, we can say with confidence that in the “Black Paintings” Goya, perhaps spontaneously and unintentionally, expressed in the form of frightening, mysterious images what tormented and worried him: the civil war, the collapse of the Spanish revolution, his relationship with Leocadia Weiss, his own inevitable aging and the approaching death. The artist subordinated the location of the “black paintings” on the walls of the “House of the Deaf” to a certain plan, combining his creation into a single complex, which can be divided into two parts: lower and upper. Therefore, in order to “read” the Quinta del Sordo paintings, to understand their hidden meaning, one must proceed not only from what is depicted on the frescoes, but also take into account their spatial relationships with each other.

First floor frescoes

In the long elongated room on the lower floor, in the walls, there were seven frescoes, which were made in the same style and represented a complete composition.

On both sides of the front door there were two portraits: presumably, the master himself and his housekeeper Leocadia Weiss, who later became the mistress of the house.

The portrait of Leocadia, located on the left side, depicts a young elegant woman who stands leaning against the grave fence.

What does grave mean? Perhaps Goya wanted to show that Leocadia is waiting for the death of her husband, who is preventing her from becoming the artist’s legal wife. Or is this the grave of Goya himself and the portrait speaks of the gloomy forebodings that possessed him?

To the right of the door are “Two Old Men”.

An old man with a long beard, reminiscent of the figure from Goya’s painting “I’m Still Learning,” most likely represents the painter himself. The second figure is the demon of his inspiration or the infernal tempter, who is forced to shout in the deaf artist’s ear so that he can hear him.

In the recess above the door - “Two old women eating from common dishes.” Little attention is paid to this fresco, but it is of great importance for the entire composition. The figures depicted on it not only eat, but also point to some place outside the space of the picture. Where are their fingers pointing?

Perhaps the artist was parodying himself, hinting at the portraits he once painted of the Duchess of Alba?

But most likely, the old women point to Goya, as if reminding him of old age’s infirmity and imminent death.

On the wall opposite the front door, Goya painted two paintings, separated by a window, which later became the most famous among his modern admirers: “Saturn Devouring His Children” and “Judith Cutting off the Head of Holofernes,” which, like the frescoes at the front door, are images of Goya and Leocadia, but symbolic.

Identifying himself with Saturn, Goya expressed his fear for his son Javier, whom he was afraid of destroying through improper upbringing, jealousy or unjust anger. The ugly pagan deity eating his own child is an emotional metaphor for the inevitable clash between fathers and sons.

The image of Judith, personifying the power of a woman over a man, reflects Goya’s experiences associated with his aging and loss of strength. Obviously, the relationship with Leocadia intensified this bitter feeling.

To the left of “Leocadia”, on the large longitudinal wall between the windows, there was a huge frieze “The Sabbath of Witches” or “The Great Goat”. Opposite him on the right wall is the frieze “Pilgrimage to St. Isidora”, depicting the annual folk festival held in Madrid.

Goya had previously addressed the topic of witchcraft and Satanism. Witches were present as the main characters in his famous Caprichos engravings. In 1798, he painted a painting that bore the same name as the fresco in The House of the Deaf. But, apparently, the artist was not interested in magic as such, but in the superstitions that existed at that time in Spanish society. “The Sabbath of Witches,” despite its depressing and disturbing mood, is most likely a satirical work in which Goya ridicules human stupidity, ignorance and lack of rational thinking. It must be said that this fresco has another, political overtone. Its content is directed against the royalists and the clergy, who gained significant power after the defeat of the Spanish revolution.

“Pilgrimage to St. Isidore” is Goya’s gloomy caricature of the life and customs of Spain in the early 19th century. The drunken, singing crowd of common people is clearly not overcome by religious feelings. For pilgrimage participants, the holiday of one of the most revered saints in Spain is just an excuse to drink and show off. However, the darkness that envelops the walking crowd and the frightened faces of the pilgrims give the painting a gloomy mood. To enhance the drama of what is happening, in the lower right corner of the fresco, Goya placed the figure of a monk who watches the procession with bitterness and sorrow. “Pilgrimage to St. Isidore” one cannot help but want to compare with another work of Goya, filled with light and joy, “Feast of St. Isidore,” which he wrote forty-five years before the creation of the “black paintings.”

Frescoes on the second floor

The second floor room had eight walls suitable for painting, but Goya only used seven of them. To the right of the front door was the mysterious “Dog”, on the long left wall were “Atropos” or “Moira” and “Duel with Clubs”, on the opposite right - “Asmodea” and “Walk of the Inquisition”, on the wall opposite the entrance and to the left of the window were “Readers”, on the right – “Laughing women”.

“Dog,” the strangest fresco that has given rise to many interpretations, is visually divided into two parts, upper and lower.

The top light yellow part occupies the main space of the image, so viewers usually perceive it as a golden sky stretching over the brown quicksand that the dog is trying to get out of. Her gaze, directed upward towards a mysterious dark area, seems to be an appeal to a higher power for help. It is possible that this is exactly how the artist felt during that difficult period for him: alone, perishing in the abyss of troubles and misfortunes that washed over him, but not losing hope for a miraculous salvation.

The painting located on the left wall, called “Atropos”, is connected with ancient Greek mythology.

Atropos (Moiras)

Goya depicted the goddesses of fate, Clotho, Lachesis and Atropos as ugly, repulsive creatures floating in the air. In the center of the picture, surrounded by goddesses, there are figures of a man with his hands tied behind his back, which apparently means the powerlessness of man before the blows of fate.

Next to Atropos, Club Duel shows two men fighting to the death while they are deep in the mud and unable to leave the battlefield.

Judging by the fact that the men are very similar to each other, their fight symbolizes the civil war that was raging in Spain at that time.

Occupying the first right wall, “Asmodeus” is probably the most difficult to explain work of all, written by the artist on the walls of the “House of the Deaf.”

Two figures, male and female, froze in the air. Their faces are distorted with fear, their gestures express anxiety. Apparently, the characters in the fresco feel unprotected from the dangers fraught with the world spread out beneath them. The man extended his hand to the huge rock on which the city with fortress walls is located. The woman is looking in the opposite direction. Below, under the flying figures, French soldiers are visible, ready to conduct aimed fire, and a group of people with horses and carts. Despite the frightening and extremely disturbing mood, the picture is incredibly beautiful, thanks to the golden background that fills it, with blue and silver splashes, on which there are two unrelated bright red objects.

The follow-up to Asmodea, Inquisition Walk, has an unclear plot and may not have been completed.

The composition of the picture is disrupted: the viewer's attention is drawn to the lower right corner, in which there are a group of unsightly characters with a man in the inquisitor's robe in the foreground. The remaining part is occupied by a gloomy mountain landscape with unclear human figures. This painting has a second title - “Pilgrimage to the Source of San Isidro” and is often confused with the painting located on the ground floor, which has a similar name.

Separated by a window, “Reading” and “Laughing Women” are made in the same stylistic manner and compositionally complement each other.

"The Readers" depicts a group of men listening with great attention to a man reading aloud a newspaper lying on his lap. Some researchers of Goya's work believe that these are politicians who are studying the article dedicated to them.

"The Laughing Women" is a sort of paraphrase of "The Readers," where the attention of two laughing women is focused on a man who is apparently masturbating. What is the true meaning of this peculiar diptych? Probably the artist wanted to show that political meetings, like masturbation, are a fruitless activity, but enjoyable.

The mysteries associated with the “black paintings” are not limited to their mysterious content. There is an assumption, however, repeatedly refuted, that the author of the Quinta del Sordo frescoes is not Goya, but his son Javier. The authors of this theory proceed from the fact that Goya’s contemporaries did not know about the existence of “dark paintings” and never saw them, and the first mention of the frescoes appeared in print 40 years after the artist’s death. In addition, the “House of the Deaf,” at the time when Goya lived in it, had only one floor, and the second was built after his departure to France. Consequently, Goya’s authorship cannot be considered indisputable.

Currently, the “black paintings”, transferred from the walls to canvas, are exhibited at the Prado Museum in Madrid. Despite the fact that the order of the paintings does not correspond to “The House of the Deaf” and the integrity of the composition is violated, their impact on the viewer has not diminished. The gloomy and frightening images created by the Spanish genius evoke strong and contradictory feelings, forcing one to admire the ugly, admire the ugly and enjoy the disgusting.

On April 4, Danny Boyle’s new film “Trance” will be released on Russian screens, the story of a confrontation between an auctioneer, a gangster and a psychotherapist over a stolen painting worth $25 million. Boyle is one of those Britons who managed to achieve unconditional recognition from Hollywood. His film Slumdog Millionaire was recognized as the best film of 2008 in England and the USA and collected all the major market awards - BAFTA, Golden Globe and Oscar. At the same time, Boyle’s themes are far from those accepted in mass culture: drug addiction, violence, religious and national enmity. In the new film he explores hypnosis. And the power of money. Like a true British eccentric, he began the interview himself

Have you already talked to Vincent (Vincent Cassel, who played the role of the gang leader Frank. - “RR”)? You see, Vincent often visited Russia. He has a lot of stories and thoughts on this matter. As for me, I only presented my films and didn’t really see anything. Although last year, when my daughter turned 21, I took her to St. Petersburg. The Hermitage shocked me. I could spend a couple of weeks there. Imagine, you enter a room - and Matisse is hanging there and no one is there! You look around: where are the visitors? Where is the security? Nobody! You can calmly look at the picture, and no one will bother you. There is nothing like this anywhere else in the world!

Is that where you got the idea to make this film about a stolen painting?

Maybe... (Laughs)

Why did you choose Francisco Goya’s “Witches in the Air” for the film?

Goya expanded the scope of contemporary art: he began to paint not only the real world, but also what people think or guess about. He often examined dreams. Witches in the Air is his most surreal work and plunges the viewer into madness. When I saw in the picture a man running with his head covered with a blanket, I was amazed how much this corresponded to the character of the main character, the auctioneer Simon, who is running but does not know where.

The heroes of "Trance" are successful people. Why should they run somewhere? Simon works in a large auction house, Frank is a big businessman, Elizabeth has rich clients. The feeling is that they want to steal a Goya painting because they are simply bored.

When you make a film, you want it to have an impetus for something new. The energy of transition to another world. The impetus for such a transition could be a suitcase with money that falls on your head, a stolen painting, or participation in the show “Who Wants to Be a Millionaire” in India.

Working on a film opens you up to this new world. I like cinema precisely because as a director you don’t know where new circumstances will take you. I come from a spoiled, pampered world, and I want to break through its limitations. My heroes want to do something unusual. Elizabeth works every day with people who come to her to overcome their fear of spiders or golf addiction. Naturally, she's bored!

That is, residents of rich countries subconsciously strive for cruelty and chaos?

Take, for example, the Olympic Games in London. A year before the Olympics, England saw uprisings. London was burning, people were stealing, greed was spilling out. And a year later - the Olympics, which became an expression of the national spirit. Society always requires conformity: it is necessary to preserve order and society itself. But freedom of expression must still be protected, although this is not always pleasant. When the punk movement began in England, it was unacceptable to most. And today this movement is full of innocence and romanticism. Because the idea of ​​freedom is always romantic and idealistic. By the way, I was a punk myself.

Simon constantly repeats that no painting is worth a human life. Is there anything at all that is worth it?

Another person's life. Just this. If you forget about this, it is very easy to start burning people in ovens again.

Who do you think is the hero of the 21st century?

Or a heroine. In "Trance" I gave a woman a serious role for the first time. It’s not immediately obvious, but the engine of the entire film is a woman. I have two beautiful daughters who are already in their twenties, but I still haven’t made a film with a woman in the lead, can you imagine? Although, if you choose a hero of the 21st century, I am sure it will be a woman.

Where will it come from?

We try to look into the future, but everything we rely on is from the past. I think women will have the greatest impact in applied sciences. For example, Samsung has released a smartphone that watches you. If you stop looking at it, it turns off, look again, it turns on. Look at the people around you: they check their phones every two seconds. The connection between man and technology will become ever stronger. Soon biotechnologists will make gadgets parts of the human body, and our heroine of the 21st century must come from this world, and not from traditional areas like culture or politics.

Where will cinema go in this situation?

Today, even in a cinema, a person can watch the same film he came to see, simultaneously on the screen of his smartphone. Simply because it’s more common. It's impossible to stop people from updating their Twitter every minute during a movie. We must learn to accept this.

One thing I know is that people have always loved a good story. Psychologically, people are geared towards a constant search for new stories and facts through any broadcaster, be it TV, telephone, cinema or the theater stage. We always need more.

Many people think that cinemas will not survive, but I hope they will. Because there is something special about the collective perception of ideas. On the other hand, my view is the view of my generation. Personally, I love going to the movies. And as a director, I'm trying to find what makes people want to go to a movie theater and sit in a dark room with strangers, rather than just download a movie and watch it wherever and whenever it's convenient.

You directed the opening ceremony of the London Olympics. Is it more difficult than making a movie?

For me personally, making films is more difficult. The Olympics are the history of the country, this is always relevant. And in cinema you tell personal stories. But personal history is an organic thing, it changes every minute. I constantly have to do something so that the story I'm filming doesn't become outdated during filming.

This is actually a pressing problem for cinema now. You make a story, the film comes out a year later. You have some kind of technical novelty there, but a year later technology has moved forward, and no one will remember what you show there. That's why I've never made topical films myself. And that is why directors constantly choose love, death, sex, fear - the eternal components of our lives - as themes.

That is, topics loved by Hollywood. But you still work with them differently - darker or something... And you still get Oscars for it.

I always try to work outside of the Hollywood system. But in practice, we all work within this system. Even take low-budget, talented films: no one will see them until the studio takes them under their wing and starts distributing them.

I admit it. But I try to keep my stories unexpected. I tried to make “Trance” so that the viewer would always doubt: at the beginning of the film, James McAvoy seems to be the hero (he plays the auctioneer Simon. - “RR”), but in his true light he appears before us only at the end. Cassel starts off as a classic villain, but by the end of the film he becomes like a teenager who doesn't know what to do with his feelings. All these shades can be shown only if you work with a smaller budget, which allows you to go against the traditions of Hollywood. Hollywood works because people want simple values, obviously. But it's always nice to confuse him and shoot something darker than he wants.