DOI Artikel:
Bryl, Mariusz: Pierwowzory obrazowe w twórczości Artura Grottgera
DOI Seite / Zitierlink: https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.13596#0424
420
MARIUSZ BRYL
enabled us to perceive the essence of Grottger's imagery and the type of image typical of it, existing in this shape from its "birth".
The pictures appeared in the artist's mind as fully formed images of concrète figures in concrète situations. Independently of
the degree of completing a sketch, independently of ail modifications of composition and narrative structure of the painting,
psychologico-emotional scope of the event is always clearly presented.
A more systematic analysis of interpictorial relationships was started with relatively simple cases of using a single motife and
placing it in a completely new context (e.g. Raffet's "Siège de Constantine" and "Defence of mansion"). We were interested in the
main principles governing the process of disposition of intrapictorial éléments. The imperative of picture's self-obviousness was the
main principle. The représentation — without any meta-commentary, even without the title — should precisely inform the viewer
about the meaning of the events represented. As another constitutive principle of element disposition, the rule of concentration of
the action was pointed out. The simplicity of utterance code is still another principle. In autocommentary, Grottger many times
refers to thèse rules as to the criteria taken into account in ail crucial modifications of représentation. Successive analyses of
pictorial relationships led us to conclusion that the artist used stylistycally eclectic patterns which were also typologically différent.
Grottger made use of stylistic patterns which differed considerably one from another; he did not hesitate to gather figures
belonging to various epochs and situations in one work of art. One may ask: How did it happen that in spite of such approach
représentations preserved their integrity, and that they avoided being split into many unrelated éléments? On the one hand, the
principle of picture's self-obviousness and concentration of the action guaranteed intégration of motifs on the common situatio-
nal-narrative basis of the event represented. On the other hand, however, Grottger must have trusted the unifying power of his own
illusionistic way of modelling that levelled stylistic différences by giving identical naturalistic marks to ail the éléments of the
composition.
Further analyses allowed us to identify those artists whose works were referred to by Grottger most frequently and eagerly.
What made Chodowiecki, English engravers of "History of England", the Nazarenes, Kaulbach and Raffet the most attractive for
Grottger? It seems that Grottger, referring to e.g. Chodowiecki, referred simultaneously to the sources of "body language" which,
conventionalized and popularized in 50 years time, was a perfect means of communication with a vast artistic audience of the
second half of 19th century. The treatment of basic meaningful units such as figures, gestures, etc. as spécifie vessels of meaning
which could be rendered univocally into discursive language was the conséquence of the self-obviousness principle, lying at the root
of Grottger's concept of a picture. The role that manuals of theatrical rhetoric played in this process (referred to in analyses)
cannot, however, be overestimated. Grottger reached rather for the sources of "body language" or for its highly artistic con-
figurations. Undoubtedly, creating his own original repertory of gestures and postures of a figure was his ambition. This repertory
was to be so much individualized as it was demanded by the context. It was the context that determined the unity of action, the
intégration of constitutive éléments which — however remote their origins were — gained the proper individualized meaning. The
context determined also pictorial relationships created by the artist, Chodowiecki's as well as others usefulness. As far as Kaul-
bach's usefulness is concerned, the références to his works were not restricted only to similar imagery but they also refer to the
technique (crayon drawings on cartoon; in both cases achromatic) and to the way of distributing the séries (photographie
reproductions).
The last part of the article was devoted to a complex analysis of the "Fight" cartoon. Identification of visual patterns (Rethel's
"Death of Arnold von Winkelried" and Miicke's "St. Hubertus") as well as références to popular imagery ("Bilderbogen" and
psycho-physical type of the hunter) and ideo-literary contex (Polish romantic poetry, Christian hagiography, the Bible) let us reach
deeper meanings of "Fight" and contributed to a fuller analysis of the picture.
Due to analysis of visual patterns used by the artist, we gained access into his créative process, we could concretize the artistic
rules governing the disposition of pictorial éléments, we reached the sources of the artist's visual code and also those régions of
imagination from which he derived inspiration and with which he identified himself. Finally, we formulated a hypothesis about
Grottger's décision about creating cartoon séries by means of black and white crayons with intention of photographie copying and
distribution.
The article constitutes a part of a bigger work which is an attempt of monographie approach to Grottger's séries. There are
four main chapters. Chapter One (Image and Pattern) deals with the visual patterns in Grottger's work. Chapter Two (Image and
Intention) deals with reconstruction of the artist's créative process. Chapter Three (Image and Beholder) is devoted to the problem
of aesthetics and history of perception (the implied viewer in the work of art's structure and empirical acts of perception). Chapter
Four (Image and Myth) is an attempt to analyse various myths connected with Grottger: from biographical legend along with the
myth about his creativity, literary mythology (Tyrteus, martyrdom and messianic myths brought up to date in literary transpositions
of the séries) to the mythologizing of the image — vital to the séries poetics.
MARIUSZ BRYL
enabled us to perceive the essence of Grottger's imagery and the type of image typical of it, existing in this shape from its "birth".
The pictures appeared in the artist's mind as fully formed images of concrète figures in concrète situations. Independently of
the degree of completing a sketch, independently of ail modifications of composition and narrative structure of the painting,
psychologico-emotional scope of the event is always clearly presented.
A more systematic analysis of interpictorial relationships was started with relatively simple cases of using a single motife and
placing it in a completely new context (e.g. Raffet's "Siège de Constantine" and "Defence of mansion"). We were interested in the
main principles governing the process of disposition of intrapictorial éléments. The imperative of picture's self-obviousness was the
main principle. The représentation — without any meta-commentary, even without the title — should precisely inform the viewer
about the meaning of the events represented. As another constitutive principle of element disposition, the rule of concentration of
the action was pointed out. The simplicity of utterance code is still another principle. In autocommentary, Grottger many times
refers to thèse rules as to the criteria taken into account in ail crucial modifications of représentation. Successive analyses of
pictorial relationships led us to conclusion that the artist used stylistycally eclectic patterns which were also typologically différent.
Grottger made use of stylistic patterns which differed considerably one from another; he did not hesitate to gather figures
belonging to various epochs and situations in one work of art. One may ask: How did it happen that in spite of such approach
représentations preserved their integrity, and that they avoided being split into many unrelated éléments? On the one hand, the
principle of picture's self-obviousness and concentration of the action guaranteed intégration of motifs on the common situatio-
nal-narrative basis of the event represented. On the other hand, however, Grottger must have trusted the unifying power of his own
illusionistic way of modelling that levelled stylistic différences by giving identical naturalistic marks to ail the éléments of the
composition.
Further analyses allowed us to identify those artists whose works were referred to by Grottger most frequently and eagerly.
What made Chodowiecki, English engravers of "History of England", the Nazarenes, Kaulbach and Raffet the most attractive for
Grottger? It seems that Grottger, referring to e.g. Chodowiecki, referred simultaneously to the sources of "body language" which,
conventionalized and popularized in 50 years time, was a perfect means of communication with a vast artistic audience of the
second half of 19th century. The treatment of basic meaningful units such as figures, gestures, etc. as spécifie vessels of meaning
which could be rendered univocally into discursive language was the conséquence of the self-obviousness principle, lying at the root
of Grottger's concept of a picture. The role that manuals of theatrical rhetoric played in this process (referred to in analyses)
cannot, however, be overestimated. Grottger reached rather for the sources of "body language" or for its highly artistic con-
figurations. Undoubtedly, creating his own original repertory of gestures and postures of a figure was his ambition. This repertory
was to be so much individualized as it was demanded by the context. It was the context that determined the unity of action, the
intégration of constitutive éléments which — however remote their origins were — gained the proper individualized meaning. The
context determined also pictorial relationships created by the artist, Chodowiecki's as well as others usefulness. As far as Kaul-
bach's usefulness is concerned, the références to his works were not restricted only to similar imagery but they also refer to the
technique (crayon drawings on cartoon; in both cases achromatic) and to the way of distributing the séries (photographie
reproductions).
The last part of the article was devoted to a complex analysis of the "Fight" cartoon. Identification of visual patterns (Rethel's
"Death of Arnold von Winkelried" and Miicke's "St. Hubertus") as well as références to popular imagery ("Bilderbogen" and
psycho-physical type of the hunter) and ideo-literary contex (Polish romantic poetry, Christian hagiography, the Bible) let us reach
deeper meanings of "Fight" and contributed to a fuller analysis of the picture.
Due to analysis of visual patterns used by the artist, we gained access into his créative process, we could concretize the artistic
rules governing the disposition of pictorial éléments, we reached the sources of the artist's visual code and also those régions of
imagination from which he derived inspiration and with which he identified himself. Finally, we formulated a hypothesis about
Grottger's décision about creating cartoon séries by means of black and white crayons with intention of photographie copying and
distribution.
The article constitutes a part of a bigger work which is an attempt of monographie approach to Grottger's séries. There are
four main chapters. Chapter One (Image and Pattern) deals with the visual patterns in Grottger's work. Chapter Two (Image and
Intention) deals with reconstruction of the artist's créative process. Chapter Three (Image and Beholder) is devoted to the problem
of aesthetics and history of perception (the implied viewer in the work of art's structure and empirical acts of perception). Chapter
Four (Image and Myth) is an attempt to analyse various myths connected with Grottger: from biographical legend along with the
myth about his creativity, literary mythology (Tyrteus, martyrdom and messianic myths brought up to date in literary transpositions
of the séries) to the mythologizing of the image — vital to the séries poetics.