8 ms·

I think he meant this painting by a painter whose last name is David. https://az334034.vo.msecnd.net/images-7/the-consecration-of-the-emperor-napoleon-and-the-

I think he meant this painting by a painter whose last name is David. https://az334034.vo.msecnd.net/images-7/the-consecration-of-the-emperor-napoleon-and-the-coronation-of-empress-josephine-on-december-2-1804-jacques-louis-david-1807-3bfd02de.jpg https://az334034.vo.msecnd.net/images-7/the-consecration-of-...

ghaff 7y ago
Pretty sure he did mean the statue given the context. Jacques-Louis David is a well-known French painter and there are works of his in the Louvre. (Some of which are monumental in size; I forget what all by him is in the Louvre.) But the average Louvre visitor probably has never heard of him--especially if they aren't French--and I doubt he's a big draw in general.
- Iv 7y ago
  Yes I meant the statue. I had memories of seeing it there as a kid, but I think I am confusing with other sculptures.
Jagat 7y ago
Saw that one when we were in louvre. It is so good you have to sit there and just look at it for a while.
JoeAltmaier 7y ago
That looks like amazing work. But I'm at an age and temperament, where I no longer want to idolize the rich and powerful. Its just a shame that such talent went to aggrandize rich white folk with life-and-death power over millions, because of an accident of birth. Here's a powerful painting, worth a long look: https://www.topofart.com/artists/Bouguereau/art-reproduction/197/The-Broken-Pitcher.php https://www.topofart.com/artists/Bouguereau/art-reproduction...
- cmdshiftf4 7y ago
  "Its just a shame that such talent went to aggrandize rich white folk with life-and-death power over millions, because of an accident of birth." What utter smug, condescending tripe. The painting in question was painted by Europeans, of a European - Napoleon and his wife Josephine - during the ceremony of them achieving the status of Emperor and Empress having risen through the ranks of the military and secured France's success in war. Your reductionist, post-modern Marxist and utterly racist take on it is so clique, but I can imagine you feel quite "woke" for having posted it.
  - JoeAltmaier 7y ago
    Yes its a pretty picture, I get it, I know what its about. Rich folk like them, of course, deserve worship because of what they are (better than everybody else). So what? The accident that some folk got to run roughshod over everybody else is quite an un-American viewpoint (we abolished the monarchy here). I understand if others still ascribe to these antique notions. I just have decided, after decades of being drenched in rich-and-powerful hero-worship in media and art, that I would opt out. Keep all the superior feelings to yourself, thank you. I have none. Kind of my whole point.
    - Iv 7y ago
      (not the person you respond to) I get your feeling, but that's a mistake to placate it on that painting. Napoleon probably abolished more monarchies than anyone else in Europe. The moment it captures is when Napoleon (who took power, he was not born into it) broke the supremacy of the church over European leaders. A definite moment for secularism. It does mimic the crowning ceremony of kings, but it actually breaks the supremacy of the church.
      - JoeAltmaier 7y ago
        Whitewashing Napoleon, another power-hungry European absolute dictator who killed thousands, is disingenuous. He took the thrones of those he deposed. Not a hero.
- kortilla 7y ago
  Why be a racist about it? Would you have been happier if it was a painting of a Chinese emperor?
  - JoeAltmaier 7y ago
    Google around a bit, and notice who's in power in the world. It was a political comment, not a racist one. Because, of course, 'white' is not a race (except to racists?)
    - AnimalMuppet 7y ago
      If you don't call white a "race", what do you call it? An ethnicity?
- bluedevil2k 7y ago
  So do you just close your eyes and ears and pretend history never happened, since history is mostly about rich and powerful people? Is looking at history through the "woke" sunglasses of 2019 even enjoyable? You pass judgement on an artist who painted an event 200+ years ago using 2019's latest politically correct talking points.
  - JoeAltmaier 7y ago
    Only the trolls are judging. I'm just now select people of the time to study, and admire art about them. I quit obsessing over the rich and powerful. All this angst over what I choose to admire and study is curious. A powerful emotion was triggered by my decision, I can see that. It says more about the trolls than about me, for sure.
    - rzmnzm 7y ago
      The emotions are being triggered by you making racist comments
    - dang 7y ago
      Your comment may not have been intentionally trolling but its content was trollish and provoked predictable effects. Please don't post like that to HN, or like these follow-ups, which just keep the flamewar going. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- bluedevil2k 7y ago
  Also, that painting you linked to as being "powerful" was painted by William-Adolphe Bouguereau. He painted in the style of Italian Renaissance painters, though he's French and lived in the mid-1800's. I guess that's cultural appropriation. He also married one of his students, which of course is a big no-no nowadays, since he was a man in power over her. Looks like you can't like this painting any more now. You see how dumb it is to apply 2019 political correctness to past history?
  - JoeAltmaier 7y ago
    I actually complimented the painting. Its revealing how much backlash my personal choice of art and whom to admire, has triggered.
    - dang 7y ago
      Please don't post in the flamewar style to HN.
- DiogenesKynikos 7y ago
  Napoleon Bonaparte wasn't emperor by accident of birth. He was emperor because he was the most brilliant general of his era, perhaps in all of history, as well as a clever politician and an extremely charismatic person, and he lived in a rare moment in history when someone could rise to the top from nothing. And what's the point of pointing out that he was white? Almost everyone in France was back then. You're projecting modern American politics back into an era in history that was very different. As a Corsican, Napoleon actually had to deal with a fair bit of prejudice.
  - eternalban 7y ago
    > from nothing Father: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carlo_Bonaparte https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carlo_Bonaparte Grand-father: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Giuseppe_Maria_Buonaparte https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Giuseppe_Maria_Buonaparte Aristocrat family: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nobile_(aristocracy) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nobile_(aristocracy) Not exactly nothing. It is interesting to muse about a nobody becoming the Emperor of the French, I'll grant that.
    - bdowling 7y ago
      From your first link about Napoleon’s father: > Carlo Buonaparte died on 24 February 1785, and, due to his frivolous spending, left his surviving wife and eight children penniless.
    - DiogenesKynikos 7y ago
      Penniless minor nobility from Corsica was pretty close to nothing in France back then.
      - eternalban 7y ago
        "Nothing" is precisely that: a social non-entity. A member of a minor nobility family, regardless of their financial situation, belongs to a distinct social class, with attendant benefits such as social contacts, etc. How did the nothing son of a poor man end up in Royal Academy? Who were his classmates? What social class did his classmates belong to? https://www.napoleon.org/en/history-of-the-two-empires/objects/napoleon-bonaparte-student-of-the-royal-military-school-in-brienne-aged-15-years-old/ https://www.napoleon.org/en/history-of-the-two-empires/objec... quote: "Thanks to documents proving his family's nobility, Charles Bonaparte was able to send his son Napoleon Bonaparte to one of the twelve military schools created by Louis XVI, reserved for young nobles." Do obvious (and universal) social matters such as this really require debate?

ghaff 7y ago

Pretty sure he did mean the statue given the context. Jacques-Louis David is a well-known French painter and there are works of his in the Louvre. (Some of which are monumental in size; I forget what all by him is in the Louvre.) But the average Louvre visitor probably has never heard of him--especially if they aren't French--and I doubt he's a big draw in general.

Iv 7y ago
Yes I meant the statue. I had memories of seeing it there as a kid, but I think I am confusing with other sculptures.

Jagat 7y ago

Saw that one when we were in louvre. It is so good you have to sit there and just look at it for a while.

JoeAltmaier 7y ago

That looks like amazing work. But I'm at an age and temperament, where I no longer want to idolize the rich and powerful. Its just a shame that such talent went to aggrandize rich white folk with life-and-death power over millions, because of an accident of birth. Here's a powerful painting, worth a long look: https://www.topofart.com/artists/Bouguereau/art-reproduction/197/The-Broken-Pitcher.php https://www.topofart.com/artists/Bouguereau/art-reproduction...

cmdshiftf4 7y ago
"Its just a shame that such talent went to aggrandize rich white folk with life-and-death power over millions, because of an accident of birth." What utter smug, condescending tripe. The painting in question was painted by Europeans, of a European - Napoleon and his wife Josephine - during the ceremony of them achieving the status of Emperor and Empress having risen through the ranks of the military and secured France's success in war. Your reductionist, post-modern Marxist and utterly racist take on it is so clique, but I can imagine you feel quite "woke" for having posted it.
- JoeAltmaier 7y ago
  Yes its a pretty picture, I get it, I know what its about. Rich folk like them, of course, deserve worship because of what they are (better than everybody else). So what? The accident that some folk got to run roughshod over everybody else is quite an un-American viewpoint (we abolished the monarchy here). I understand if others still ascribe to these antique notions. I just have decided, after decades of being drenched in rich-and-powerful hero-worship in media and art, that I would opt out. Keep all the superior feelings to yourself, thank you. I have none. Kind of my whole point.
  - Iv 7y ago
    (not the person you respond to) I get your feeling, but that's a mistake to placate it on that painting. Napoleon probably abolished more monarchies than anyone else in Europe. The moment it captures is when Napoleon (who took power, he was not born into it) broke the supremacy of the church over European leaders. A definite moment for secularism. It does mimic the crowning ceremony of kings, but it actually breaks the supremacy of the church.
    - JoeAltmaier 7y ago
      Whitewashing Napoleon, another power-hungry European absolute dictator who killed thousands, is disingenuous. He took the thrones of those he deposed. Not a hero.
kortilla 7y ago
Why be a racist about it? Would you have been happier if it was a painting of a Chinese emperor?
- JoeAltmaier 7y ago
  Google around a bit, and notice who's in power in the world. It was a political comment, not a racist one. Because, of course, 'white' is not a race (except to racists?)
  - AnimalMuppet 7y ago
    If you don't call white a "race", what do you call it? An ethnicity?
bluedevil2k 7y ago
So do you just close your eyes and ears and pretend history never happened, since history is mostly about rich and powerful people? Is looking at history through the "woke" sunglasses of 2019 even enjoyable? You pass judgement on an artist who painted an event 200+ years ago using 2019's latest politically correct talking points.
- JoeAltmaier 7y ago
  Only the trolls are judging. I'm just now select people of the time to study, and admire art about them. I quit obsessing over the rich and powerful. All this angst over what I choose to admire and study is curious. A powerful emotion was triggered by my decision, I can see that. It says more about the trolls than about me, for sure.
  - rzmnzm 7y ago
    The emotions are being triggered by you making racist comments
  - dang 7y ago
    Your comment may not have been intentionally trolling but its content was trollish and provoked predictable effects. Please don't post like that to HN, or like these follow-ups, which just keep the flamewar going. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
bluedevil2k 7y ago
Also, that painting you linked to as being "powerful" was painted by William-Adolphe Bouguereau. He painted in the style of Italian Renaissance painters, though he's French and lived in the mid-1800's. I guess that's cultural appropriation. He also married one of his students, which of course is a big no-no nowadays, since he was a man in power over her. Looks like you can't like this painting any more now. You see how dumb it is to apply 2019 political correctness to past history?
- JoeAltmaier 7y ago
  I actually complimented the painting. Its revealing how much backlash my personal choice of art and whom to admire, has triggered.
  - dang 7y ago
    Please don't post in the flamewar style to HN.
DiogenesKynikos 7y ago
Napoleon Bonaparte wasn't emperor by accident of birth. He was emperor because he was the most brilliant general of his era, perhaps in all of history, as well as a clever politician and an extremely charismatic person, and he lived in a rare moment in history when someone could rise to the top from nothing. And what's the point of pointing out that he was white? Almost everyone in France was back then. You're projecting modern American politics back into an era in history that was very different. As a Corsican, Napoleon actually had to deal with a fair bit of prejudice.
- eternalban 7y ago
  > from nothing Father: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carlo_Bonaparte https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carlo_Bonaparte Grand-father: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Giuseppe_Maria_Buonaparte https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Giuseppe_Maria_Buonaparte Aristocrat family: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nobile_(aristocracy) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nobile_(aristocracy) Not exactly nothing. It is interesting to muse about a nobody becoming the Emperor of the French, I'll grant that.
  - bdowling 7y ago
    From your first link about Napoleon’s father: > Carlo Buonaparte died on 24 February 1785, and, due to his frivolous spending, left his surviving wife and eight children penniless.
  - DiogenesKynikos 7y ago
    Penniless minor nobility from Corsica was pretty close to nothing in France back then.
    - eternalban 7y ago
      "Nothing" is precisely that: a social non-entity. A member of a minor nobility family, regardless of their financial situation, belongs to a distinct social class, with attendant benefits such as social contacts, etc. How did the nothing son of a poor man end up in Royal Academy? Who were his classmates? What social class did his classmates belong to? https://www.napoleon.org/en/history-of-the-two-empires/objects/napoleon-bonaparte-student-of-the-royal-military-school-in-brienne-aged-15-years-old/ https://www.napoleon.org/en/history-of-the-two-empires/objec... quote: "Thanks to documents proving his family's nobility, Charles Bonaparte was able to send his son Napoleon Bonaparte to one of the twelve military schools created by Louis XVI, reserved for young nobles." Do obvious (and universal) social matters such as this really require debate?