User:Erind218/Love and Psyche (David)

Article Draft: Love and Psyche (David)
Love and Psyche or Cupid and Psyche is an 1817 painting by Jacques-Louis David, now in the Cleveland Museum of Art. It shows Cupid and Psyche. It was produced during David's exile in Brussels, for the patron and collector Gian Battista Sommariva. On its first exhibition at the museum in Brussels, it surprised viewers with its realist treatment of the figure of Cupid.

Many saw this painting as proof of David's decline due to his exile, but he was actually attempting to reinterpret mythological characters in a way that moved away from traditional techniques. His inspiration for this painting comes from a mix of mythological and realistic sources, evident in the mixed nature of the painting details. His more realistic treatment of Cupid received a largely negative response from critics because it deviated from the popular style of the time.

Career
In terms of David’s career, the circumstance of his exile is of vital importance to this painting, as it was his first painting done in Brussels. After the fall of Napoleon’s empire, David was exiled. He ultimately received a pardon but decided to go to Brussels anyways. During this time David was critiqued by some as being “a mere copyist of the antique”. His typical style was what Winckelmann, a german art historian, calls the “beau ideal.”. This style focused on an idealized image of bodies. David’s style had also previously been characterized by its simplicity. This painting dramatically deviates from these traits, which he had become known for. When it debuted in Paris, many viewers saw it as a symbol of the negative effect of his exile.

Patronage and Inspiration
This painting was made for Sommariva, most likely to form a more complete private collection. Sommariva had gained his wealth relatively quickly, and through questionable means. Most likely Sommariva’s motivation for acquiring a painting by David was to display his wealth through a big art collection, featuring many famous artists.

According to one of his art students, David had become interested in the story of Cupid and Psyche He wanted to put a new twist on an overused theme, which he does through his use of realism. The cupid in this painting is supposedly based on James Gallatin, who posed nude for this photo. He was a 17 year old boy who was the son of an American diplomat and worked as his secretary. This inspiration becomes evident when viewing the awkward teenage look of Cupid in the painting.

Cupid and Psyche Myth
This painting is based on a myth that comes from Apuleius’ Metamorphoses, which featured the story of Cupid and Psyche. Psyche is a beautiful mortal, who is punished for her beauty by Venus, who is jealous of her beauty. Her punishment is left up to Venus’s son cupid, but he falls in love with her. Cupid rescues Psyche from her ultimate demise by capturing her and bringing her to his castle. He keeps his identity a secret in order to not upset his mother. Every night Cupid stays with Psyche and leaves in the morning before she wakes up. Psyche begins to wonder who he is, and tries to use a lamp to discover his true identity. Cupid catches her in this act and abandons her. In Apuleius’s story, the remainder of the myth is about Psyche trying to regain Cupid’s love. David’s picture captures the moment in the morning when Cupid sneaks off after spending the night with her. David’s painting is put into conversation with Apuleius’ work as both use a “deceptive approach to an allegory”.

Painting Details
The painting itself was called a history painting by David’s wife. It features cupid sneaking off as Pysche peacefully sleeps in the background. The setting is decorative and cluttered, as David tries to communicate the circumstances of her imprisonment. The dark deep colors and the overwhelming canopy are contrasted with the setting in the background. The landscape in the back symbolizes a “journey, renewal and illumination,” which contrasts with Psyche's circumstances. The bodies of both Cupid and Psyche are illuminated even more through the contrast with the dark colors, emphasizing the unidealized nature of them.

The original study of this painting was created before his exile and is remarkably different. His typical paintings were simplistic, but there are lots of details that clutter this painting. The changes he made were done after the study was transferred to canvas, typically big changes were done before this process. The biggest change was the shift of the setting to “style empire,” which was popular during Napoleon’s time. David had minimal experience in designing furniture for Napoleon, so he knew this style well. While in his exile, implementing this style in his painting was a remembrance of the time when Napoleon was in power.

There is a small detail of a butterfly above Psyche. The flying butterfly symbolizes both “death and transcendence” which coincides with Cupid’s departure of Pysche every morning.

The most striking detail of this painting is the hyper-realistic depiction of Cupid’s body and his expression. His original study shows he always intended to paint Cupid in this manner, even before his exile. Cupid’s wings continue this style, as they are worn out and ugly, making Cupid seem to be a part of the mortal realm rather than the world of gods.

Analysis
The main analysis of this painting revolves around the realistic portrayal of Cupid, which deviates from the typical portrayal of this myth which usually concentrates on innocence. Gerard’s Psyche and Amor painted in 1798 is a good point of comparison. Here both characters are painted in an idealized way that emphasizes pure young love. Additionally the retelling of the myth also usually did not implicate Cupid and portrayed him as largely innocent and beautiful. In addition, a contemporary of David, Picot, created Amor and Psyche in 1819, which depicts the same moment of cupid leaving. Again, Cupid and Psyche are painted in an extremely idealized way, providing a basis of comparison to why David’s painting was so out of the ordinary.

In David’s version, Cupid appears to be sinister while psyche is vulnerable, creating a slightly perverted relationship dynamic between the two. Cupid seems almost unhealthy; his complexion is muddied, and his expression and body language seem unloving, bordering on hostile, and his body is scrawny, a far cry from the idealized bodies typical of the time. Cupid’s positioning and gaze break the separation between the subject and the viewer. He appears to step out of the painting into reality and his gaze is directed at the viewer. This creates an uncomfortable sensation when looking at the painting as it “makes the viewers complicit in this power dynamic” between cupid and psyche. In this way David almost controls the way the viewer interacts with this painting. Psyche’s pose is reminiscent of “Titan’s and Correggio’s recumbent goddess”. Her facial expression is innocent and beautiful. She is still asleep again emphasizing her vulnerability. The contrast between sweet psyche and vulgar cupid reimagines the myth in a completely new way.

Criticism
There were two supportive articles of the painting, but they were likely influenced by David himself. Both of them focused on the realism, one article saying it was a “‘purely historical’ representation of the mythological scene”. When put into contrast with Picot’s work, the realism was further applauded by some. But, overwhelming the response to this painting was not good.

The ruling class preferred more idealized works, as the realism in this painting opposed social order by hinting at sexual undertones. This is represented in the critques of Gros, who was a known supporter of David, who said “the head of Amor has a somewhat faun-like character, the hands are somewhat dark and above all not refined enough”. Other critics were confused by the huge deviation from Cupid’s typical appearance and were disturbed by the distortion of it. Overall, this painting was largely ignored in comparison to David’s other works.