Skip to main content

Stubbs, 'Horse Attacked by Lion', 1762

 A Lion Attacking a Horse | Yale Center For British Art

My eye is drawn to the eye of the horse. Stubbs has humanised the animal, creating an expression of desperate terror with the white of his eye emphasised by the white diamond in the forehead and the deep shadow between. He has also positioned the horse and lion’s heads locked together, making a direct comparison between their teeth, but also their eyes: the lion looks up almost impassively, as if what is a matter of life or death for the horse is of little consequence to him. In fact, Stubbs himself actually witnessed a horse being attacked by a lion during his visit to Africa, and this haunted him and the subsequent paintings he created. The drama and raw brutality are very different from the majority of his other images of horses.

If it was not for the background perspective in the painting, it would seem like a very two-dimensional picture. There is no foreshortening and the horse and lion are depicted in a very flat manner, almost like a relief frieze, which brings them very close to the viewer and concentrates the movement inwards, suggesting there is no escape. However Stubbs incorporates nature into the painting too, to create dimension to the work. The painting recedes from the horse and lion, into the middle ground represented by the first trees and finally the background shown by the lone tree to the right of the canvas, and the suggested landscape beyond.

Stubbs has drawn on Romantic themes and depicted the power of animals and the natural world – the horse seems to be beginning to buckle and fall under the weight of the lion, the veins on its hind legs bulging and straining as the adrenaline pumps through the body. You get the sense of its great power through its muscular neck and body, even though you sense the futility. The lion’s grip on the horse in painting seems firm, almost wrapped around the horse entirely.

The dramatic Romanticism is also felt in the way Stubbs depicts movement. There seems to be some sort of wind that perhaps the viewer will only really feel if they step into the painting. This is shown by the way the horse’s mane is flying out to the side, whilst in the background, it also looks like the trees are being blown and perhaps even a storm is brewing, hence the dark clouds which every time you take another glance at the painting seem to be moving further and further over the pocket of blue sky. The colours used also link to this, with the whole painting having quite a dark feel to it, apart from the horse. Perhaps, through the use of light and shade on the horse, the artist is trying to evoke some sympathy for the horse as it is taking down by the enemy that is the lion in the painting, which is shrouded in darkness. It is tempting to see some kind of symbolism with the more elegant, civilised animal being attacked by the wild beast. 

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Mark Rothko, 'Light Red over Black', 1957

  My eye is not drawn to the painting itself but the title of the painting, 'Light Red Over Black'. We would automatically think that the black is on top of a red background, but Rothko has flipped this around, subverting the title just like he subverting the meaning of what it was to be an artist and what Art actually was. During this time, art was going through rapid changes, with abstract expressionism coming into full force (Rothko, Pollock). But Rothko showed that all this change was for the good, even if for him, it was short lived.  The colour red in this painting is searing and the black struggles to fully cover this velvety border, especially at the bottom of the canvas. Unlike the black squares which have a hazy quality to their edges, the red is clear and impregnable. It is hard to figure out what this represents - the Tate has suggested a window perhaps, but if it is a window then what are we looking out into? Perhaps it is night, or perhaps the viewer is catching ...

Egon Schiele, 'Dead Mother', 1910

  My eye is drawn to the hand. Those long, bony fingers are so characteristic of Schiele but here they are particularly skeletal and deathly – the veins seem to have been injected with poison. And they are a warning right in the foreground of the painting that keeps the viewer at bay as an outsider to this incredibly intimate relationship between mother and child, and sets the tone of death and mortality which hangs over the whole image. The mother cradles her child in a womb-like shroud, alluding to childbirth and the death of the mother explained in the title. She seems desperate to feel that bodily connection with her child, highlighted by the emphasis on her craned neck as she tries to connect to the baby. There is a clear link between the mother’s bent neck and the child’s bent neck, again emphasising their longing to be with each other. However, the darkness around the child is almost like ropes, with flecks of white in the painting making it look as though the darkness is wo...

Frans Hals, 'The Laughing Cavalier', 1624

  The Laughing Cavalier is a man on the cusp of unseriousness. His eyes follow a viewer around the room, his curled moustache twitches endearingly as if he struggles to maintain composure, whilst his lip is pursed to stop laughter escaping. The pose, meanwhile, is proud and monumental, filling the canvas with a foreshortened elbow and shoulder pushing into a viewer's world, serving to emphasise the silks and expensive dress against the monochromatic background.  Frans Hals was first and foremost a portrait painter. His oeuvre includes wedding portraits of solo male and female sitters, multifigure works including The Banquet of Officers from 1627, yet his depictions often turned to peasants or comical characters, notably his Jester with a Lute now in the Louvre, proving that portrait painters also had range. The Laughing Cavalier remains an equally intriguing work: despite being Hals' most famous piece, the sitter remains anonymous. Yet, the smile is so familiar to a viewer, an...