Welcome to the Home Work page for JHist '11. Every Monday and Tuesday (or sometimes Wednesday) I'll post some artifact and look for your great questions.
the painting is clearly display the happiness of the people, who are refusing to submit to the sultan of turkey through an insulting letter, yet there are a few faces that give that seem to show anger and resentment.how does the pictures few angry faces represent the Zaporozhian Cossacks as a whole? Was everyone really interested in continuing to resist, or did the community want to surrender but couldn't because of a few over confidant hooligans? -Ben Zwillinger
In this picture it seems that some individuals appear to be joyous, and others quite angry. Why did the painter decide to portray a mix of emotions among the subjects? -- Jon Levi
Is it fair to argue that since they are painted with happy, almost arrogant, grins on their faces, the cossacks are writing this after they already joined the Russians against Turkey, and are writing the response with the same rude arrogance as portrayed by their smiles?
Is the painter exploring deeper themes than simply Cossak pride and joy after defeating the Turkish army and refusing to submit to the the Sultan of Turkey? How is Repin's contrast between the closely-huddled eclectic mass of the victorious Zaporozhian Cossaks and the two solitary Ottoman figures a reflection on the humble beginnings of Ukranian Cossak republicanism? -Ariel Isser
It is unclear whether the Cossacks were organized enough to have written letters to foreign governments. So, does the painting depict a true historic event, or does it glorify a patriotic legend? As an example of an historically inaccurate picture, I would point to the painting of Washington Crossing the Delaware.
Why is it that the man with the pen, who is being surrounded by everyone else seems to be wearing the simplest of outfits and looks the least important? And why are the two men in matching white fur coats, who look the most important, painted with their backs facing us? Has anyone noticed that the man in the white coat to the right of the painting is pointing at the big man in the red coat's sword? Maybe all the faces we CAN see are smiling, but i don't think everyone in the picture shares that happiness. -Talia Franco
Towards the middle of the page, there is a man wearing a cross and pointing at something. Since this painting is about the Cossacks, who seperated due to religion, replying to the Sultan of Turkey, one must question the relevancre of the Christian man. Why is he here? Who does he represent? -Aaron Zuckerman
As a creative work, this painting doesn't have to reflect the Cossack's actual signing of the letter. That being said, was the painter trying to portray this motley group of Cossacks as an arrogant warriors, or as people concerned for their livelihood? Do the ecstatic faces in the center reflect on the group as a whole, or do some of the concerned faces in the background tell a different tale? Were they unified in their opposition to Turkish rule, and were they unified in the vulgarity expressed in their letter?
There are many emotions in this picture - some look very pleased , others look frustrated. Was there a battle right before this event? Also, if some of the men look worried or worn down, why do the other men look so calm and secure (that is, if they just came out of a battle)? Also I noticed that toward the bottom right of the picture there is a Jewish star depicted on a possession and toward the middle stands a man wearing a necklace of a cross. What is the significance of these symbols in the painting?
Repin painted the event almost 200 years after it happened. He portrays the Cossack leaders in the painting having a great time writing the reply to the Turkish Sultan. In all appearances this is the classic example of nationalistic propaganda not necessarily an accurate depiction of history, the men in the painting appear happy, confident, and powerful. So powerful in fact, that they do not need to show respect to arguably the most powerful man in the world, the can swear at him and treat him like dirt. The Cossacks are joking around with each other, basking in their victory over the Ottoman Empire, for all of these reasons this painting is pure propaganda. Yet this is not a typical painting of nationalistic propaganda like, for example, Trumbull's Declaration of Independence (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Declaration_independence.jpg). The men in the picture appear drunk, rowdy, and uneducated. Was Repin's goal to portray the Cossack forefathers as fun-loving military heroes or ignorant buffoons?
Why is the painter showing the Cossacks as portraying everyone in the picture as villains and smoke all around? Is it something to do with the painter not approving of the Cossacks killing or stealing,or is it just that the author usually drew people as pirates?
This seemingly historic meeting has a strange setting; despite the fact they are meeting in battle dress, it appears odd that they are not meeting inside a tent or other portable shelter of some sort. Is it possible the artist is trying to allude to how animalistic these people are, by leaving them outdoors?
The Zaporozhian Cossacks were a group that loved to wreck havoc on other people and were free in a sence because they got to travel around all the time and ruin peoples towns. Do you think the painter used light, but devilish colors to portray an easy going feeling amoungst the Cossacks as they discuss buisness and maybe even future attacks?
In the painting there are two different groups of people the Turkish and the Russians. From the look of the painting it seems that a lot of people have weapons on them, which may imply that they went to war with each other. Why are these two groups signing a treaty with each other? what made them get in an argument in the first place?
is the author trying to make a point by portraying the intellectual writing the letter as a priest while portraying the military men even those clearly of high social status as drunken vagrants --klein--
The people that are surrounding the guy writing the letter all dont look like they are part of the same group they all seem random with each other like they dont fit well with each other but are also all excited and interested in the guy who is sitting at the table writing something. Why are all these different types of people excitingly surrounding the guy writing while there are many people around them who do not notice or care about the man sitting down writing or the people surrounding him? Why are these random people interested in the man sitting at the table writing? -michal j
throughout history, the portrayal of art and its style varies from time to time. this piece of art that has a bunch of men, some happy and some sad, and the significance of that could be interpreted differently in different stylistic periods. in this piece, what stylistic period of art are we in? -david reiz
In the background it looks like men setting out to war- you can see shadows of men on horses and men holding weapons. Then, up close as the main complexion we see a man writing a letter with others surrounding him, some sad, some extremely happy, all of which are also holding some type of weapon. This image causes the imagination to wonder what the man in the black robes is writing about... could he be writing a declaration to promulgate the war or is he writing to terminate it? If so, why are some men happy, some sad? Aren't they all on the same side? -Eliana Ely
The artist definitely wanted to portray the Cossacks in a bad light, giving them crazed faces and painting a scene of disorder. There were legends surrounding the letter and the text that was actually given. They all tell of the Cossacks yelling at the Sultan (in some versions with obscenities). Could the artist be using the idea that the Cossacks were a brutal group in general to further a point of glory in Russian history? In other words, The men are so crazed and happy because the artist wanted to show the Russians as winners by saying that they didn't even care about a letter they sent to the sultan of Turkey?
This painting does not seem to portray any of it's subjects in a good light- does the artist do that intentionally, if so, why? -Joey R.
ReplyDeletethe painting is clearly display the happiness of the people, who are refusing to submit to the sultan of turkey through an insulting letter, yet there are a few faces that give that seem to show anger and resentment.how does the pictures few angry faces represent the Zaporozhian Cossacks as a whole? Was everyone really interested in continuing to resist, or did the community want to surrender but couldn't because of a few over confidant hooligans?
ReplyDelete-Ben Zwillinger
In this picture it seems that some individuals appear to be joyous, and others quite angry. Why did the painter decide to portray a mix of emotions among the subjects? -- Jon Levi
ReplyDeleteIs it fair to argue that since they are painted with happy, almost arrogant, grins on their faces, the cossacks are writing this after they already joined the Russians against Turkey, and are writing the response with the same rude arrogance as portrayed by their smiles?
ReplyDeleteIs the painter exploring deeper themes than simply Cossak pride and joy after defeating the Turkish army and refusing to submit to the the Sultan of Turkey? How is Repin's contrast between the closely-huddled eclectic mass of the victorious Zaporozhian Cossaks and the two solitary Ottoman figures a reflection on the humble beginnings of Ukranian Cossak republicanism? -Ariel Isser
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteModified question:
ReplyDeleteIt is unclear whether the Cossacks were organized enough to have written letters to foreign governments. So, does the painting depict a true historic event, or does it glorify a patriotic legend? As an example of an historically inaccurate picture, I would point to the painting of Washington Crossing the Delaware.
Why is it that the man with the pen, who is being surrounded by everyone else seems to be wearing the simplest of outfits and looks the least important? And why are the two men in matching white fur coats, who look the most important, painted with their backs facing us? Has anyone noticed that the man in the white coat to the right of the painting is pointing at the big man in the red coat's sword? Maybe all the faces we CAN see are smiling, but i don't think everyone in the picture shares that happiness. -Talia Franco
ReplyDeleteTowards the middle of the page, there is a man wearing a cross and pointing at something. Since this painting is about the Cossacks, who seperated due to religion, replying to the Sultan of Turkey, one must question the relevancre of the Christian man. Why is he here? Who does he represent?
ReplyDelete-Aaron Zuckerman
As a creative work, this painting doesn't have to reflect the Cossack's actual signing of the letter. That being said, was the painter trying to portray this motley group of Cossacks as an arrogant warriors, or as people concerned for their livelihood? Do the ecstatic faces in the center reflect on the group as a whole, or do some of the concerned faces in the background tell a different tale? Were they unified in their opposition to Turkish rule, and were they unified in the vulgarity expressed in their letter?
ReplyDeleteThere are many emotions in this picture - some look very pleased
ReplyDelete, others look frustrated. Was there a battle right before this event? Also, if some of the men look worried or worn down, why do the
other men look so calm and secure (that is, if they just came out of a battle)? Also I noticed that toward the bottom right of the picture
there is a Jewish star depicted on a possession and toward the middle stands a man wearing a necklace of a cross. What is the
significance of these symbols in the painting?
-Rose L
Repin painted the event almost 200 years after it happened. He portrays the Cossack leaders in the painting having a great time writing the reply to the Turkish Sultan. In all appearances this is the classic example of nationalistic propaganda not necessarily an accurate depiction of history, the men in the painting appear happy, confident, and powerful. So powerful in fact, that they do not need to show respect to arguably the most powerful man in the world, the can swear at him and treat him like dirt. The Cossacks are joking around with each other, basking in their victory over the Ottoman Empire, for all of these reasons this painting is pure propaganda. Yet this is not a typical painting of nationalistic propaganda like, for example, Trumbull's Declaration of Independence (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Declaration_independence.jpg). The men in the picture appear drunk, rowdy, and uneducated. Was Repin's goal to portray the Cossack forefathers as fun-loving military heroes or ignorant buffoons?
ReplyDeleteWhy is the painter showing the Cossacks as portraying everyone in the picture as villains and smoke all around? Is it something to do with the painter not approving of the Cossacks killing or stealing,or is it just that the author usually drew people as pirates?
ReplyDeleteDovi Miller
:)
ReplyDeleteThis is great so far! I'll respond to you all hopefully by the end of the evening, but certainly before lunch tomorrow.
mw
This seemingly historic meeting has a strange setting; despite the fact they are meeting in battle dress, it appears odd that they are not meeting inside a tent or other portable shelter of some sort. Is it possible the artist is trying to allude to how animalistic these people are, by leaving them outdoors?
ReplyDeleteThe Zaporozhian Cossacks were a group that loved to wreck havoc on other people and were free in a sence because they got to travel around all the time and ruin peoples towns. Do you think the painter used light, but devilish colors to portray an easy going feeling amoungst the Cossacks as they discuss buisness and maybe even future attacks?
ReplyDelete-Julia Adelman-
In the painting there are two different groups of people the Turkish and the Russians. From the look of the painting it seems that a lot of people have weapons on them, which may imply that they went to war with each other. Why are these two groups signing a treaty with each other? what made them get in an argument in the first place?
ReplyDeleteis the author trying to make a point by portraying the intellectual writing the letter as a priest while portraying the military men even those clearly of high social status as drunken vagrants --klein--
ReplyDeleteThe people that are surrounding the guy writing the letter all dont look like they are part of the same group they all seem random with each other like they dont fit well with each other but are also all excited and interested in the guy who is sitting at the table writing something. Why are all these different types of people excitingly surrounding the guy writing while there are many people around them who do not notice or care about the man sitting down writing or the people surrounding him? Why are these random people interested in the man sitting at the table writing?
ReplyDelete-michal j
throughout history, the portrayal of art and its style varies from time to time. this piece of art that has a bunch of men, some happy and some sad, and the significance of that could be interpreted differently in different stylistic periods. in this piece, what stylistic period of art are we in?
ReplyDelete-david reiz
In the background it looks like men setting out to war- you can see shadows of men on horses and men holding weapons. Then, up close as the main complexion we see a man writing a letter with others surrounding him, some sad, some extremely happy, all of which are also holding some type of weapon. This image causes the imagination to wonder what the man in the black robes is writing about... could he be writing a declaration to promulgate the war or is he writing to terminate it? If so, why are some men happy, some sad? Aren't they all on the same side?
ReplyDelete-Eliana Ely
The artist definitely wanted to portray the Cossacks in a bad light, giving them crazed faces and painting a scene of disorder. There were legends surrounding the letter and the text that was actually given. They all tell of the Cossacks yelling at the Sultan (in some versions with obscenities). Could the artist be using the idea that the Cossacks were a brutal group in general to further a point of glory in Russian history? In other words, The men are so crazed and happy because the artist wanted to show the Russians as winners by saying that they didn't even care about a letter they sent to the sultan of Turkey?
ReplyDeleteTani Levitt
It seems that the people in this painting are drawn to look very much like pirates. Are the Cossacks similar in many ways to pirates?
ReplyDelete