At the Met

Assyrian_Relief__North-West_Palace_of_Nimrud__room_B__panel_18____865___860_BC__British_Museum   7328123454_fedbaa7c40_m

Dipped into the Metropolitan today to see some of my old favorites.  Why do I love these reliefs so?  The inscriptions relate the insufferable and ceaseless bragging of the Great King.  “I fought, I killed, I conquered, I slew…etc. etc.”  Perhaps it has something to do with a different sort of Magic Kingdom, the one to which I was occasionally vouchafed a visit in my southern Californian childhood, the original Disneyland.  On the freeway ride there my eyes were always diverted by this outlandish structure shown below:  It’s the Samson Tire Factory, built in the late 1920’s.

Whenever I am at the Met, I always make it a point to take a few minutes to pay my respects to the founder of modern chemistry, painted with his wife by Jacques-Louis David.


Antoine Lavoisier was a minor noble, and a very great scientist.  He was among the most liberal of the pre-revolutionary elite, and he was guillotined in The Terror for his pains.  (He had held the post of chief tax farmer for the king.)   I was thinking today that this picture shows only one of the couple having their portrait painted.  Madame is posing, looking out at us, but he is busy working at his desk.  You can just hear her, “Dear, Monsieur David is here to paint our picture.  Please stop your work a moment, as important as it is.”  He hears something, looks up, over his shoulder, “Ah yes, my dear.  So sorry, I forgot all about it…Now where was I..?”  He is busy with his intellectual business, she performs the crucial domestic support function of a loyal and loving wife, the perfect pair.

In fact, Madame was an accomplished if unacknowledged researcher on her own, and her contribution to Monsieur’s work is now recognized as having been very important.  She, however, escaped death during the revolution.  Madison Smartt Bell has written a very nice short biography – Lavoisier in the Year One – the title of which nicely captures that good old apocalyptic spirit of revolution that I love so well.  He does a better job of explaining the unravelling of the weird and complicated pre-modern theories of chemistry demolished by Lavoisier than a mere novelist has a right to do, although he confided to me in an email that he did commit an error that no one but a chemist friend had noticed.

7 Responses to At the Met

  1. Guy Savage says:

    That’s a great painting for the way it captures a three-way glance effect. Us looking at the painting. Her looking at the painter. Him looking at her. A very intimate moment.

  2. Ducky's here says:

    Those reliefs are fabulous.

    MFA had a show of all the stuff the Brits stole and put in the British Museum. The commentary featured a comic book artist who was quite fascinating talking about the ways they managed to solve spacial problems in their battle scenes.

  3. lichanos says:

    You mean preserved, not stole, of course.

    A comics artist would certainly like this…

  4. Guy Savage says:

    I watched the documentary The Art of the Steal tonight and wondered if you’ve seen it.

  5. lichanos says:

    I was aware of the fracas, but knew nothing of the film. Sounds interesting!

  6. Guy Savage says:

    I’ve never belonged to the art world, so I am not an expert, but the film raises some great questions about inheritance and Trusts. Who will be there to protect your interests when you are sitting in an urn on someone’s mantelpiece? I think it was naive to expect that the Barnes would be bailed out w/o some sort of ‘deal.’ The stakes were too big.

    Barnes comes across as a very strong individual; too bad there was so much snobbery in with the pissing contest in those early days.

    I loved the scenes with the neighbours who were not happy with the tour buses arriving on their streets.

    People weren’t shy about expressing their dislike for various individuals, so I expect you’d enjoy it with your background.

    • lichanos says:

      Thanks for the tip on this film – I enjoyed it. For me, the big question is why didn’t Barnes, a shrewd character by all accounts, leave the trust an endowment big enough to protect it in perpetuity?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: