Wednesday, February 6, 2019

Le Panthéon, the final resting place of Voltaire

















Jacques-Germain Soufflot, Church of Ste-Geneviève (now Le Panthéon), Paris, France, 1755-90

Le Panthéon is a civic building in Paris that originally started out its existence as the Church of Saint Geneviève. The church was designed upon the request of King Louis XV, by the architect Jacques-Germain Soufflot. The king saw the creation of the church as a way to fulfill his father’s vow to rebuild the church; while also using it as a symbol of the French Catholic church’s opposition to the Roman Catholic Church.

The church’s design was heavily influenced by the Enlightenment. During the Enlightenment, the architects of the time started to analysis the architectural styles of the past in more critical/scientific ways; in the attempt that they could extract more of the reason and methods behind historical forms. This led to the beginning of Neoclassical architecture. Neoclassical architecture sought to use the forms of the Gothic and Greek/Roman, and use them a strictly ordered and logical way. Neoclassical architecture sought to remove the excess ornamentation (gaudiness) of Baroque architecture, and create more elegant (pure) architecture. Soufflot, being one of the architects at the forefront of the Neoclassical movement, used these principles to guide his design of the church (and to symbolically support the king’s opposition of the Roman Catholic Church).

During the French Revolution, the church would be converted into a secular civic building, in which the revolutionaries would celebrate the great philosophers and heroes of the revolution. The church was thus transformed from a reliquary for the remains of Saint Genevieve into a mausoleum for the “great men” of France. The building would literally become a pantheon. The revolutionist would bring Voltaire’s remains to Le Panthéon July 1792 (14 years after his death). The building would later swing back and forth between being a secular temple and a church five more times until finally secularizing in 1885.

Voltaire was celebrated by the French revolutionaries, although he did not live during the time of the Revolution. He was celebrated for his ideals (especially his criticism of the Catholic Church). The transportation of Voltaire was even noted as being part of the revolutionary campaign against the traditional Catholic Church. (Guyot) How much more ironic could it get? The revolutionaries’ way to get at the catholic church was to put a man who was critical of the church in one of their former churches. 

Citations:

Laurent Guyot, “Transportation of Voltaire to the French Panthéon, 8 July 1792,” Liberty, Equality, Fraternity, accessed February 6, 2019, http://chnm.gmu.edu/revolution/d/138.
Britannica, The Editors of Encyclopaedia. “Panthéon.” Encyclopædia Britannica, Encyclopædia Britannica, Inc., 18 Jan. 2019, www.britannica.com/topic/Pantheon-building-Paris-France.
Ranogajec, Paul A. “Soufflot, The Panthéon, Paris.” Khan Academy, Khan Academy, www.khanacademy.org/humanities/monarchy-enlightenment/neo-classicism/a/soufflot-the-panthon-paris.



Sunday, February 3, 2019

1492

1492 released October 9, 1992
Drama
Budget: $47,000,000

The central historical message of this film was the Hollywood depiction of Columbus and his search for the new world. Released in 1992, the film was created to celebrate to 500th anniversary of the great discover that was made. It overall shows the struggle of the new world and the effect that the Europeans had on the original inhabitants. The film weakly attempts achieving any sort of historical accuracy. The main cast of the movie is Gerard Depardieu, Armand Assante and Sigourney Weaver.

The film was directed by Ridley Scott and written by Rose Bosch. The film had an extremely large budget however only brought back in around $7 million. It was produced by Gaumont, Legende Films and France 3 Cinema.

The main points very closely followed the actual story of Columbus, however when it came to the actual details and historical accuracy, it was lacking. The film starts out with Columbus wanting to explore into Asia however he did not have a boat or a crew. Eventually, as history tells us, he is able to explore, gets lost and then finds his way into the new world.

The film was created in 1992 and it clearly shows that many people have a false idea of what actually happened in the discovery. Based on actual information from the diaries of Columbus, people have a general understanding of the history. However, even though the creators of the movie had access to these journals, some things still were not correct. The look of the film as well as the editing was actually something that was very positive in this film. However, when it comes down to establishing if a historical movie is "good" or not, historical accuracy must prevail. Another thing that really made this film something that was rather unenjoyable was the casting and the character story line. Even though the film was very long, there was no actual character development created.

Now, let's discuss the juicy part that everyone really cares about; was Columbus actually shown as a man that ruins the lives of the original inhabitants or was it a white washed version of history. To be frank, the movie very seldom followed the actual details of what happened. First, looking at the boats and how Columbus sailed to the new world. The entire film Columbus had three ships. Which was actually not the case according to Columbus' journals. There were actually 2 ships on the majority of the voyage because the Santa Maria sunk near Christmas time in 1492. However, the movie does not mention that at all. Next, let's discuss the other main thing that I noticed; the arrival of Columbus. In the film, Columbus is going through the land and then eventually is approached by natives that have all kinds of weapons. He then tells the natives that they come in peace. This is not only false in terms of them coming in peace, but also, that never happened. In the journals Columbus clearly states that he had to show the natives weapons and teach them about what weapons were.

Therefore, with all of these things considered, I would have to rate this movie fairly low. Overall, it did not really have any depth to it that was true. This is something important for a historical film. If I had to rate it out of 10, I would give it a 3... maybe.    

1. Paramount Pictures ; directed by Ridley Scott. 1492 : Conquest Of Paradise. Hollywood, CA :Paramount Pictures, 1993. Print.

2. Columbus, Christopher. The Journal of Christopher Columbus. London :Blond, 1968. Print.

3. John McKay, Merry E. Wiesner-Hanks, et al. A History of Western Society, Vol. 2: Concise Version, 12th edition (Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2016)