Róka Enikő szerk.: Zichy Mihály, a „rajzoló fejedelem” (A Magyar Nemzeti Galéria kiadványai 2007/4)

A „rajzoló fejedelem" RÓKA ENIKŐ

A 'Prince among Draughtsmen' ENIKŐ RÓKA Mihály Zichy and Mihály Munkácsy were often mentined and compared in the Hungarian press concerning the world exhibition of 1878. Of the critics, Gusztáv Keleti and Jenő Péterfy were highly appreciative of the drawing of The Triumph of the Genius of Destruction (fig. 39,), but expressed severe criticism of the colouring of the painting. However, both were enthusiastically praising the colours of Milton by Munkácsy. Consequently, from that time on this particular element of cricticism had become a constant motif of art criticism, it was subsequently published in feuilletons and articles written about both artists, as well as continuing to reemerge in later assessments. 'Munkácsy is a master of colours, Zichy is that of drawing.' Naturally, this topos like statement is genuinely dependent on the genres they were cultivating, that is, Zichy mostly did paper based works, whereas Munkácsy did paintings, Yet, it is rather odd that the category of French art criticism, dessin-couleur, was applied here and got specially stressed, just as well the percievable intention of putting the two artists in some kind of 'contest'. The notions of drawing and painting were allegorically presented by Zichy in his aquarelle entitled Daydreaming over a Paint Box. (fig. 2-4.) 'The Neutral Ink' represents drawing and it is manifested by an antique citizen of the world, Diogenes the Cynic, who lived in a barrel. According to his aphorisms and anecdotes on him, he was a philosopher who chose to lead the life of an ascetic, and by doing so, he had become a true representative of the freedom of thought, as well as of contemplating, ethics, thinking, wisdom and of irony. Zichy formulated a thesis whereby an artistic product only exists by virtue of 'the ink of Diogenes', therefore drawing is the basis of spirit, thought, sense and of all arts. Nevertheless, aquarelle units make up the creatures of artistic imagination, whereby colours invigorate a drawing and each colour is accompanied by a symbolic figure. The idea of giving priority to drawing continued to exist in nineteenth century academic teaching practices just as well in related treatises along the lines of renaissance traditions. At the same time the complex discourse on colour and drawing had been an integral part of French culture since the 17th century. The juxtaposition of Poussin and Rubens was revived in the debate on Ingres and Delacroix in the mid-19th century, which actually involved the conflict between academic and independent painters, or the conflict between classicists and romanticists. From the 1830s onwards Teophile Gautier had been working on the comparative analysis of Ingres and Delacroix and two decades later it was him that helped Mihály Zichy become acknowledged in Europe and in his home country. Although Gautier belonged to the romanticists and was passionate about Delacroix, he thought very highly of Ingres too. It was probably him that inspired Balzac to rewrite The Unknown Masterpiece the first part of which was complemented with a discussion of the problem of colours and drawing. The old painter, Fernhofer, the protagonist in Balzac's work flatly denies the justification of the existence of drawing since his world is made up of light and colours only. However, the other master, Porbus, despite all his regard for him disagrees with Fernhofer. In his view 'structure is dependent on drawing, but life is colour; nevertheless, life without structure is something of a more imperfect entity than structure without life...'. The 1845 edition of Balzac's work is still to be found in Zichy's estate bearing his own seal. His aquarelle entitled Daydreaming over a Paint Box is closely related to the interpretation of drawing and colours in Balzac's novel, not quite independent of Gautier's concept, but Porbus's above mentioned view comes closest to it.