-_._-_ ..._---
TEAR DOWN THE VEILS: FRANCIS BACON'S PAPAL VARIATIONS 1946-1971
by
KIMBERLY YUEN HONG
A THESIS
Presented to the Department of Art History
and the Graduate School of the University of Oregon
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of
Master of Arts
June 2009
"Tear Down the Veils: Francis Bacon's Papal Variations 1946-1971," a thesis prepared
by Kimberly Yuen Hong in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Master of Arts
11
degree in the Department of Art History. This thesis has been approved and accepted by:
Dr. Kat Mon och, hair of the Examining Committee
Committee in Charge:
Accepted by:
G3'ean of the Graduate School
Dr. Kate Mondloch, Chair
Dr. Lauren Kilroy
Dr. Ellen Rees
© 2009 Kimberly Yuen Hong
111
IV
An Abstract of the Thesis of
Kimberly Yuen Hong
in the Department of Art History
for the degree of
to be taken
Master of Arts
June 2009
Title: TEAR DOWN THE VEILS: FRANCIS BACON'S PAPAL VARIATIONS 1946-
1971
Approved:
-
Dr. Kate Mondloch
Twentieth-century British figurative painter Francis Bacon (1909-1992) is
perhaps best known for his near-obsessive series of papal paintings inspired by Diego
Velazquez' renowned portrait Pope Innocent X (1650) and created over the course of
Bacon's entire artistic career. The artist's working process plays a crucial role in
understanding this celebrated and varied series. Bacon deliberately avoided Velazquez'
"original" portrait, preferring instead to work with photographic reproductions of the
piece alongside a large collection of seemingly disparate visual material in his chaotic
studio at 7 Reece Mews (South Kensington, London, England). This thesis proposes that
Bacon explored issues of mechanization, fragmentation, and repetition through these
visual juxtapositions in order to offer a critique of artistic and religious institutions.
CURRICULUM VITAE
NAME OF AUTHOR: Kimberly Yuen Hong
PLACE OF BIRTH: St. Louis, Missouri
DATE OF BIRTH: May 8, 1984
GRADUATE AND UNDERGRADUATE SCHOOLS ATTENDED:
University of Oregon, Eugene, Oregon
Saint Louis University, St. Louis, Missouri
DEGREES AWARDED:
Master of Arts, Art History, 2009, University of Oregon
Bachelor of Arts, Art History and Communication, Certificate in Women's
Studies, 2006, Saint Louis University
AREAS OF SPECIAL INTEREST:
Modern and Contemporary Art and Architecture
PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE:
Graduate Teaching Fellow, Department of History, University of Oregon, Spring
2009
Academic Tutor, Services for Student Athletes, University of Oregon, Winter
2009
Graduate Teaching Fellow, Department of Art History, University of Oregon,
2007-2008
Search Committee Member for Modernist Art Historian, Department of Art
History, University of Oregon, 2007-2008
v
VI
Graduate Chair for Art History Symposium, Art History Association, University
of Oregon, 2007-2008
Arts Bridge Scholar, Jordan Schnitzer Museum of Art, University of Oregon,
Spring 2008
Collection Assistant, Visual Resources Collection, University of Oregon, 2006-
2008
Art Auction Chair, Art History Association, University of Oregon, 2006-2007
Administrative Graduate Fellow, Visual Resources Collection, University of
Oregon, Fall 2006
Gallery Assistant, Greenberg Van Doren Gallery, St. Louis, Missouri, 2004-2006
Gallery Attendant, The Pulitzer Foundation for the Arts, St. Louis, Missouri,
2004-2006
Breidenbach Internship, The Samuel Cupples House, Saint Louis University,
2005
Internship, Art Institute of Chicago, Museum Education, Summer 2005
Office Assistant and Gallery Attendant, Saint Louis University Museum of Art,
2003-2005
GRANTS, AWARDS AND HONORS:
Christine Sundt Award for Student Leadership and Service in Art History,
University of Oregon, 2008
Marian C. Donnelly Travel Grant Recipient, University of Oregon, 2008
University of Oregon Graduate Teaching Fellowship, Department of Art History
2006-2008
VB
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
I would like to thank the members of my thesis committee (Professors Mondloch,
Kilroy, Rees, and Schulz) for their guidance with the research, writing, and completion of
this text. The time and energy they devoted to my academic development and this project
not only served this thesis but also fueled my personal interest in teaching. I would also like
to note the great level of support given to me by the Department of Art History. My
research was funded in part by the Department's Marian C. Donnelly Travel Grant. The
financial support allowed me to conduct research at the Hugh Lane Municipal Gallery's
Francis Bacon Database in Dublin, Ireland. The Hugh Lane Gallery's staff, notably Jessica
O'Donnell and Patrick Casey, aided my on-site findings by advising me on the database
and studio exhibition. I am greatly indebted to my friends and fellow graduate students at
the University of Oregon. Special thanks are due to Olivia Miller and Jenna Roelle, who
read drafts of my thesis. I am also truly grateful for the thoughtful encouragement and
support from Read McFaddin, Jessica Wilks, Helena Dean, Dana Solow, and C. Eric
Devin, Katie Moss, Gui Bryant, Jenny Kirkman, and Krista Meany. Finally, I would like to
thank my family, whose phone calls, visits, and notes from St. Louis and Atlanta kept my
spirits high, my head clear, and my heart happy.
For my Momma and Popsie, who, by example, taught me the love ofleaming.
Thanks for always believing in me.
V111
IX
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Chapter Page
I. INTRODUCTION 1
II. BACON BITS: UNDERSTANDING FRANCIS BACON'S PAPAL
VARIATIONS AS A SERIES........................................................................... 8
General Background and Bacon's Interest in Figuration............................. 8
Post-War Europe and the Papal Variations.................................................. 11
Overview of Papal Variations...................................................................... 16
Typology of Papal Variations 17
Iconographic Links to Velazquez' Pope Innocent X: Furniture,
Vestments and Jewelry 19
Bacon's Sub-Series of Popes and Interest in Sequencing............................ 23
Bacon's Iconographic Markers: Raw Meat, Owls and Monkeys,
and the Scream..................................................................................... 30
Stylistic Shifts in Bacon's Papal Variations 33
III. THE PAPAL PORTRAIT IN THE AGE OF MECHANICAL
REPRODUCTION: BACON'S ARTISTIC PROCESS IN PAINTIJ~G
HIS PAPAL VARIATIONS 35
The Importance of Collection and Photographic Material to
Bacon's Process 35
Chapter
x
Page
Bacon's Avoidance ofthe Velazquez Painting......................................... 38
Photographic Reproductions ofPope Innocent X as
Working Documents 43
Bacon and Benjamin................................................................................ 47
Mechanization and Juxtaposition in 7 Reece Mews 50
Bacon and Process Materials: Medical, Animal, and Film Imagery....... 51
Bacon and Simulacra 58
Baudrillard's Three Categories of Simulacra and Bacon's
Papal Variations................................................................................... 59
IV. PUSHING CONVENTIONS OF TRADITION: BACON,
VELAzQUEZ, AND THE ART-HISTORICAL CANON 63
Velazquez and the Creation ofPope Innocent X....................................... 64
Britain and Velazquez................................................................................ 66
Bacon and the National Gallery's The Artist's Eye Program 67
Bacon and His "Reinterpretation" of Figurative Painting 69
A BriefHistory of Seated Papal Portraits-Beginning with
Raphael's Julius II............................................................................. 70
Bacon's Papal Variations and their Spectatorial Effect on their
Audience 76
Chapter
Xl
Page
V. CONCLUSION 80
APPENDIX: FIGURES 82
BIBLIOGRAPHY 135
Xll
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure Page
1. Photograph of Francis Bacon's Studio Space at 7 Reece Mews,
South Kensington, London.................................................................................... 82
2. Diego Velazquez, Pope Innocent X, 1650 83
3. Francis Bacon, Study after Velazquez's Portrait ofPope Innocent X, 1953 84
4. Francis Bacon, Study (Pope Pius XII), 1955.......................................................... 85
5. Raphael, Julius 11, 1511 86
6. Alberto Giacometti, Walking Man 11, 1960................ 87
7. Alberto Giacometti, Sketch ofPope Innocent X, 1936 88
8. Francis Bacon, Study for the Head ofa Screaming Pope, 1952............................ 89
9. Francis Bacon,StudYfor a Pope, 1955 90
10. Francis Bacon, Study (Imaginary Portrait ofPope Pius XII), 1955...................... 91
11. Francis Bacon, Figure with Meat, 1954................................................................. 92
12. Francis Bacon, Head VI, 1949 93
13. Francis Bacon, Study ofRed Pope, 1962, 1971 94
14. Francis Bacon, Study for a Pope, 1955.................................................................. 95
15. Francis Bacon, Portrait ofa CardinalI (Pope 1), 1955......................................... 96
16. Francis Bacon, Seated Figure (Red Cardinal), 1960............................................. 97
17. Francis Bacon, Pope 1, 1951 98
18. Francis Bacon, Study for Portrait ofPope Innocent X; 1965 99
Figure
X111
Page
19. Francis Bacon, Figure Seated (The Cardinal), 1955 100
20. Titian, Pope Paul Farnese, after 1546 101
21. Sebastiano del Piombo's Studio, Pope Clement VII, 1531-32 102
22. Francis Bacon, Study after Velazquez, 1950.......................................................... 103
23. Francis Bacon, Study after Velazquez II, 1950 104
24. Francis Bacon, Pope II (Pope Shouting), 1951...................................................... 105
25. Francis Bacon, Pope III (Pope with Fan Canopy), 1951 106
26. Francis Bacon, Study for Portrait I, 1953.............................................................. 107
27. Francis Bacon, Study for Portrait II, 1953 108
28. Francis Bacon, Study for Portrait 111,1953 109
29. Francis Bacon, Study for Portrait IV, 1953 110
30. Francis Bacon, Study for Portrait V (Cardinal V), 1953 111
31. Francis Bacon, Study for Portrait VI, 1953 112
32. Francis Bacon, Study for Portrait VII, 1953.......................................................... 113
33. Francis Bacon, Study for Portrait VIII, 1953 114
34. Working Document, Muybridge Motion Study 115
35. Working Document Photograph by John Deakin of George Dyer in Soho 116
36. Francis Bacon, Study for Head ofGeorge Dyer, 1967 117
37. Francis Bacon, Pope II, 1960 118
38. Chaim Soutine, Carcass ofBeef, 1925 119
39. Working Document Illustration ofMeat 120
-------------_... ----------- ---_. __ ._-_.-
XIV
Figure Page
40. Francis Bacon, Pope and Chimpanzee, 1962 121
41. Working Document Film Still from the Battleship Potemkin 122
42. Francis Bacon, Second Version oj 'Study jor the Red Pope 1962, '1971 123
43. Unknown, Copy After Velazquez' Pope Innocent X.............................................. 124
44. Pope Innocent X Working Document 1 125
45. Pope Innocent X Working Document 2 126
46. Pope Innocent X Working Document 3 127
47. Pope Innocent X Working Document 4 128
48. Working Document, Radiography 129
49. Working Document, Phenomena of Materialisation 130
50. Working Document, Battleship Potemkin, Odessa Steps 131
51. Diego Velazquez, Portrait ojPhilip IV ojSpain, 1625 132
52. Diego Velazquez, The Rokeby Venus, 1647-1651 133
53. Edouard Manet, The Execution ojMaximilian, 1867-68....................................... 134
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
During the last year, Francis Bacon's Post-World War II figurative paintings
traveled as a part of the first major retrospective since the artist's death in 1992. The
show began at the Tate Britain in September of2008, then moved to Madrid's Museo
del Prado in February of 2009 and will end its tour later the same year at the
Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York.! Growing international attention, in both the
academic art world and the financial art market, illustrate the continuing influence of
Bacon's oeuvre.2 While Bacon's prominence grew in the 1950s and 1960s, new
discoveries about his artistic practice made within the last ten years have led to
I Matthew Gale and Chris Stephens, Francis Bacon, exh. cat. (London: Tate Publishing, 2008).
2 Until the recent economic recession in the United States, post-war and expressionist Western art
auctions experienced record sales. However, it should be noted that these high sale prices led to
heightened expectations for continuing art auctions. For example, Christie's Post-War London auction in
November of 2008 estimated a forty-million dollar sale of Bacon's 1964 painting Study for SelfPortrait.
Unfortunately, the bidding ceased at under twenty-eight million dollars. For additional auction results
please see the websites of Christie's, Sotheby's and Phillips. Bacon has also been at the fore oflegal
disputes. After his death, the Estate of Francis Bacon filed a lawsuit against the Marlborough Gallery. In
2000, trustees ofthe Estate claimed that the Marlborough Gallery took excessive financial commissions
on the artist's work, produced lithograph prints of Bacon's work without the artist's consent and without
compensation, and failed to account for up to thirtythree of his paintings. After years oflegal dispute, the
Gallery settled and returned several paintings and documents to the Estate. For more information
regarding this legal dispute see Carol Vogel, "Gallery Accused of Cheating Prominent Artist," The New
York Times (March 22, 2000); Terri Judd, "Heir's illness ends the battle between Bacon's estate and his
gallery," The Independent, London (February 2,2002); and Carol Vogel, "Bacon Estate and Dealer Settle
a Two-Year Suit Over Pricing" The New York Times (February 2,2002).
2
additional publications, research, and projects devoted to the artist.3 Chief among these
was the donation of Bacon's studio to the Hugh Lane Municipal Gallery in Dublin,
Ireland by his lover John Edwards.
In August of 1998, the Hugh Lane relocated and painstakingly catalogued over
7,000 objects found in the artist's studio space at 7 Reece Mews, South Kensington,
London (Figure 1).4 Margarita Cappock, the project's head coordinator, published
Francis Bacon's Studio in 2005.5 The book outlined the scope of the relocation and
presented images of the studio and some of its contents. The Hugh Lane Municipal
Gallery's venture resulted in an extensive and detailed database accessible to scholars
and a permanent exhibition open to the public.6 Martin Harrison's 2005 book In
Camera: Francis Bacon, Photography, Film and the Practice ofPainting focused on
issues of process and mechanization linked to the Hugh Lane Gallery undertaking. 7
3 It seems that many art-historical findings on Bacon, like many artists, have been revisited after his
death. Bacon died of a heart attack in 1992 while vacationing in Madrid, Spain. Much art-historical and
mass-media texts published on Bacon during his life were informed by Bacon himself. Bacon interviewed
frequently, and often to friends in the art world. While his words provide interesting insights into his
process, artwork, and intention, they also complicate his oeuvre and practice. As discussed throughout
this thesis, Bacon self-fashioned his public identity through these interviews.
4 The Hugh Lane Gallery created a website that documents the kinds of materials found within the studio
and background information on their process. To visit the site, please see
http://www.hughlane.ie/francis bacoDs studio.php?type=About&heading=Artist%92s+Materials&rsno=
1. For books on Bacon's studio consult John Edwards. 7 Reece Mews: Francis Bacon's Studio (London:
Thames and Hudson, 2001); Margarita Cappock, Francis Bacon's Studio (London: Merrell, 2005).
5 Ibid.
6 I refer to information found from the database as Hugh Lane Database.
7 Martin Harrison, In Camera: Francis Bacon Photography, Film and the Practice ofPainting (London:
Thames and Hudson, 2005). This text was particularly important to my thesis. Due to the importance of
Bacon's process materials (to his work and my own), I researched the Hugh Lane Gallery Francis Bacon
database for information on Bacon's range of sources and iconographic links in his papal series. I am
grateful for the time and energy given by their staff, particularly Jessica O'Donnell and Patrick Casey,
who helped me navigate the database and personally showed me the collection.
3
This thesis builds on and relies upon both the Hugh Lane Gallery's and
Harrison's findings regarding the artist's process, but focuses on Bacon's appropriation
of Diego Velazquez' Pope Innocent X (1650) (Figure 2). From 1946 to 1971, Bacon
referenced photographs of the Baroque portrait in his series of papal variations. His
fixation resulted in forty-four known paintings such as Study after Velazquez's Portrait
ofPope Innocent X (1953) (Figure 3) and Study (Pope Pius Xll)(1955) (Figure 4). The
papal variations are of notable importance within Bacon's oeuvre because the artist did
not repeat any other subject as frequently as the popes and revisited the topic over the
expanse of his career. Additionally, given Bacon's strong interest in figuration and
appropriation, his papal portraits act as a set of prototypes due to their direct
engagement of the artist's idiosyncratic working process. Seen as such, Bacon's papal
variations are some of his most signature paintings.
By focusing on artistic practice, I hope to avoid sensationalizing the artist's
biography (such as his sexuality, his bohemian lifestyle, and his tumultuous personal
relationships, particularly those with his family).8 Through a visual examination of
Bacon's series of popes and their context, his artistic process (in particular the
documents he appropriated from), and his own statements, I analyze how his papal
portraits function for a contemporary audience. This thesis, as the first in-depth study of
all of the portraits, proposes that Bacon's papal variations explore issues of
mechanization, fragmentation, repetition, and originality. In so doing, the artworks
8 Many texts have given dramatic accounts of Bacon's life, for some of these see Daniel Farson, The
Gilded Gutter Life ofFrancis Bacon (London: Century, 1993); Andrew Lambirth, "The Painter as King."
The Spectator, 4 November 2006. My thesis does look to Bacon's biography for information regarding
his process but does not attempt to conduct a psychoanalytic analysis of his life in order to learn more
about his work.
4
problematize the tradition of papal portraiture, the genre of figurative painting, and the
identity of religious and artistic institutions.
Although Bacon's papal variations are arguably some of his most well-known
works; they have not been fully examined as a comprehensive group. 9 This gap in
scholarship overlooks the pope as a major theme in Bacon's painting and the papal
portraits' position as an exemplification of his unique artistic process in painting. To
remedy this problem, my work consulted texts concerning Bacon's tropes and
appropriation of works of art, such as Gilles Deleuze's thematic investigation of
Bacon's paintings, Hugh M. Davies' writings devoted to the papal portraits of 1953, and
Brendan Prendeville's examination of Bacon's appropriation of Vincent van Gogh's
figurative painting. 10 Monographs by Michel Leiris, Michael Peppiatt, and Ernst van
Alphen provided a significant research foundation necessary for understanding the artist
and his work. I I Bacon's interviews conducted and published by David Sylvester and
9 Hugh M. Davies, Francis Bacon: The Papal Portraits of1953, exh. cat. (New York: Distributed Art
Publishers, 2001) includes a brief text that focuses on the 1953 works and gives a cursory understanding
of the papal variations as a unified group. The lack of study could be due to the difficulty ofgrouping the
breadth of the papal variations. Bacon's works, including the papal variations are not easily categorized
and evade clear answers. French philosopher Gilles Deleuze makes a call for the kind of research
necessary for understanding Bacon's pelpes urging, "We cannot simply compare the two portraits of
Innocent X, that of Velazquez and that of Bacon, who transforms it into the screaming Pope. We must
compare Velazquez's portrait with all of Bacon's paintings." Gilles Deleuze, Francis Bacon: The Logic
ofSensation, trans. Daniel W. Smith (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2003), 46. Currently,
Harrison and the London-based Estate of Francis Bacon are reworking Bacon's catalogue raisonne The
Catalogue Raisonne Committee was formed in November of2006 and includes Martin Harrison, Richard
Calvocoressi, Hugh Davies, Nonna Johnson, and Sarah Whitfield. Dr. Rebecca Daniels is also assisting
with research for the project. I am eager to see how Harrison and the Estate organize Bacon's works,
especially the papal portraits.Ronald Alley and John Rothenstein, eds. Francis Bacon (New York: The
Viking Press, 1964). Since this volume has yet to be published, my thesis relies on Ronald Alley and Sir
John Rothenstein's 1964 catalogue raisonne for accurate titles and dates for Bacon's paintings.
to Deleuze, Francis Bacon; Davies, Francis Bacon: The Papal Portraits of1953; and Brendan
PrendeviIIe, "Varying the Self: Bacon's Versions of van Gogh." Oxford Art Joumal27 (2004): 23-42.
11 Michel Leiris, Francis Bacon: Full Face and In Profile, trans. John Weightman (Barcelona, Ediciones
Poligrafa, 1983); Michael Peppiatt, Francis Bacon: Anatomy ofan Enigma (New York: Farrar, Straus and
5
Michel Archimbaud provided additional infonnation regarding the artist's possible
intent, self-fashioning, and artistic practice. 12
My first chapter, "Bacon Bits: Understanding Francis Bacon's Papal Variations
as a Series," introduces the papal variations and groups them into thematic and
chronological typologies. While many compositional and iconographic similarities
between the papal variations exist, there are also significant stylistic, iconographic, and
compositional differences. For example, the papal variations use approximately the
same size canvas, but Bacon varied the color of the papal vestments by using blue,
purple and red. Iconographic markers throughout Bacon's oeuvre such as animals, raw
meat, tassels, eyeglasses, and arrows appear in some of the papal paintings but not in
others. This chapter argues that the papal variations juxtapose conventional visual
devices and objects found in earlier papal portraits with dynamic fragmented
photographic images collected within Bacon's studio. These juxtapositions in Bacon's
papal portraits complicate the perceived identities and notable characteristics of the
Pope, Catholic Church, and humankind.
My second chapter, "The Papal Portrait in the Age ofMechanical Reproduction:
Bacon's Artistic Process in Painting His Papal Variations," discusses Bacon's working
method, namely his employment of the medium of photography. Bacon used
mechanization in a variety of ways to produce his paintings. He referenced and
Giroux, 1996); Ernst van Alphen, "The Narrative of Perception and the Perception of Narrative," Poetics
Today 11, no. 3 (Autumn 1990): 483-509; and Ernst van Alphen, Francis Bacon and the Loss ofSelf
(Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1993).
12Michel Archimbaud, Francis Bacon in Conversation (London: Phaidon, 1993); and David Sylvester,
The Brutality ofFact: Interviews with Francis Bacon (London: Thames and Hudson, 1987).
6
appropriated reproductions of a variety of images as inspiration. Often, Bacon
collected multiple reproductions or leaves of the same image or kind of visual
document. Toward the middle of his career, he composed and commissioned
photographic material to serve as models for his portraits. 13 Bacon preferred to work
from two-dimensional material and memory rather than from a live sitter. 14 The camera,
the process of mechanization, and issues of repetition are therefore foundational to
understanding Bacon's art. This chapter analyzes critical texts related to photography
and issues of originality written by Walter Benjamin and Jean Baudrillard in order to
understand the importance of Bacon's use of fragmentation and repetition. IS In so
doing, it proposes that Bacon sole use ofphotographic reproductions of Pope Innocent
X permitted the artist to see permutations created by mechanization, remove the
painting from its initial context, and complicate the role of the "aura."
The final chapter, "Pushing Conventions of Tradition: Bacon, Velazquez, and
the Art-Historical Canon," analyzes the relationship between Bacon and other artists
included in the traditional art-historical canon, most significantly the seventeenth-
century Spanish court painter Velazquez. By examining the history of the casual seated
papal portrait type originating with Raphael's depiction of Pope Julius II (1511) (Figure
5), I will place Bacon's papal variations in and against the genre of "official" papal
imagery. The pope's body occupies a unique position in visual depiction. The pope's
13 Harrison, In Camera.
14 Wieland Schmied, Francis Bacon: Commitment and Conflict (Munich: Prestel-Verlag, 1996),87.
15 Roland Barthes, Camera Lucida: Reflections on Photography (New York: Hill and Wang, 1980);
Walter Benjamin, Illuminations (New York: Schocken Books, 1968); and Jean Baudrillard, Simulacra
and Simulation, trans. Sheila Faria Glaser (Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press: 1995).
7
identity is a complicated mixture of tradition, institution, individual human being,
spiritual intercessor, and religious and political leader. This chapter examines Bacon's
appropriation and alteration ofVehizquez' Pope Innocent X, and the strange spectatorial
effects of the pope's gaze out toward the viewer. 16 This chapter claims that Bacon's
papal variations build on a pre-existing history of figuration, in particular the tradition
of seated papal portraiture. Through a visual and curatorial dialogue with these pictorial
conventions, Bacon intensifies the intimacy and power dynamics between the pope and
the viewer.
Bacon said in regards to successful art, artists and the visual portrayal of truth,
"Great art is always a way of concentrating, reinventing what is called fact, what we
know of our existence- a reconcentration, tearing away the veils that fact acquires
through time. Ideas always acquire appearance veils, the attitudes people acquire of
their time and earlier time. Really good artists tear down those veils."!? I believe that
great art historians do the same. This thesis aims to follow Bacon's mantra by "tearing
away the veils" surrounding his art and practice, namely those interested in sensational
biography and even those fashioned by the artist himself.
16 Norman Bryson, Vision and Painting: The Logic a/the Gaze (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press,
1986).
17Hugh M. Davies and Sally Yard, Francis Bacon (New York: Abbeville, 1986), 110.
8CHAPTER II
BACON BITS: UNDERSTANDING FRANCIS BACON'S PAPAL VARIATIONS AS
A SERIES
General Background and Bacon's Interest in Figuration
Beginning in August of 1961 until his death in April of 1992, Bacon accumulated
a wide range of images and texts in his infamously chaotic studio and home at 7 Reece
Mews in South Kensington, London (Figure 1). I The items therein were central to his
artistic process and oeuvre because they served as source materials for his paintings.2
Scattered through his small studio lay photographs of Eadweard Muybridge's motion
studies, on top of reproductions of artworks, newspaper clippings, paint rags, empty
butter bean cans and champagne bottles, film stills, and color plates documenting medical
ailments. In this mess, Bacon lived and worked for most of his artistic career.
1 Bacon's behavior of collecting large amount of visual material and books occurred prior to his residence
at 7 Reece Mews. However, multiple moves during his early career discourage further discussion of these
sites at 19 Cromwell Place, the Hotel Imperial at Henley-on-Thames, and a summer residence in Tangiers.
Bacon stayed at 9 Overstrand Mansions at Battersea for six prior to his move to 7 Reece Mews. Images of
his Battersea studio and home look very similar, in terms of clutter and materials, to his South Kensington
residence.
2 Michael Peppiatt and Martin Harrison refer to the materials found within Bacon's studio at 7 Reece Mews
as working documents. I continued to use this term because it illustrates their multiple functions as a
research archive on Bacon as well as active process materials for the artist. The working documents do not
have clear names and often appear in multiples. I chose to name with the designation working document
and a number. The numbers do not refer to Bacon's chronology of collecting the image. The time that
Bacon selected and placed the working document in his studio is unknown.
9
The majority of Bacon's work takes the form of figurative oil painting. He
frequently depicted friends, lovers, and himself, in addition to taking the occasional
commission for a portrait.3 Art historian Hugh M. Davies wrote of Bacon's innovation
within the genre of figurative painting: "Yet while extending the timeless tradition of
figuration, he invented profound and startling new ways ofportraying people as he
distorted the inhabitants of his painterly world in order to unlock the valves of feeling and
therefore return the onlooker to life more violently.,,4 Bacon's papal variations fit with
Davies' claim that the artist reinvented a kind of modern figuration. His papal portraits
continue in the tradition of figurative painting; however, his artistic process, choice of
subject, and expressive figures provide the necessary framework for his audience to
experience the human form in a more sensorial manner.
To create a painting, Bacon predominately worked from photographic studies of
the human body, and his memories and photographs of people he knew well. Most-often,
he compiled fragments from his massive collection of source material. After
consideration of the range of interview statements, paintings, and scholarly
interpretations, it can be concluded that Bacon's interest in figuration was grounded in
issues concerning the perception of reality and the subject's sensory effect on the viewer.
His exploration of portraiture and figurative work continued throughout the entirety ofhis
career. While Bacon's painting style changed throughout his life, many of his themes and
tropes stayed the same. For example, he painted figurative triptychs, portraits of friends,
3 For a comprehensive understanding of Bacon's figurative work consult Ronald Alley and John
Rothenstein, eds. Francis Bacon (New York: The Viking, 1964); and David Sylvester, Francis Bacon: The
Human Body (Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 1998).
4 Hugh M. Davies, Francis Bacon: The Papal Portraits of1953 (New York: Distributed Art, 2001),11.
10
and wrestlers over the span of his career. His early artistic work, likely influenced by his
mentor, the Australian painter Roy de Maistre, referenced tropes such as crucifixion
scenes and figures in landscapes.s Self-portraits and portraits of friends pervade his
middle and late periods. Bacon's papal variations are most dominant in his early and
middle career, however, unlike most of his themes, he sporadically revisited the Popes
well into his later period.
Between 1946 and 1971, a time marked as the height of his artistic production,
Bacon painted some of his most acclaimed and perplexing work by repeating the subject
matter of popes, specifically noting Velazquez' Pope Innocent X (Figure 2).6 Bacon
confessed, in his famous 1963 interview with friend and art historian David Sylvester,
referencing Velazquez' Pope Innocent X, "I've always thought it was one ofthe greatest
paintings in the world and I've had a crush on it."? Bacon's infatuation with the portrait
in conjunction with his search for a new kind of figural depiction caused him to generate
a timely series of papal portraits that shocked viewers into questioning the reality of the
world around them. Bacon hoped to uncover the "truth" in reality by "tearing down the
veils."S Bacon commented, "Great art is always a way of concentrating, reinventing what
is called fact, what we know of our existence- a reconcentration, tearing away the veils
that fact acquires through time. Ideas always acquire appearance veils, the attitudes
5 Martin Harrison, In Camera: Francis Bacon Photography, Film and the Practice ofPainting (London:
Thames and Hudson, 2005), 28-31. Harrison argues that de Maistre might have influenced Bacon in his
construction of his crucifixion paintings during the early 1930s.
6 Ibid, 92.
7 Wieland Schmied, Francis Bacon: Commitment and Conflict (Munich: Prestel-Verlag, 1996), 17.
S Hugh M. Davies and Sally Yard, Francis Bacon (New York: Abbeville, 1986), 110.
11
people acquire of their time and earlier time. Really good artists tear down those veils."g
Since Bacon's series of papal portraits were based on a painting created three hundred
years earlier, Velazquez' Pope Innocent X would have undoubtedly acquired "veils" in
Bacon's mind. A contemporary audience viewing Velazquez' Pope Innocent X would,
according to Bacon's claims, grapple with elusive visual cues distinguishing the "facts"
from "appearance veils." Over time, the commission of the painting, Pope's life and
activity, and program of the seventeenth-century papacy, among other "facts," would
have changed just as visual reception evolves with context and expectation. Therefore,
Bacon's papal variations should be understood as his attempt to problematize the public's
perception of "truth" through images portraying the institution of the papacy.
Post-War Europe and the Papal Variations
Initially exhibited and created in the context of post-World War II England,
Bacon's portrayal of isolated, suffering popes posed pertinent questions regarding the line
between good and evil, the role of religion in contemporary life, and the authority of
traditional institutions. Davies wrote of Bacon's papal portraits and their relationship to
religion and Post-War Europe: "The eternal quiet of Velazquez's Innocent is replaced by
the involuntary cry of Bacon's anonymous, unwitting, tortured occupant of the hot seat.
One could hardly conceive of a more devastating depiction of postwar, existential angst
or a more convincing denial of faith in the era that exemplified Nietzsche's declaration
that God is dead."lo Bacon's decision to depict a historical and religious authority in the
9 Ibid.
10 Davies, Francis Bacon: The Papal Portraits of1953, 12.
12
environment ofpost-war Britain reflects his critical intentions. By inverting the figure's
attributes to its binary opposites (attributes of strength become weakness), Bacon uses the
context of fear and recovery after World War II to question "truth," especially
institutional authority. The visual interaction between the Pope and the audience is
deliberately uncomfortable. For those viewing Bacon's papal paintings, the emotional
discomfort caused by the artist's fragmentation of the Pope's body and expression on the
decaying figure lead to a questioning of the authority, stability, and validity of the Pope
and Catholic Church.
Questions regarding the identity and position of the Pope relate to Bacon's
referencing of his papal subject as a "tragic hero" (a term most likely due to his interest in
literature). II His papal portraits exemplify the "tragic hero" through the visual
combination of attributes connoting weakness and spiritual gifts (such as the scream and
papal vestments), shown in the portrayal of the sacrifice of the Pope. The term connotes
and joins the symbolic authority of the long-standing icon of the Pope with Bacon's
painfully disabling portrayal of the human body. Aristotle, whose discussion of the
tragedy continues to inform literary theory, claimed of the "tragic hero," "There remains,
then, the intermediate kind of personage, a man not pre-eminently virtuous and just,
whose misfortune, however, is brought upon him not by vice and depravity but by some
error ofjudgment."12 Aristotle's statement refers to the subject's normal position in
society. For him, a successful "tragic hero" is not morally virtuous or reprehensible. The
11 Alley and Rothenstein, Francis Bacon, 68.
12Aristotle, The Poetics, trans. Ingram Bywater (Oxford: Clarendon, 1909),9.
13
significance in Bacon's use of the term relies on the judgment passed on the "tragic hero"
by society. When seen as neither morally superior or inferior, the Pope becomes just a
human being, a person susceptible to pain and no closer to God than anyone else.
Bacon's papal variations present his audience with a different depiction of the Pope than
the traditional propagandistic "official" portrait program controlled and commissioned by
the Papacy; Bacon's Pope has no actual power or spiritual authority.13 Much like his
friend Alberto Giacometti's Walking Man II (1960) (Figure 6), Bacon's lone Pope
simultaneously evokes virtuous, humbling, and disturbing reactions.
Interestingly, Giacometti copied Velazquez' Pope Innocent X in a sketch during
1936 (Figure 7). In contrast to Bacon's project, Giacometti paid attention to the
"original" painting and attempted to replicate Velazquez' naturalism. He concentrated on
the face and the psychology of man, evidenced by the stem look and multiple lines that
indicate depth and perspective on the head of the Pope. 14 Bacon's papal variations differ
from Giacometti's because they do not replicate a naturalistic figurative depiction
prioritizing mimesis. Distinctions in their divergent approaches to Velazquez' portrait are
important, given the art-historical canon's grouping of both artists as Post-War
expressionists (a classification that Bacon personally disapproved of, in regards to his
artistic identity). 15 Bacon and Giacometti's engagement with Velazquez' portrait
13 More information on the relationship between Bacon and the genre of "official" seated papal portraits
will be provided in Chapter 3.
14 Michel Archimbaud, Francis Bacon in Conversation (London: Phaidon, 1993), 70-71. In this text, Bacon
claimed that Giacometti was "not only among the greatest draughtsman of our time but among the greatest
ofall time."
15 Gale and Stephens, Francis Bacon.
14
prioritize and appropriate different visual elements and thereby, point to Bacon's
interaction with the painting as conceptually guided rather than mimetically inspired.
While many of Bacon's paintings use the word "sketch" or "study" in their title,
such as Study for the Head ofa Screaming Pope (1952) (Figure 8), Study for a Pope
(1955) (Figure 9), and Study (Imaginary Portrait ofPope Pius XII) (1955) (Figure 10),
their visual nature ties more closely to a completed work. 16 The artist's papal variations
function as sketches because they were part of a continuing series that never fully
satisfied his personal goals. Bacon despairingly claimed that the variations were "a
failure."]? His devaluing of the series emphasizes the variations' role as an interest that
he returned to in the hope of achieving a particular vision. Despite the papal portraits'
similar appearance to unfinished work evidenced by their sparse backgrounds and light
white perspectival lines, Bacon's paintings of popes employ techniques that allude to
sketches to improve their efficacy. The lack of detail in the background and warped
perspective bolster the pope as the visual focal point. All the popes in Bacon's series can
be linked by the high level of attention given to their faces in comparison to the rest of
the canvas.
Significantly, Bacon's papal variations are based off of photographic
reproductions ofVe1<izquez' Pope Innocent X. Bacon stated in regards to this practice, "I
16 David Sylvester, Looking Back at Francis Bacon (London: Thames and Hudson, 2000), 189. Sylvester
comments in his sixth bullet point on conventions in Bacon's painting "So there are studies from, studies
for, studies of, studies after, as if to say that at least some of the works were preliminary sketches for more
definitive statements. What is in fact being said is that the artist wishes all his works to be regarded as
provisional."
17 David Sylvester, The Brutality ofFact: Interviews with Francis Bacon (London: Thames and Hudson,
1987),71.
15
became obsessed by this painting and I bought photograph after photograph of it.,,18 His
words assert his primary fixation with the photographs of the work over the "original"
painting. Numerous leaves bare the physical wear and tear of7 Reece Mews and Bacon's
consultation. Books, tom-out pages, and photographs formed new compositions by being
painted over, accidently splattered on, and written on. Significantly, the artist further
restricted his interaction by opting against seeing the "original" painting during the years
of producing the papal works. Bacon's deliberate decision to avoid the portrait firsthand
made him reluctant to even enter the Galleria Doria Pamphili in Rome, where the
painting and a copy of it hangs. 19
Bacon's statements, avoidance behavior, and repetitious activity beg the
following questions. What purpose did Bacon's collection of multiple images of
Ve1<izquez' Pope Innocent X serve? What was he trying to achieve? How are the papal
variations similar and different from one another? And, finally, why did he ultimately
consider them to be a "failure"? This chapter works to answer these questions through
contextualizing the creation of the papal portraits, performing a formal visual analysis of
key papal works, creating a typology of the kinds of papal variations, and exploring the
meaning of the portraits' iconography.
18 Ibid.
19 Bacon was in Rome in 1954 and did not visit the Galleria Doria Pamphili. However, in 1991, a year
before his death, Bacon did encounter the Velazquez portrait firsthand. Curiously, there is little information
on his reaction to the portrait or any statements as to why he chose to finally see it. It is important to note
that by 1991 he had stopped making papal portraits for twenty years. The family name Pamphili can also be
spelled Pamphilj.
16
Overview of Papal Variations
This nearly obsessive series resulted in forty-four oil paintings, in addition to an unknown
number of destroyed works, works on paper, and preparatory pieces. The series includes
many of Bacon's well-known paintings such as Study after Velazquez's Portrait ofPope
Innocent X(1953) (Figure 3) and Figure with Meat (1954) (Figure 11). Harrison contends
that the artist began his papal depictions in 1946 while vacationing in Monte Carlo.
Displeased with these works, Bacon subsequently destroyed them.2o Due to the artist's
obliteration of the paintings and the works' lack of public viewing, little can be discerned
concerning the first group of papal variations. The earliest surviving papal variation,
Head VI (Figure 12) dates to 1949.21 Bacon's last extant papal portrait, Study ofRed
Pope, 1962 (Figure 13), was completed in 1971. While Bacon's painting was often serial
and appropriated from other artists' work, such as Vincent van Gogh's The Painter on the
Road to Tarascon (1888), no subject can compete with his engagement with the
Velazquez portrait.22 Schmied wrote of Bacon's appropriation in comparison with other
artists in the art- historical canon: "Bacon's fascination with Velazquez's portrait of
Innocent X must surely be without parallel in the history of art; as an instance of
obsession with a specific picture by another major artist, it surpasses even van Gogh's
preoccupation with Delacroix or Picasso's variations on Grunewald.,,23 Read as such,
20 Harrison, In Camera, 44.
21 Head VI implies at least five other works within the series. The group included a range of figurative
motifs, but, only Head VI referenced Vehizquez' Pope Innocent X.
22 Brendan Prendeville, "Varying the Self: Bacon's Versions of van Gogh," Oxford Art Journal 27 (2004):
23-42.
23 Schmied, Francis Bacon: Commitment and Conflict, 17.
17
Bacon's papal variations occupy a unique position in the history of art and engage issues
particular to appropriation.
Typology of Papal Variations
Outlining a typology of Bacon's papal portraits is important due to the lack of clarity in
the classification and organization of Bacon's oeuvre. Rothenstein and Alley's 1964
catalogue raisonne unfortunately is now outdated and incomplete (Bacon produced art
until his death in 1992).24 Bacon's destruction of his work, in addition to newly-found
preparatory sketches and works on paper, create further challenges to interpreting his art
in a cohesive thematic manner.25 As a public figure that self-fashioned his public persona
as a bohemian, he denied any significance in traditional sketch work. He claimed that at
times he sketched but that the final image presented itself to him on the canvas as ifby
luck or chance.26 However, Bacon did create loose sketches, collect and contain disparate
24 Alley and Rothenstein, Francis Bacon. The Estate of Francis Bacon website provides up-to-date
information regarding the research and publishing of the catalogue raisonne. For more information, consult
http://www.francis-bacon.com/news/?c=Catalogue-Raisonne.
25 Some of these works on paper have been controversial in their attribution to Bacon. One of the artist's
neighbors Barry Joule presented a collection of works on paper to the Tate Museum. The museum refused
to accept the gift claiming that they were uncertain if they were authentically Bacon. After the artist's death
in 1992 many have come forward with materials from his studio, and even garbage in hopes of profiting
financially from his fame. The Irish Museum of Modern Art held an exhibition of the works, now known as
the "X Album." Two publications came from the "X Album" findings: David Alan Mellor, Barry Joule,
Richard Hamilton, and Declan McGonagle, The Barry Joule Archive: Works on Paper Attributed to
Francis Bacon (Dublin: Irish Museum of Modern Art, 2000); and Mark Sladen and John Hoole, Bacon's
Eye: Works on Paper Attributed to Francis Bacon from the Barry Joule Archive, ed. Georgia Mazower
(London: 21 Publishing, 2001).
26 Sylvester, The Brutality ofFact, 16-17. Bacon claimed in interviews that he wanted to allow accidents to
happen to his paintings. In her essay, "Chance and the Tradition of Art in Francis Bacon's Work" Barbara
Steffen examines Bacon's early ties to Surrealism. Surrealist interaction with chance and employment of
the self-conscious could have contributed to Bacon's consistent statements that uphold accident, chance,
and chaos as contributing factors to his paintings. Steffen articulates the element of chance in Bacon's work
through a thematic discussion of the white blotch. In many of his works, including some of his papal
portraits, Bacon placed a white blotch of paint on the canvas. The blotch of paint appears to be situated due
18
images, and destroy work that he felt seemed too contrived. It seems as if Bacon was
more concerned with constructing a fa<;;ade that appeared to be based on chance
operations than fully allowing randomness to function fully. However, the role of chance
cannot be completely discarded. It connected him to a tradition of artists who reinvented
modes of representation and provided for unlikely juxtapositions and undoubtedly caused
some alterations to his final painting. In a related activity, Bacon's paintings rely on
controlled chaos.27 He supplied the container (7 Reece Mews) in which juxtapositions of
many kinds of visual material such as film stills, surgical studies, personal photographs,
and reproductions of famous paintings took place. His construction of controlled chance
in the site of his small studio led to the repetition of iconographic markers in his oeuvre.
Thus, the papal variations hold many visual connections to his other paintings. Bacon
worked on the papal portraits over a twenty-five year time span. Such a long engagement
likely caused Bacon to change his expectations and interaction with Velazquez' Pope
Innocent X He even reflected that his disappointment in the papal series was in
hindsight, which suggests that he had different intentions regarding the whole series at
to chance-normally in distracting locations such as on the face. Bacon attributed the blotch to purely
chance. He saw tossing a blob of paint onto the canvas as a way of letting accident playa significant role in
the completed work. However, scholars such as Sylvester have pointed out the 'conscious manipulation' of
Bacon's process. The use of controlled chance recalls the work of American Abstract Expressionist action
painter Jackson Pollock, whose drip paintings seemingly use chance but in a controlled and deliberate
manner. Barbara Steffen, "Chance and the Tradition of Art in Francis Bacon's Work," in Francis Bacon
and the Tradition ofArt, eds. Wilfried Seipel, Barbara Steffen and Christoph Vitali (Milan: Skira, 2003),
23-42.
27 For Bacon, controlled chaos relies on accident or chance of images colliding with one another within the
confined space of7 Reece Mews. The artist often referenced the role of chance or accident in his work. Use
of chance in artistic process has a long tradition to collage works such as Kurt Schwitters' Merz works and
Surrealist games, like the exquisite corpse, and artworks.
19
the end of his life distinct from those of the individual paintings at the time they were
created.28
All of Bacon's papal works reference Velazquez' Baroque portrait in terms of
iconography, positioning, and psychological impact on the viewer. Velazquez depicted
Pope Innocent X at a three-quarter view, sternly and cynically addressing the audience.
He sits powerfully in his gilded papal throne wearing crimson and white vestments. Both
of his arms rest on the chair, prominently displaying his papal rings and a paper
document with text attributing the painting to Velazquez.29 Large ears, a sharp nose, and
a furrowed brow supply individualized facial features that reinforce notions of a "true"
mimetic portrait. Velazquez' portrayal fits with Anton Haidacher's account, who
described Pope Innocent X's physical appearance as awkward and unappealing.
According to Anton Haidacher's findings, Pope Innocent X was "tall, gaunt stature, with
small eyes, large feet and sparse beard, his skin colour almost olive green, his head
bare.,,3o
Iconographic Links to Velazquez' Pope Innocent X: Furniture, Vestments and Jewelry
Iconographically consistent with Velazquez' Pope Innocent X, all of Bacon's popes, with
the exception of the flying figure in Study for a Pope, 1955 (Figure 14), sit in a papal
28 Sylvester, The Brutality ofFact, 71.
29 Barbara Steffen, "The Papal Portraits," in Francis Bacon and the Tradition ofArt, eds. Wilfried Seipel,
Barbara Steffen and Christoph Vitali (Milan: Skira, 2003), 116. The inscription on the document reads,
"AHa Santa di Nr Sigre/Innocencio X./Per/Diego de SilvaNelazquez dela Ca/mera di s. Mte Cattca. 1650."
Jose Lopez-Ray, Velazquez, Werkverzeichnis (Cologne, 1999),282.
30 Anton Haidacher, Geschichte der Ptipste in Bildern (Heidelberg: F.H. Kerle Verlag, 1965), 596.
20
throne (ex cathedra).3! Davies' use of the term ex cathedra in his accompanying text for
an exhibition on the 1953 papal portraits speaks specifically to the symbolic power and
authority tied to the throne. Ex cathedra can be interpreted literally and figuratively as a
piece offumiture as well as the position of God's seated mOlial representative on Earth.
Barbara Steffen pushed the link further and connected the 1953 series to the sedes
gestatoria or portable papal seat.32 Steffen's usage stresses Bacon's appropriation of
Velazquez' Pope Innocent X. Just as Bacon has removed the Baroque portrait and leader
from its initial context, the papal throne and authority therein has been effectively
appropriated through the portable nature of the sedes gestatoria. The papal seat
designates the power and authority of the Pope. Agostino Paravicini-Bagliani emphasizes
the significance of papal chairs as legitimizers of partriarchical and religious authority of
a newly appointed pope. 33 Language used to describe, empower, and organize the
Catholic Church utilizes the powerful symbolism of the throne. For example, the Holy
See literally refers to the bishop's seat. This seat connotes the role of the papacy as
"presiding over, and teaching the Christian community.,,34 Paravicini-Bagliani analyzes
the functional and symbolic differences and similarities between the two types of papal
thrones: the sedes stercorata (stone seat) and the porphirecticae (porphyry seat).35
31 Davies, Francis Bacon: The Papal Portraits of1953, 11. As Davies explained the meaning of ex
cathedra has a dual meaning. Literally translated into the cathedral seat it can be read as a piece of furniture
as well as the position of God's seated representative on mortal Earth.
32 Steffen, "The Papal Portraits,"115. Popes were lifted high in crowds on the sedes gestatoria. The
portable and light nature of the chair made it possible to be seen by more people.
33 Agostino Paravicini-Bagliani, The Pope's Body (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 2000) 44-45.
34 HarperCollins Encyclopedia ofCatholicism , 1181.
35 Paravicini-Bagliani, The Pope's Body, 44-45. According to Paravicini-Bagliani, the stone throne's
symbolic significance is sustained through official books on papal ceremonial decorum and a passage from
21
Bacon's popes sit on two kinds of chairs that parallel Paravincini-Bagliani's designations:
an ornate gilded chair with finials or a square chair with a lack of decorative details.
Bacon's use of the gilded carved papal seat in works such as Portrait ofa
Cardinal I (Pope I), (1955) (Figure 15) recalls the fonn of the sedes stercorata. In the
painting, Bacon relies on the audience understanding the throne as papal. The two large
glistening finials signal the prestige of the Papacy and flank the seated figure, who
appears as more of a businessman than a pope due to his contemporary clothing. 36
Paravicini-Bagliani wrote, "The significance of this symbol of humility, perhaps the most
radical symbol ever applied to the Roman pontiff (by means of the connection between
the seat and the word stercus, meaning dung, mud, filth, and even excrement), is obvious.
Having reached the summit of grandeur and wealth, the pope was obliged to recall his
basic human condition and to humble himself.,,3? Visually, sedes stercorata recalled
imperial thrones through their ornate carvings and motifs that stressed religion's elevated
character, defeating evil through the power and mercy of God.38 Bacon's 1960 variation
Seated Figure (Red Cardinal) (Figure 16) uses the porphirecticae as a supportive stilt.
The thick purple, simplified slabs add stability and weight that visually ground the
blurred human form. Bacon's use of the minimal throne form signaled the Pope's vested
authority due to the richness of porphyry, while compositionally securing the audience's
focus on the central figure.
1 Samuel 2:8. The biblical passage articulates the strength and intent of God. It reads that God, "raises up
the poor from the dust; he lifts the needy from the ash heap, to make them sit with princes, and inherit a
seat of honor."
36 Ibid.
37 Ibid.
38 Ibid.
22
Each of Bacon's human subjects can be additionally identified as a pope through
his vestments. The papal cap with three ridges (officially called a carnauro) provides a
consistent link for the majority of Bacon's popes. The carnauro functions as an atiic1e of
clothing that physically protects the Pope's head from the cold, but also signifies the
superior intellect of the Pope and marks his position as the "head" of the Catholic
Church. Bacon's early papal portrait Pope I (1951) (Figure 17) emphasizes the cap by
elongating the violet carnauro. Distorting the proportions of the papal cap caricature
Pope Innocent X's long face and recall the formal three-tier papal tiara (a vestment not
depicted by Bacon but emblematic of the grandeur of the papacy). Rather than alluding to
articles of papal costume like the tiara, Bacon's papal portraits directly follow Velazquez'
Pope Innocent Xby wearing a crimson red outer short cape garment, or mozzetta. Bacon,
however, varies the color of the cape, employing violet and blue in addition to red. In
Catholicism, the deep red in Study for Portrait ofPope Innocent X (1965) (Figure 18) can
symbolically recall the Passion of Christ. The deep color purple, such as in Figure Seated
(The Cardinal) (1955) (Figure 19) references imperial power, whereas blue tends to refer
to the Virgin Mary. In Velazquez' portrait, white undergarments emphasize the
innocence, humility, and purity of Christ's death on the cross, especially in contrast to the
brightly colored, rich, and typically red mozzetta. Bacon's papal variations continue to
use the contrast of white undergarment and colored mozzetta. In so doing, the artist
connects his work iconographically with the tradition of seated papal portraits.
Keeping with traditional papal portrait iconography, Velazquez' portrait depicts
Pope Innocent X wearing a topaz ring on his right hand.39 The topaz ring is a long-
39 Steffen, "The Papal Portraits," 116.
23
standing symbol of papal authority. For instance, Titian's Pope Paul Farnese (after
1546) (Figure 20) wears a similar square topaz ring. Sebastiano del Piombo's studio's
painting of Pope Clement VII (1531/32) (Figure 21) placed three large rings on the Pope,
two of which are topaz. Rings symbolized the marriage and unity between the Pope and
the Church as well as the intimate relationship between Pope and Christ,4o Additionally
the scale and opulence of the ring spoke to the wealth and authority of the papal state.
Bacon's inclusion of the ring, like the rich furniture and clothing, ironically plays with
the audience's expected perception of the power and wealth ofthe Papacy. While
decadence and prestige are symbolically present in the ring, the characteristics of the
Pope and the stark environment dispute this contention. The Pope appears weak and the
background provides no details of place, let alone grandeur.
Bacon's Sub-Series of Popes and Interest in Sequencing
While the papal variations can be regarded as a unified series, their production occurred
at different times in Bacon's career that also allows them to be read independently or in
sub-series. For example, some of the paintings maintain stylistic unity, were completed
over a short period of time, and were created for a particular exhibition or showing.
However, an equal number function as independent works within a time of artistic
production predominately dedicated to a different subject, such as Bacon's triptych
works, wrestlers, animals, self-portraits or portraits of friends. Due to these differences in
40 HarperCollins Encyclopedia o/Catholicism.
24
time and means of conception and construction, each group needs to be properly
contextualized and formally analyzed.
The earliest surviving Bacon papal variation is Head VI (1949) (Figure 12).
Lawrence Gowing wrote of the contemporary response to the work:
The shock ofthe picture, when it was seen with a whole series of heads in
Bacon's exhibition at the Hanover Gallery in London at Christmas 1949, was
indescribable.... It was everything unpardonable. The paradoxical appearance at
once of pastiche and iconoclasm was indeed one of Bacon's most original
strokes. The picture remains as one of his masterpieces and one ofthe least
conventional, least foreseeable pictures of the twentieth century.41
Head IV encloses the purple Pope in a box and focuses on the bust and face of the Pope
that disappears and dissolves like steam on the canvas. Despite the innovation of the
papal portraits, displayed in Head IV, Bacon found himself discontent with his early
papal works, so much so that after their showing he destroyed the initial three paintings
created for the Hanover Gallery in London.42 Bacon also destroyed his Untitled (Study
After Velazquez 11) from 1950. However, recently Study after Velazquez (1950) (Figure
22) and Study after Velazquez 11 (1950) (Figure 23) surfaced.43 These two paintings stand
apart from other papal variations for their use of veils, or what Bacon coined
"shuttering.,,44 The Pope sits in a centrally located throne, like the majority of those in the
larger series however, the clarity of the figure is further blurred with the inclusion of
repeating vertical striations that rain down upon the sitter.
4\ Lawrence Gowing and Sam Hunter. Francis Bacon (London: Thames and Hudson Ltd., 1989).
42 Steffen, "The Papal Portraits," 118.
43 Davies, Francis Bacon, 16-17. Davies discusses the possible reasons why these works remained hidden.
44 Gale and Stephens, Francis Bacon.
25
In the fall of 1951, Bacon began a third series of popes based on a photograph
capturing Pope Pius XII seated during a public ceremony.45 The small group included
Pope I (Figure 17), Pope II (Pope Shouting) (Figure 24), and Pope III (Pope with Fan
Canopy) (Figure 25). Interestingly, Pope II (Pope Shouting) was the first work finished in
the small group. Pope II (Pope Shouting) was followed by Pope I and then Pope III
(Pope with Fan Canopy).46 The numbering and attention given to the titles outside of
their actual chronological completion supports a sequential reading. Pope I, Pope II
(Pope Shouting) and Pope III (Pope with Fan Canopy) sit in a chair atop a raised
platform. An elliptical line intersects the foundation on which the Pope's throne rests,
spatially suggesting the curved form of the apse of a church.47 Positioned asymmetrically,
the Pope remains on the right side of the canvas in all three paintings indicating the
consistency of the location, figure, and time. Read sequentially according to their titles,
the Pope, at first, leers at the audience, screams out toward them, and ends the interaction
by violently writhing in pain with eyes cast away. The paintings break the viewer's
interaction with the Pope into momentary fragments. Pope III (Pope with Fan Canopy),
now destroyed, is the only one of Bacon's papal variations to include a canopy. The
canopy does, however, encroach upon the figure in a similar way as Bacon's umbrellas.
Like the umbrellas, the canopy marks a sacred location, focuses the viewer's attention on
the Pope, and hides the Pope from direct interaction with the viewer.
45 Steffen, "The Papal Portraits," 118.
46 Alley and Rothenstein, Francis Bacon, 54.
47 Steffen, "The Papal Portraits,"119. Steffen claims that the ellipse lines reference the papal apartment.
26
In 1999, the Museum of Contemporary Art, San Diego organized "Francis Bacon:
The Papal Portraits of 1953." The exhibition brought together a series of eight papal
portraits: Study for Portrait 1- VIII (Figure 26_33).48 During the summer of 1953 over a
two-week span, Bacon quickly painted the works for an upcoming autumn exhibition in
New York at the Dur1acher Brothers Gallery.49 Surprisingly, the Museum of
Contemporary Art, San Diego's exhibition marks the first time all of the paintings had
been exhibited together. The Dur1acher Brothers' show only featured five of the
variations; Study for Portrait II (Figure 27), Study for Portrait IV (Figure 29), and Study
for Portrait VI (Figure 31) were excluded.50 Davies claims that the initial painting Study
for Portrait 1 (Figure 26) began as a portrait of David Sylvester. Much like the work of
Bacon's artistic peer and friend Giacometti, the portrait changed as the sittings
continued.51 By Sylvester's fourth sitting, the portrait meshed with Velazquez's Pope
Innocent X 52 While the figure sits cloaked in papal vestments and the sharp elongated
face mimic the features of Pope Innocent X, Sylvester's deep-set eyes make direct
contact with the viewer. Bacon's involuntary behavior attests to his deep-seeded interest
in Pope Innocent X and the role of spontaneity in the artist's process.
Each of the portraits is almost identical in size and set in a dark vacant
background loosely demarcated by lightly sketched yellow and white lines. Long lines of
48 Davies, Francis Bacon, 14. The 1953 grouping is the largest deliberately cohesive series in Bacon's
career.
49 Ibid. The show was Bacon's first exhibition outside of England.
50 Ibid.
51 James Lord, A Giacometti Portrait (London: Farrar Straus and Giroux, 1980).
52 Davies, Francis Bacon: The Papal Portraits of1953, 14.
27
gold allude to the papal throne and finials. Their consistency in vacant background,
furniture, and fixtures works to unify the series and creates a sequencing effect much like
his earlier series. Photographic materials, such as Eadweard Muybridge's book The
Human Figure in Motion, found in his studio corroborate Bacon's fascination in
sequencing or breaking down one event into distinct parts. Muybridge's motion studies
(Figure 34) break each movement into a separate visual sequence represented by a single
photograph. Books of film stills, photo booth photographs and print contact sheets, all
items found in 7 Reece Mews, operate similarly. According to Davies, Bacon purposely
painted Study for Portrait I- VIII as a series, deliberately linking the images to create
"shifting sequences.,,53 To support a sort of narrative involving the same Pope in a range
of moods and activity, all of the paintings place the figure at approximately the same
height on the canvas and use the same proportional scale. Consistency in the size of the
popes continues throughout his career. Each variation, except for Study for Portrait I
(Figure 26), incorporates a gold tassel dangling awkwardly around the Pope. The tassel
continues to appear in Bacon's variations and relates to traditional seated papal portraits
that depict a curtain in the background. The curtain references the interior of the papal
chambers, creates the feeling of a privileged interaction between the papal sitter and the
artist, and reinforces the Pope's official capacity. In the same year of the series'
production, Sam Hunter wrote, "Technically, Bacon has been audacious enough to try for
one continuous cinematic impression in his popes-an entirely new kind of painting
experience. He combines the monumentality of the great art of the past with the
53 Ibid,IS.
28
'modernity' of the film strip.,,54 Use of the curtain in Bacon's papal variations combines
elements of performance found in the cinema and the propagandistic "performance" of
the Papacy. Playfully intermingling the two, Bacon critiques the official nature of the
Pope, the Papacy, and the Roman Catholic Church by merging the modem context of
film with a potentially outdated religious system.
The first portrait in the series, Study for Portrait I parallels Velazquez' Portrait of
Pope Innocent X and the tradition of official seated papal portraits most closely. Bacon's
pope sits at a three-quarter view directly glaring at the viewer. Cloaked in violet
vestments and wearing wire-rim glasses, the pope dissolves into the non-descript black
background and the unprimed marigold expanse spanning the bottom third of the canvas.
His blurred pale white face and missing extremities further support the physical
dissolution of the figure.
Studyfor Portrait II (Figure 27) presents the pope in profile. Bacon's employment
of the profile view foreshadows the 1964 working photographic documents made by John
Deakin of George Dyer in Soho (Figure 35) that led to works such as Study for Head of
George Dyer (1967) (Figure 36).55 The figure's bright white collar of his undergarments
and the stark black background causes the head to encroach on the picture plane.
Movement is implied through the now asymmetrical distribution of the head and the
finials. Purple vestments continue to hide the unformed body. Hands, arms, and legs are
not visibly present. Space and perspective are complicated by the illogical rendering of
sketchy white lines and tubular gold strokes. Unlike the first portrait in the series, Study
54 Sam Hunter, "Francis Bacon: An Acute Sense of Impasse," Art Digest 28 (October 15, 1953), 16.
55 Harrison, In Camera, 182-183.
29
for Portrait II tums away from the viewer with his eyes closed in a dismissive manner.
Davies claims, of the next painting in the sequence, that the figure in Study for Portrait
III (Figure 28) "appears guarded in confronting the painter.,,56 The blurring of the face
makes it difficult to read the mood of the figure. The closed mouth and eyeglasses convey
a feeling of timidness recalling Davies' assertion. The lack of movement, scream, and
facial drama present a more formal, static, and quiet pope.
Study for Portrait IV (Figure 29) depicts more of the gold tubular constructs than
the other works in the 1953 series. A large gold, rectangular outline extends above the
finals on the throne. The shape and positioning recall the gilded frames surrounding
Bacon's papal works. Bacon wanted each of his works to be mounted under thick glass
and with traditional gilded frames. 57 The pope is situated within the picture plane, and
then reframed in the second gold rectangular construction. The right hand of the pope
touches his nose and face possibly alluding to an involuntary action such as a sneeze. The
blurred rendering of the face extends to the hand that ghostly and ethereally floats
beneath the papal garb. Study for Portrait IV is the only painting in the 1953 series that
depicts legs. Light, straggly lines curve and extend below the right hipline of the pope.
The fifth portrait is the only one in the Durlacher Brothers' series with an
additional parenthetical designation. Study for Portrait V (Cardinal V) (Figure 30)
56 Davies, Francis Bacon: The Papal Portraits of1953,15.
57 Ibid, 19. Bacon's use of rich gilded frames link him to earlier art and artists. It also forced viewers to
confront their own reflection in the glass. The opulence ofthe gold frames also recalls Bacon's outdated
states that mimicked the heavy, decadent Aristocratic furnishings of his youth.
30
creepily smiles out at the viewer. 58 His eyes are fully blurred adding to the audience's
feeling of discomfort. Drapery is implied through sloping lavender lines intersecting at
the Pope's midsection. A polygonal shape formed by the gold lines contains the figure on
the canvas. This polygonal form shifts slightly in Study for Portrait VI (Figure 31). This
minor alteration in composition again references the sequential nature of the series and
the portrayal of fragmented movement of the same pope throughout time. The Pope's
eyes roll backward as he sits motionless. Davies interprets this pope as attempting to
speak. 59 Dark patches on the cloak give this pope more depth than the earlier paintings in
the 1953 series.
Study for Portrait VII (Figure 32) portrays the Pope fully screaming. His
shoulders lift up as if caught by surprise. Dotted lines streak off the edge of his left
shoulder giving a feeling of hastened movement. The polygonal form overlaps the papal
figure negating the depth and weight established in the previous portrait. The culminating
portrait in the series Study for Portrait VIII (Figure 33) most fully breaks from
Vehizquez' Pope Innocent X. The Pope raises his arms defiantly at the viewer, signaling
disgust.
Bacon's Iconographic Markers: Raw Meat, Owls and Monkeys, and the Scream
In addition to the 1949, 1951, and 1953 series, many of the papal variations can be
categorized according to three iconographic markers: raw meat, animals (owls and
58 Ibid, 15. Davies relates the Pope's teeth to a photograph of Teddy Roosevelt laughing. While visually the
images can be linked, Davies does not provide any information on the origin of the Roosevelt image and if
it was found in 7 Reece Mews.
59 Ibid.
31
monkeys), and the scream. Two papal variations, Figure with Meat, (1954) (Figure 11)
and Pope II, (1960) (Figure 37), juxtapose the Pope with raw meat. The use of meat in
figurative painting often serves a moralizing function. Seeing depictions of meat causes
viewers to question their own identity, short lifespan, and hierarchical position in the
food chain. While humans commonly identify themselves as superior to animals, both
animals and humans are, at their foundation, simply meat. 60 The clear lines between
animal and human, savage and civilized blur. Gilles De1euze writes of Bacon's use of
meat imagery: "Meat is not dead flesh; it retains all the sufferings and assumes all the
colors of living flesh. It manifests such convulsive pain and vulnerability, but also such
delightful innovation, color, and acrobatics. Bacon does not say, "Pity the beasts," but
rather that every man who suffers is a piece of meat.,,61 Bacon's papal variations rely on
this interrelation between raw meat and the suffering of humanity. The physical pain of
the Popes asserts their primary role as meat over that of religious authority. The artist
emphasized this connection in an interview with Sylvester. Bacon said: "I've always been
very moved by pictures of slaughterhouses and meat, and to me they belong very much to
the whole thing ofthe Crucifixion...Of course, we are meat, we are potential carcasses. If
I go into a butcher shop I always think it's surprising that I wasn't there instead of the
animal.,,62 Bacon's interest in raw meat began at an early age. In the 1920s, he convinced
a childhood friend to go with him to examine hanging meat cuts at local butcher shops in
60 Nick Fiddes. Meat: A Natural Symbol (London: Routledge, 1991).
61 Gilles Deleuze, Francis Bacon: The Logic ofSensation, trans. Daniel W. Smith (Minneapolis: University
of Minnesota Press, 2003), 21.
62 Sylvester. The Brntality ofFact, 23, 46.
32
Sallins, County Kildare, Ireland.63 Many different kinds of photographs ofmeat were
found in Bacon's studio at 7 Reece Mews. In addition to photographs, Bacon collected
reproductions of works of art that depicted raw meat, such as Chaim Soutine's Carcass of
Beef (1925) (Figure 38) as well as hand-drawn illustrations of cuts of meat (Figure 39).
Bacon's use of animals, such as owls and primates, functions in the same regard as his
inclusion ofmeat. The animalistic nature of mankind is asserted. In Pope and
Chimpanzee (1962) (Figure 40) the monkey climbs atop the seated Pope. Almost
attacking the religious authority, the monkey obscures a clear visual reading of the cleric.
Movement of the animal, alluded to by bright messy paint, blurs the face and body of the
Pope. The audience reads the power of the primate rather than the authority of the Pope
and Papacy. The decision to depict a primate alongside the Pope also comments on issues
of evolution and religion.
The most reoccurring iconographic element in Bacon's papal portraits is the
figure's expressive scream. Bacon claims that the visual depiction of the scream was
appropriated from Sergei Eisenstein's 1925 film The Battleship Potemkin. According to
Harrison, Bacon could have seen the film while working as an interior designer, possibly
at its debut showing in London in November of 1929.64 During the film's climax on the
Odessa steps, a nurse gets shot directly in her right eye while descending the stairs.
Imagery of the scream combines different sensory elements. Bacon's painted canvas, a
silent art object, depicts a human expression loaded with auditory readings. The lack of
sound and the intensity of the open-mouthed scream create a tension that freezes the
63 Doreen Molony, "Unclaimed genius from county Kildare." The Irish Press, 28 March 1977: 9.
64Harrison, In Camera, 26.
33
interaction. Time stops. The scream shows no sign of ending. The Pope's human outcry,
representative of all mankind, is silenced. Film stills of Battleship Potemkin and other
stills made up a large portion of Bacon's studio image collection (Figure 41). Bacon
openly cited his adoration for the medium of film. He said, "Oh, yes, cinema is great art!
I've often said to myself that I would have liked to been a film director if! hadn't been a
. ,,65pamter.
Stylistic Shifts in Bacon's Papal Variations
Bacon's work can also be categorized according to stylistic shifts. Davies claims that a
stylistic change occurs between Bacon's artwork of the 1940s to the 1950s.66 He
continues by describing Bacon's production in the 1940s as, "closely packed picture
surface, color is solid and harsh, and volume is well modeled and clearly stated.,,67 He
links the instability of surface, form, color, and volume in the 1950s paintings to Bacon's
growing interest in photography and its relationship to documenting issues of movement.
Bacon's papal portraits stylistically evolved, like his other figurative work, into more
fragmented forms. Conventional uniform bodies and space no longer existed by the
1970s. Conceptually fragmentation operates in his artistic process and paintings through
his insistent use of mechanical reproductions, his selection of images, his representation
of the human form, his handling of paint, his studio environment, and his employment of
65Archimbaud, Francis Bacon in Conversation, 16.
66 Hugh Davies, Francis Bacon: The Early and Middle Years, 1928-1958, PhD dissertation (Princeton
University, 1975), 94.
67 Ibid.
34
serial work. Chapter Two presents a larger discussion on the medium ofphotography and
its influence on Bacon's papal portraits.
Perhaps unsurprisingly, Bacon's variations stylistically break from their
seventeenth-century model. Bacon's style ofpainting uses textured, transparent layers of
oil paint on, mainly, the unprimed side of the canvas. His highly expressive and
abstracted figures actively avoid clear visual definition. Situated in a nondescript location
and time, often depicted by Bacon as a black void, his lone figures appear to be
simultaneously static and moving, victim and aggressor, real and unreal, alive and dead.
This maintenance of tension pervades all ofBacon's papal portraits. The artist's impulse
to appropriate from reproductions of Vebizquez' Pope Innocent X resulted in a celebrated
series that combines conflicting concepts and visual traditions that continue to unnerve
viewers of the papal variations. Having given an overview to Bacon's papal variations
and outlined their iconographic and stylistic similarities and differences, this thesis shifts
its analysis to the artist's process and engagement of photography.
CHAPTER III
THE PAPAL PORTRAIT IN THE AGE OF MECHANICAL REPRODUCTION:
BACON'S ARTISTIC PROCESS IN PAINTING HIS PAPAL VARIATIONS
Photography is a tool for dealing with things everybody knows about but isn't attending to. My
photographs are intended to represent something you don't see.
-Emmet Gowin l
One thing which has never been really worked out is how photography has completely altered figurative
painting.
-Francis Bacon2
The Importance of Collection and Photographic Material to Bacon's Process
The pastime ofcollecting material items of significance may be a specifically human
activity. Individuals seek treasured goods as a way to support their identity, remember
special occasions, or directly interact with the physical world around them. German
critical theorist Walter Benjamin (b. 1892-1940) commented on his personal book
collection:
Every passion borders on the chaotic, but the collector's passion borders on the
chaos of memories. More than that: the chance, the fate that suffuse the past
before my eyes are conspicuously present in the accustomed confusion of these
books. For what else is this collection but a disorder to which habit has
accommodated itself to such an extent that it can appear as order?3
1 Susan Sontag, On Photography (New York: Anchor, 1977), 200.
2 Martin Harrison, In Camera: Francis Bacon Photography, Film and the Practice ofPainting (London:
Thames and Hudson, 2005), 87.
3 Walter Benjamin, Illuminations (New York: Schocken, 1968),60.
35
36
This welding of oppositional concepts, in particular disorder and order within a
collector's nostalgic treasures exemplifies Bacon's artistic activity.
While Bacon collected books, of greater interest, due to its peculiarity, variety,
and size, is his collection of visual images.4 The artist amassed a wide range of process
materials or working documents in his infamously chaotic studio and home (Figure 1).
The sheer range and number of objects found within the studio makes it nearly
impossible to discuss them in full. When the Hugh Lane Municipal Art Gallery in Dublin
relocated his small London studio to their exhibition space in August of 1999, their staff
catalogued over 7500 photographs, drawings, newspapers clippings, books, and
miscellaneous items.5 Over 1500 of the pieces catalogued were photographic in nature.
Thus, it can be implied that these photographic materials hold a central position in
regards to Bacon's artistic process.6 The artist's paintings typically meld disparate
physical materials found in his studio to form compositionally unified works and a
recognizable figural subject. Functioning as repetitious fragments, Bacon appropriated
images from photographic sources and mixed them with those images retrieved from his
memory onto the surface of the canvas.
4 The Hugh Lane Gallery documented over 570 books and 1,300 loose pages. Bacon's interest in these
books points to depth of literary and pictorial inspiration. Books offered information, stories, and images
that combined in his studio. For additional information on his collection of books please see the Hugh Lane
Gallery's website on Francis Bacon's Studio:
http://www.hughlane.ie/francis_bacons_studio.php?type=About&heading=Books&rsno=3.
5 Barbara Steffen, "Chance and the Tradition of Art in Francis Bacon's Work," in Francis Bacon and the
Tradition ofArt, eds. Wilfried Seipel, Barbara Steffen and Christoph Vitali (Milan: Skira Editore, 2003),
37.
6 These images have been called "process materials" by Margarita Cappock, director of the Hugh Lane
Municipal Gallery in Dublin, Ireland.
37
Bacon's forty-four papal variations most strongly illustrate his working method of
collection, appropriation, and recollection of fragmented photographic materials. To
create his series of papal portraits, the artist compiled different photographic
reproductions ofVellizquez' Pope Innocent X (Figure 2) from various monographs and
art-historical texts. The Hugh Lane Municipal Gallery's Francis Bacon Database details
the amount and kinds of texts Bacon owned on Vellizquez. The artist collected writings
by Enrique Lafuente Ferrari, Jose LOpez-Rey, Jonathan Brown, Xavier de Salas, Georges
Belmont, Jose Ortega y Gasset, and others pertaining to the Spanish court painter.7 While
Bacon's fascination extended to Velazquez' oeuvre and personality (a point analyzed
further in Chapter Three), his general interest in the artist can be seen in Bacon's
collecting habits. None of the artist's other serial work compares in terms of size, time
frame, and personal fixation with his appropriation ofVellizquez' seventeenth-century
papal portrait.8 John Russell points out in his biography Francis Bacon that, "he [Bacon]
was 'influenced' by Velazquez, however, the influence was more subtle than the mere
borrowing of a motif.,,9 This thesis follows in the footsteps of Russell's statement and
examines the intricacies of Bacon's papal variations by analyzing his unique artistic
process, its reliance of mechanization, and the resulting consequences of repetition and
fragmentation in relationship to issues of originality.
7 Hugh Lane Gallery, Francis Bacon Studio Database, consulted in July 2008.
8 Bacon's appropriation of van Gogh occurs on a much smaller level. The paintings within the Van Gogh
series are the only other paintings by Bacon that directly and deliberately appropriate from an artist in the
art historical canon. For more information, see Brendan Prendeville, "Varying the Self: Bacon's Versions
of van Gogh," Oxford Art Journal 27 (2004): 23-42.
9 John Russell, Francis Bacon (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1979), 46.
38
Interestingly, much of the artist's working process crystallized during around
1946. While vacationing in Monte Carlo, Bacon started to compile a variety of
photographic images, painted on the unprimed side of his canvas, used fabrics such as
corduroy for the texturing of paint, and destroyed some of his work, in particular his early
works. lO The artist's strong interest in Pope Innocent X continued well into his later
period; in 1971, he finished his last papal portrait, Second Version of 'Study for the Red
Pope 1962' (Figure 42).
Bacon's Avoidance of the Velazquez Painting
Significantly, Bacon opted to encounter Pope Innocent X only through mechanized
reproductions. Despite having the opportunity to see Pope Innocent X and other
portrayals of the Pope (formerly known as Giovanni Battista Pamphili) firsthand in their
initial context at the Galleria Doria Pamphili, Bacon purposely avoided the collection. In
1954, he changed his travel itinerary and ventured to Rome for two months instead of
attending the XXVII Biennale in Venice. I I
Archimbaud claims in his chronology that, while in Rome, Bacon did not visit the
Galleria Doria Pamphili due to illness. 12 However, it seems unlikely that Bacon missed
10 Harrison, In Camera.
11 Reasons as to why Bacon changed his trip are unknown. He traveled with friends throughout Italy during
this time. Regardless of the reason, his lack of commitment to attending the XXVII Biennale supports his
identity as a bohemian, and, at the time, an outsider to the international art community.
12 Michel Archimbaud, Francis Bacon in Conversation (London: Phaidon, 1993), 177. Bacon supports this
with his statements to Archimbaud. However, in Bacon's interviews with David Sylvester, the artist does
not mention being ill at all and discusses his avoidance ofthe work as deliberate. His behavior likely
supports Sylvester's findings rather than Archimbaud's claims. Archimbaud's interview was conducted
toward the end of the artist's life. It is probable that Bacon hoped to sidestep discussion on his fascination
with the Velazquez portrait.
39
seeing the work firsthand simply on account of sickness. According to Miguel Zugaza,
the current Director of the Museo del Prado, Bacon frequently requested the museum to
privately open for him on days in which the facilities were closed to the public. 13 The
Prado's renowned collection ofVehizquez' paintings demanded Bacon's attention to such
an extent that he made extra efforts to see the works firsthand. It logically follows that the
artist would have visited Vehizquez' Pope Innocent X regardless of illness. His lifestyle
allowed for frequent travel, and extending his trip or planning an additional holiday
would have been relatively easy. Additionally, Bacon's lifelong struggle with asthma, the
most probable cause of his illness, rarely prevented him from leading an adventurous
life.14 Finally, Bacon's fascination and related activity with the Prado's collection of
paintings by Velazquez and of Velazquez' Pope Innocent X are noticeably divergent.
Thus, seeing Velazquez' art in person and appropriating reproductions of Velazquez'
portraits operate differently for Bacon. What did the avoidance of the "original" painting
and the use of mechanical reproductions of Velazquez' Pope Innocent X alongside other
photographic images offer Bacon?
Some art historians note possible psychological impulses as the origin of Bacon's
fascination with Pope Innocent X. Wieland Schmied wrote, "He seemed afraid of
encountering the original, as ifhe were insufficiently prepared for the experience of
seeing it with his own eyes, or as if he felt unworthy of the privilege. It is also possible
that he was afraid of being disappointed; perhaps his mental image of the painting was so
powerful that he was unwilling to risk a first-hand encounter which might diminish its
13 Agence France Presse, "Bacon exhibition to open at Madrid's Prado," Yahoo! News, January 30, 2009.
14 Bacon drank heavily, gambled, kept odd hours, and smoked cigarettes.
40
stature.,,15 While desire and fear are often interrelated in psychoanalytic texts, Schmied's
arguments do not fit with Bacon's actual practice. It is extremely doubtful that the artist
found himself "unworthy of the privilege" when he never showed any signs of reluctance
to see other paintings by Velazquez in person. Prominent art institutions and scholars
regard Pope Innocent X as an excellent example of Baroque portraiture. Sir Joshua
Reynolds thought that Vehizquez' portrait of the Pope was one of the most impressive
paintings ever created. 16 Even so, other paintings by Vehizquez, such as Las Meninas
(1656), are seen as equally, if not more noteworthy. If Bacon felt confident enough to see
the Velazquez pieces at the Prado, he would have felt just as confident at the Galleria
Doria Pamphili. 17 Curiously, Bacon claimed that Las Meninas was his personal favorite
of Velazquez' paintings. 18
Schmied's assertion that Bacon "was unwilling to risk a first-hand encounter
which might diminish its stature" is also flawed. The architecture, curation of artworks,
and the portrait's intended reception at the Galleria Doria Pamphili aggrandize the
painting and aim to recreate the "original" context surrounding the piece. The Galleria
Doria Pamphili places the Velazquez painting at the pinnacle of its collection. Their
holdings boast numerous portrayals of the Pope in both paintings and sculptural busts.
These artworks, by means of their placement and textual/auditory didactics, anticipate the
15 Wieland Schmied, Francis Bacon: Commitment and Conflict (Munich: Prestel-Verlag, 1996), 19.
16 Dawson W. Carr, Velazquez, exh. cat.(London: National Gallery, 2006), 221.
17 After all, it is Velazquez' work Las Meninas that Pablo Picasso appropriated fifty-eight times in 1957,
piqued Eve Sussman's interest to create the 2004 film 89 Second~ at Alcazar and sparked much art-
historical curiosity and debate by such thinkers as Michel Foucault, Leo Steinberg, and Svetlana Alpers.
18 Harrison, In Camera, 89.
41
Velazquez portrait. Visitors walk down hallways covered in elaborate art and decoration
while they listen to one of Giovanni Battista Pamphili's heirs discuss his family's rich
collection. Emphasizing issues of originality, the man's voice notes the collection's
uniquely unified nature; the family's holdings are the same as they were in the
seventeenth century. In 1651, Pope Innocent X specified that the art, furnishings, and
other objects of value or aesthetic significance not legally be sold or removed from the
premises. 19 The slightly smaller Copy After Velazquez' Pope Innocent X (Figure 43)
hangs in the precise wall location of the "original" portrait. In so doing, the Galleria
Doria Pamphili encourages their contemporary audience to relive the environment of
seventeenth-century Rome while simultaneously allowing their curators the freedom to
position the "original" portrait in a more privileged location.
Since 1927, Velazquez' portrait ofPope Innocent X sits partitioned off in an
alcove at the end of the hall. Encircled with red velvet rope and juxtaposed with a
sculptural bust of the Pope by the Italian artist and architect Gianlorenzo Bernini, the
curation of Velazquez' portrait elevates the painting to the same level of prominence as
one of the most esteemed artists of the Baroque period. The plaque didactic, again
stressing mimetic likeness, points to anecdotes such as Pope Innocent X's shock at the
likeness of Velazquez' portrait and his later ostracization ofBernini and his art from the
papal court.2° According to legend, the Pope exclaimed "troppo vero" after seeing
19 This information was found through an audio didactic supplied by the Galleria Doria Pamphili.
20 Information was found on didactic for Velazquez' Pope Innocent X. The written text was further
expanded in the audio accompaniment.
42
Vehizquez' painting for the first time ("it is too true.,,)21 By using these stories, the
Galleria Doria Pamphili emphasizes the Velazquez portrait as a reflection of mimetic
"truth." The traditional aims of portraiture as a visual replication of "likeness" in tenns of
physical, spiritual, and psychological character bolster Velazquez' success in the eyes of
the Galleria Doria Pamphili's audience. The small architectural space encourages long
intimate looking and comparison. Additionally, the recent memory of the Copy After
Velazquez' Pope Innocent X spurs curiosity on issues of originality. Viewers ponder
questions such as: how is the copy like the "original"? How is Velazquez' painting more
or less successful than Bernini's sculptural bust? What can be deduced about the Pope's
artistic preferences, self-fashioning, and leadership? How realistic or true to life is
Velazquez' portrayal of Pope Innocent X? Analyzing the environment around the
"original" painting and the current installation of the Baroque portrait is crucial to
understanding Bacon's avoidance ofthe space. If seeing the work in person and
interacting with the painting through its reproductions are considered to be separate
activities that supply different advantages and disadvantages, then the reception of the
work by Bacon and the visitors to the Galleria Doria Pamphili should be strikingly
distinct. The Galleria Doria Pamphili encourages their audience to uphold their collection
and the Velazquez portrait on tenns of originality, whereas Bacon's variations and artistic
process question the "truth" behind an "original."
Schmied's conclusion that Bacon did not want to "diminish the stature" of the
Velazquez portrait, while speculative at best, cannot be supported given the attention to
the viewing environment and reception surrounding the painting at the palazzo. The
21 Information from didactic at Galleria Doria Pamphili.
43
"stature" ofVehizquez' Pope Innocent X is only further upheld by the practices and
priorities of the Galleria Doria Pamphili. Pragmatically, Bacon must have found artistic
benefits in avoiding the "original" painting for his appropriation and creation of his series
of papal variations. To address these potential advantages, this chapter turns to
mechanized reproductions Bacon used and the writings of Walter Benjamin, Jean
Baudrilliard, and Gilles Deleuze for their insights on photography and issues of
.. l' 22ongma lty.
Photographic Reproductions of Pope Innocent X as Working Documents
Reproductions of Pope Innocent X allowed the artist to see the work out of context, in
smaller sizes, in different tonalities, and juxtaposed with other kinds of images. While
many of his process materials were serial in nature or collected in multiples, each
individual image displays different deliberate and accidental qualities. For example, Pope
Innocent X Working Document 1 (Figure 44) portrays the painting in black and white.
Paperclips bind together edges, and rips show the wear and tear ofBacon and his
confined studio space. The paper clips fold the image and alter its overall composition.
Pope Innocent X Working Document 2 (Figure 45), despite its similar production in gray,
contains a bluer tint and light markings of paint on the image. Smudges of paint,
fingerprint residue, and creases are most evident in Pope Innocent X Working Document
3 (Figure 46). Streaks of periwinkle paint overwhelm the Pope's face foreshadowing
22 Benjamin, Illuminations; Jean Baudrillard, Simulacra and Simulation, trans. Sheila Faria Glaser (Ann
Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press: 1995); and. Gilles Deleuze, Francis Bacon: The Logic of
Sensation, trans. Daniel W. Smith (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2003).
44
Bacon's blurring of facial details in his papal variations. Pope Innocent X Working
Document 4 (Figure 47) represents one ofa number of images barely altered from its
initial printed condition. These four process documents found in Bacon's studio and
home represent the importance of variety within the collection of reproductions of Pope
Innocent X. How could owning multiple images in a range of conditions, sizes, and
tonalities of the same primary painting benefit Bacon's goals for his series of popes?
Bacon, despite asserting that his process was primarily based on chance, or to use
his word "accident," must have been aware of some of the consequences of his artistic
process.23 The artist worked adamantly to downplay and hide the significant role of
photography in his work. According to Dennis Farr, late in Bacon's career, a researcher
asked the artist if he could view and use his photographic process material as evidence
for his scholarly findings. Bacon responded dramatically and grabbed "all the
photographs and press cuttings that littered his studio floor, bundled them into two plastic
sacks, and made a bonfire of them.,,24 By uncovering the elements that the artist hoped to
hide about his artistic process, new information can be gleaned as to his intentions and
goals for his papal portraits?5
Bacon's use of sketch work and preliminary drawings has been hotly contested.
After the artist's death in Madrid on April 28, 1992, multiple friends and acquaintances
23 Bacon's engagement with chance can be tied to other artistic ventures such as collage, montage, and
automatism.
24 Dennis Farr, "Francis Bacon in Context," in Francis Bacon: A Retrospective (New York: Harry N.
Abrams, 1999),225.
25 Bacon's self-fashioning practice hindered some scholarly pursuits on the artist. Since the artist's death in
1992 many new publications have shed light on Bacon's process and art. The Estate of Francis Bacon and
the Hugh Lane Gallery's relocation of the artist's studio have most significantly fostered these aims at
uncovering new information regarding Bacon.
45
came forward to art museums and auction houses with works on paper attributed to the
artist. During his life, Bacon claimed to create preliminary sketches; however, he asserted
the significant role of accidental impulses that led to their evolving fonns?6 While the
Estate of Francis Bacon has officially disattributed some of these works on paper, namely
those brought forward by neighbor and friend Barry Joule, the Hugh Lane Gallery's
Francis Bacon Database confinns the existence of Bacon's preliminary work. In 1998,
the Gallery found book leaves with loose paint drawings and felt-tip pen markings on
them as well as notes jotted down by Bacon planning juxtapositions and compositions of
paintings. Bacon claimed, "Painting today is pure intuition and luck and taking advantage
of what happens when you splash the stuff down.,,27 Chance plays less of a role than what
Bacon led the public to believe.
The Gallery also uncovered independent leaves that had been affixed to one
another, creating deliberate juxtapositions. For example, Bacon adhered a black and
white illustration ofVehizquez' Pope Innocent X on one side of a piece of paper with a
color image ofIngres's The Turkish Bath (l862)?8 Bacon effectively created his own
recto and verso images, directly juxtaposing and binding reproductions rather than
allowing the studio to do so organically. His removal of leaves from books cyclically
returned to a similar fonn. The artist also pinned and traced cutout profile fonns from
26 David Sylvester, The Brutality ofFact, 16-17.
27 Michael Peppiatt. Francis Bacon: Anatomy ofan Enigma (New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 1996),
150.
28 Infommtion on this combination was found through the Francis Bacon Database at the Hugh Lane
Gallery, Dublin.
46
photographic material onto the canvas.29 His 1953 Study for Portrait II (Figure 27)
depicts the Pope in profile view and was likely planned as such. This deliberate action in
Bacon's process provides support for understanding his smaller sub-series such as the
1953 Blue Popes as a fragmented breakdown of one character and performing a unified
movement.3D Finally, the artist mounted reproductions of his older paintings on the walls
of his studio. This allowed him to reference, remember, and appropriate his own work, a
practice most evident in his paintings created after 1970. The juxtapositions within those
early paintings led to further distillation and fragmentation in later works. Without such
self-referential operations, it would have been unlikely for Bacon's fixation with
Ve1l1zquez' papal portrait to continue. His concluding papal variation references an
earlier work and is appropriately titled Second Version of 'Study for the Red Pope 1962
(Figure 42). Harrison comments on this custom: "His reluctance to divulge more about
his image-bank was justified in the sense that it invited reductionism. Recycling a pre-
existing image was less meaningful than the unexpected associations he made between it
and other images, the transformative power of his interventions.,,3!
Through an analysis the artist's self-fashioning and secretive nature on his
process, it is clear that Bacon manufactured a practice that appeared to be spontaneous
and driven by chance. However, in truth, the artist's method functioned much more
deliberately; at times he forced juxtapositions, sketched possible compositions and forms,
and situated images against one another to promote a visual interaction. While his process
29Harrison, In Camera, 182-183.
30Davies, Francis Bacon: The Papal Portraits of1953.
31Harrison, In Camera, 83.
47
materials freely mixed within 7 Reece Mews, Bacon remained ultimately in control of
what objects were allowed to join the collection initially. Therefore, Bacon's use of
photographic material must be considered as a medium that the artist deliberately used to
serve an artistic purpose. The artist employed an extensive collection of mechanized
reproductions that he personally selected. After 1962, he commissioned his own
photographs. He opted to only see Pope Innocent X through the mediation of the camera,
and he self-referentially turned to photographs of his own paintings to create his
celebrated series of papal portraits. 32
Bacon and Benjamin
In his influential 1935 essay The Work ofArt in the Age ofMechanical Reproduction,
Benjamin writes on the differences between mechanization of the camera and traditional
visually reproductive ventures such as painting: "First, process reproduction is more
independent of the original reproduction. For example, in photography, process
reproduction can bring out those aspects of the original that are unattainable to the naked
eye yet accessible to the lens, which is adjustable and chooses its angle at will.,,33 The
variance of coloring and gradation found in Bacon's process materials of Pope Innocent
X serve as evidence to the qualities discussed by Benjamin. Some of the reproductions
found within 7 Reece Mews present slightly different hues, overarching tints, or even
depict the work in a reduced palette of grays. While many of the reproductions of Pope
Innocent X could be considered of poor quality due to their "unrealistic" coloring, these
32 Ibid, 8-1 I.
33Benjamin, Illuminations, 220.
48
mimetic discrepancies created through process reproduction alter the reception of the
"original" painting. The personality and mood of the Pope changes as does the
institutional (the Academy and the Papacy) and artistic control over the painting. Despite
creating the "original" portrait, Vehizquez was unable to predict or control its
contemporary reception, modifications, and proliferation. Bacon embraces the
modifications generated by mechanization and its consequences. His papal vmiations
build off of the removal of authorial control. Almost counter intuitively, Bacon's
reproductions ofPope Innocent X displayed details that were lacking in the "original"
painting and in firsthand encounters with the portrait. Harrison accentuates this positive
element embodied in Bacon's compendium of reproductions when he writes,
The amassing of multiple copies of the most suggestive photographs was
paralleled by his acquisitiveness in respect of reproductions of certain paintings
such as Velazquez's Pope Innocent X...The extent of this hoarding was a
Baconian phenomenon, and implies that he saw nuances of scale, definition and
colour as potentially revelatory of fresh means of employing images in his
iconoclastic recombinations. 34
Harrison's statement points to the idiosyncratic nature of Bacon's process of painting and
how in working in a manner foundationally grounded in the mediation of photography,
the artist was able to deconstruct the "original" Vehizquez painting by creating a timely,
dynamic series of papal variations composed of disparate visual fragments.
By removing the painting from its "original" context (through the mediation of
the camera), Velazquez' Pope Innocent X, should according to Benjamin's terms, lose its
"aura." Benjamin described his tenn, the aura: "Even the most perfect reproduction of a
work of art is lacking in one element: its presence in time and space, its unique existence
34Harrison, In Camera.
49
at the place where it happens to be." However, by relying solely on reproductions of
Pope Innocent X, Bacon's repetitious use of photographic reproductions and avoidance of
the "original" painting actually increases the "aura" ofVellizquez' painting. Benjamin's
claims on mechanization's removal of "aura" are negated through Bacon's artistic
process. As such, the Galleria Doria Pamphili's assertions of the portrait's "originality"
are applicable, despite Bacon's avoidance of the curated space. Bacon's papal variations
rely on the unique status of the individual art object, even although the artist never
engaged with the painting firsthand. His personal interest in the portrait, repetitious use of
photographs of the painting, and appropriation of the image uphold the prominent
position of the singular art object.
Bacon's sole reliance on photographic reproductions might abdicate the trappings
attached to the renowned artist Velazquez, the grandeur and spiritual power of the
Papacy, and the wealth and unity of the art collection at the Galleria Doria Pamphili.
However, it is the removal of these markings of initial context (not the "aura") that
provide the necessary framework for the effective fusion of different fragments of
photographic imagery in Bacon's papal series. Bacon's collecting activity was not
constricted to reproductions of works of art. Within the walls of his studio, he amassed
and appropriated from a substantial amount of photographic materials pertaining to
medicine, film, motion studies, the supernatural, and animals, among other genres. It is
within this photographic collection of non-art images that Bacon's removal of the "aura"
through the use of art reproductions becomes particularly important. By removing the
"aura" from paintings, such as Pope Innocent X, Bacon provided the needed environment
for art and non-art images to interact and comingle evenly. Harrison notes, "Bacon's
50
consumption of imagery was, in a sense, non-hierarchical. Irrespective of an image's
original state as a photograph or painting it was homogenized-democratized-by its
reproduction through a mechanical screen.,,35 Bacon's utilization of mechanical
reproduction in the fashioning of his papal variations operates independently of
conventions set forth and maintained by institutions such as the Academy, the Canon, and
the Papacy. The process of mechanization diminishes notable characteristics that
demarcate the line between painting and photography. Institutional distinctions between
high art and low art, fact and fiction, scientific and supernatural, are no longer relevant or
enforceable. Bacon reinforced this concept by saying, "Some photographers are artists
but I'm not particularly interested in that aspect ofphotography.,,36 However, Bacon's
statement does not correlate with his activity. He interacted with photographs after an
artist's particular work and the visual mutations caused by the camera; these interests
speak to the aesthetic role of mechanization.
Mechanization and Juxtaposition in 7 Reece Mews
Benjamin continues his essay on the mechanization of photography and the proliferation
of the work of art, "Secondly, technical reproduction can put the copy of the original into
situations which would be out of reach for the original itself.,,37 The artist's studio at 7
Reece Mews is a testament to Benjamin's point. Many recent art-historical writings
focused on the chaos of cluttered boxes of images, destroyed canvases, stacks of books
35 Ibid, 8.
36 Archimbaud, Francis Bacon in Conversation, 22.
37 Benjamin, 220-221.
51
and dried up paint materials that over-ran his studio space?8 Bacon's studio allowed for
the jumbling of different images and ideas. Bacon said of visual efficacy, "one image
against the other seems to be able to say the thing more.,,39 Juxtaposition is crucial to
Bacon's artistic production.4o His collection of reproductions was not articulately kept or
well maintained. Rather, his process materials acted as scattered groundcover, an archive
for research, purposeful disarray, and public evidence to support his "crazed" bohemian
persona. Bacon wrote, "1 feel at home here in the chaos because the chaos suggests
images to me.,,41 The artist's words, again sustaining and emphasizing the element of
chance in his work, also speak to his paradoxical thoughts on the generative nature of
destruction. The mess of the studio, caused by the accidental and deliberate demolition of
canvases, books, and materials, provides the environment for the generation of new ideas
and vi~ual schemes that were unavailable or unapparent to Bacon.
Bacon and Process Materials: Medical, Animal, and Film Imagery
Photographs from medical textbooks documenting skin ailments, diseases of the mouth,
and other health concerns make up part of Bacon's process materials. For instance, he
38 Some of the major texts include Harrison, In Camera; Margarita Cappock, Francis Bacon's Studio
(London: Merrell, 2005); and John Edwards, 7 Reece Mews: Francis Bacon's Studio (London: Thames and
Hudson, 2001).
39Sylvester, The Brutality ofFact, 22.
40 Juxtaposition of images has often been employed in earlier art movements, such as Cubism. However, it
is important that Bacon uses juxtaposition differently by allowing the combinations to occur organically.
Rather than deliberately juxtaposing conflicting images that he conceived, Bacon allows the his
engagement with the studio to lead the image. The juxtapositions in the studio but not present on the canvas
are just as important to the final image as the completed painting.
41 Maragarita Cappock, '''The Chemist's Laboratory: Francis Bacon's Studio.'" 1n Francis Bacon and the
Tradition ofArt (Milan: Skira, 2003), 85.
52
owned K.C. Clark's 1939 text Positioning in Radiography, a book that included over
2500 black and white images of human bodies situated for x-ray procedures (Figure 48).
42 Bacon first referenced an x-ray image in 1933.43 While images produced by x-ray
machines are scientific and documentary in nature, they also have the potential to distort
reality. Bacon possessed a copy of Baron Albert von Schrenck Notzing's Phenomena of
Materialisation that chronicled seances through photography (Figure 49).44 The black
and white images use "supernatural" beams of light as documentation of what is not
visibly apparent to the naked eye. The book's photographs recall x-rays in visual and
ideological terms. Images produced through x-rays parallel photographic material. Like
photography, x-rays dually function as a subjective and objective machine. Their
mechanically based processes can support fact and fiction equally. Bacon's use of these
devices suggests his interest in society's formation of "truth." If these mechanized
techniques could produce an artificial "reality"-an image that understood by the
audience as "real," then how could he dismantle paintings that also establish themselves
as documentation of "real" power such as in Velazquez' Pope Innocent X.
Bacon's interest in Sergei Eisenstein's 1925 film Battleship Potemkin caused him
to amass multiple books of film stills of it. Roger Manvell' s 1944 book Film contained
two double-page spreads that highlighted twelve key black and white stills ofBattleship
Potemkin (Figure 41).45 Bacon said, "You could say that a scream is a horrific image; in
fact, I wanted to paint the scream more than the horror. I think if I had really thought
42 Harrison, In Camera,lO.
43 Ibid.
44 Ibid.
45 Ibid, 90.
53
about what causes somebody to scream it would have made the scream that I tried to
paint more successful.,,46 The artist's statement substantiates his interest in depicting
human sensation rather than physical violence.
French philosopher Gilles Deleuze's exploration of Bacon's oeuvre in Francis
Bacon: The Logic o/Sensation focuses on the artist's employment of imagery that
stresses painting sensation instead ofrepresentation.47 Deleuze claims that,
Sensation is the opposite of the facile and the ready-made, the cliche, but also
of the "sensational," the spontaneous, etc. Sensation has one face turned
toward the subject (the nervous system, vital movement, "instinct") ... and
one face turned toward the object (the "fact," the place, the event.) Or rather,
it has no faces at all, it is both things indissolubly .. .it is in the same body
that, being both subject and object, give and receives the sensation.48
Bacon's papal variations fit within Deleuze's definition of a work of sensation. The
Popes are simultaneously the object and subject. Their scream causes the audience to
place them in the role of the victim (the object), yet the lack of physical aggressors on the
canvas causes the same audience to consider the Pope self-inflicting his pain (the
subject). Likewise, the Pope's conflicting identities as a victim in physical duress and as a
spiritual authority and intercessor to God in the Roman Catholic Church, creates a
complicated duality present in Deleuze' s discussion of sensation. The context (or to use
Deleuze's term "fact") of the position and the history of the Papacy run counter to the
physical and mental response of the Pope's nervous system. The artist said, "I think that
great art is deeply ordered. Even if within the order there may be enormously instinctive
46 Sylvester, Looking Back at Francis Bacon, 29-30.
47 Deleuze, Francis Bacon: The Logic ofSensation.
48 Ibid, 31.
54
and accidental things, nevertheless I think that they come out of a desire for ordering and
for returning fact to the nervous system in a more violent way.,,49 Bacon's interest in the
response of the human nervous system extended further the Battleship Potemkin film
stil1.50 FurthelIDore, Bacon's words attest to the role of chance and accident in his
painting process. For him, order stems from a human impulse. Artists that attempt to
establish order through the creation of the painting, according to Bacon, will always be
acting in a field of chance. Pushing this even more, Bacon claims that the urge to control
cannot ignore accidental changes that alter the artist's constructed order. Chance and
accident attack the nervous system because they question the extent of human control
over their surrounding environment and perception of "reality."
Bacon often connected humankind and animals. Humans and animals both at their
foundational level are bodies with a functioning nervous system that guides survival
activity. The interrelation of humans and animals in Bacon's mind carries over into his
collecting and painting practice. The Hugh Lane Francis Bacon Database catalogued
photographs of meat warehouses and illustrations of cuts of meat, 5I Aside from painting
figurative works, Bacon depicted owls and monkeys independently and also as
accompanying figures in some of his series of papal variations. By connecting humans
and animals, Bacon removes the civility surrounding mankind. Depictions of man portray
an animal-- a hunk of meat and flesh.
49Sy]vester, The Brntality ofFact, 58-59.
50 Bacon's interest in open mouths extended to images of mouth diseases and asthma information. For more
information on the range and specifics of these working documents consult the Hugh Lane Gallery Francis
Bacon Database.
51 Hugh Lane Gallery, Francis Bacon Database.
55
Bacon underscores this relationship between humans and meat in two of his papal
variations: Figure with Meat (1954) (Figure 11) and Pope II (1960) (Figure 37). Figure
with Meat depicts a pope in blue vestments; two large flanks of brightly colored beef
surround his fonn in the center of the canvas. The raw meat recalls Bacon's earlier
Crucifixion paintings that fostered his first large publication and critical attention in
Herbert Read's text Art Now. A directional black arrow pierces the left flank
iconographically connecting the work with John's Gospel account of Christ's Crucifixion
and the related imagery of the Holy Lance that bore into his side. In Pope IL the use of
beef carcass is much more tame. The proportionally smaller chunk of raw meat sits on a
cube form that reads as a table, to the side of the Pope. The juxtaposition of the Pope and
raw meat, not only draws connections between human and animal kind, it also serves as a
reflection on death and religion.
By painting these subjects against one another, Bacon investigates timely
questions pertaining to human nature, the role of religion, and certainty of death for all
living things. Bacon's combinations also could be seen as mocking the authority of the
Catholic Church. Ifhumans are no more than animals, what is the role of God in
relationship to people? What position of authority could the Pope actually hold? Are
institutions such as the Church even relevant if mankind is just an animal?
Bacon's interests, in uncovering the "truth" behind sensation, human nature, and
the human body, recall the pursuits of early anatomists. The artist's photographic images
dissect the human body and activity. Medical textbooks focus on parts of the human body
for isolating illness. Motion studies break a singular movement into distinct segments.
Film stills freeze moving narratives into fragmented photographs. Dissection
56
scientifically and methodically removes layers of the human body in hopes of discovery
of knowledge. Renaissance anatomists hoped to gain control over the health of the human
body through medical dissection and, as a consequence, their social practice in major
cities in Western Europe such as Brussels and London led to classist implications in
institutional systems such as law and religion. 52 British historian Jonathan Sawday writes
in his introduction to The Body Emblazoned: Dissection and the Human Body in
Renaissance Culture, "The 'culture of dissection' is, then, the culture of enquiry: an
incisive recomposition of the human body, which entailed an equivalent refashioning of
the means by which people made sense of the world around them in terms of their
philosophy of understanding, their theology, their poetry, their plays, their rituals of
justice, their art, and their buildings."s3 Bacon's use of dissection imagery parallels his
interest in photographic processes. Photography, in its very nature, fragments the unity of
the object into a brief objective interaction between the object and the machine of the
camera. As such, photographic material only represents one brief moment in time, a
fragment. This repetitious creation of fragments can be read as a dissection of the
ongoing life of an image. Sawday's words articulate the process of investigation and
deconstruction inherent in dissection. His statement also conflates the cultural production
of a society with the urge to dissect.
Bacon's varied images appear to have little in common, but they all display
elements of repetition and fragmentation. Like Bacon's collection of multiple images of
52 Jonathan Sawday, The Body Emblazoned: Dissection and the Human Body in Renaissance Culture
(London: Routledge, 1995).
53 Sawday, ix.
57
the painting Pope Innocent X, the majority of these images appear numerous times in the
studio. For example, the Hugh Lane Gallery documented Eadweard Muybridge's
photographs from four separate copies of the 1955 abridged volume of The Human
Figure in Motion, as well as an edition ofAnimal Locomotion, and independent leaves. 54
Multiple copies of the same "original" image within the studio space would have created
a repetitious organic pattern of appearing and disappearing into a pile.
Since its inception, photography has been dually bound to the opposing roles of
documentary and creative, objective and subjective. The subjective elements, such as the
alteration of tone, size, gradation, and contrast permit Bacon to understand the painting of
Pope Innocent X as purely a reproduced image without its original context. However, the
documentary nature of the camera allows the photographs of the painting to be
understood as "facts." The reproductions of Pope Innocent X still are copies of the
"original" painting. Understood as serving simultaneously both positions of fact and
fiction, Bacon's papal portraits through their process (reliant on photography) deconstruct
and fragment the viewer's understanding of artistic and religious institutions, such as the
Academy and the Papacy. Bacon's papal variations do not merely appropriate from
Velazquez' Pope Innocent X, but in using Velazquez' work comment on the entire
compilation of seated papal portraits beginning with Raphael's portrait of Julius II. The
history of the genre of "official" seated papal portraits functions as a propagandistic
program bolstering the power of the Papacy. The opposing positions of fact and fiction
inherent in photography, when used in Bacon's variations, set the framework for
deconstruction of the systems referenced through appropriation.
54Harrison, In Camera, 10-11.
58
Bacon and Simulacra
Bacon's use of mechanized reproduction to create his series of papal variations and its
inherent use of repetition, fragmentation, and enhancement of the "aura," concerns issues
of originality, in particular the role of simulacra. Bacon did not need to consult the
"original" painting for his papal series to be successful. Instead, quite the opposite is true.
The repetitious hunt and holding pattern for process materials allows Bacon to see
nuances in mechanized images and investigate issues of originality. For Bacon, there is
no "original" reproduction. One mechanically reproduced image does not and cannot
value itself as more significant than any other. Repetitious activity is also inherent to the
field of photography. Photography's modem innovation allows for and intends to be
circulated in multiples, at its very least in editions. It is through these conditions of
repetition, mechanization, and fragmentation that Bacon delves into portraying the
simulacral.
French critical theorist Jean Baudrillard discusses issues of the "original" in
Simulacra and Simulation (1985).55 By claiming that society's notions of the real are
conflated with artificial simulations, Baudrilliard argues that the world is actualized in
constructed models of simulacra or the hyperreal. Baudrilliard's theory of simulacra and
the hyperreal conceptually connect with Bacon's papal variations. The artist's papal
works are, in effect, serial copies of one another. Earlier works impact later works that
inevitably reference one another due to Bacon's studio practice. Additionally, by basing
his variations on reproductions of images found in books containing Velazquez' painting,
Bacon's papal series foundationally relies on simulacral activity. Mechanized
55Baudrillard, Simulacra and Simulation.
59
reproductions ofVe1<izquez' Pope Innocent X offers further mediation from the real.
Baudrilliard writes in The Precession ofSimulacra, "it is the camera lens that, like a
laser, comes to pierce lived reality in order to put it to death.,,56 Bacon's use of the
camera in his process supplied the framework necessary to question the power and
authority vested in the Papacy.
Baudrillard's Three Categories of Simulacra and Bacon's Papal Variations
Baudrilliard defines three categories of simulacra: natural simulacra, productive
simulacra, and simulacra of simulation.57 Bacon's process employs all of Baudrillard's
orders in the creation of his papal variations. According to the philosopher, natural
simulacra are "naturalist, founded on the image, on imitation and counterfeit. .. that aim
for the restitution or the ideal institution of nature made in God's image.,,58 Velazquez'
portrait ofPope Innocent X, like all mimetically based art, fits within the definition of
natural simulacra. Even more so than other papal portraitists, Velazquez' depiction of
Pope Innocent X has been noted for its extreme attention to mimetic details. Innocent X
is rumored to have disliked the portrait due to its unflattering likeness. 59 Velazquez'
painting embodies the simulacra by attempting to artistically represent the person and
likeness of Pope Innocent X. The image of the person exists only as a fas:ade, a sign of
the living person.
56 Ibid, 28.
57 Ibid, 121.
58 Ibid, 121.
59 Didactic at Galleria Doria Pamphilli
60
Bacon's use ofphotography in his process of painting fits within the limits of
Baudrillard's second category ofproductive simulacra. Productive simulacra are defined
by Baudrillard as "productivist, founded on energy, force, its materialization by the
machine and in the whole system of production-a Promethean aim of a continuous
globalization and expansion.,,6o Bacon's sole reliance on mechanized reproductions of
Pope Innocent X embodies the elements of productive simulacra. The machine of the
camera allows for the repetition and the global proliferation of images. Baudrillard's third
version of simulacra, simulacra of simulation, is "founded on information, the model, the
cybernetic game-total operationality, hyperreality, [and] aim of total control.,,61 The
history of seated papal portraits outlined and sustained by the Academy, the institution of
the Papacy, and the religious tradition of Roman Catholicism all fit within this order.
Each of these institutions works to create a system and ordered model under which
people follow guidelines set forth to control and discipline behavior. Baudrillard's
analysis of simulacra aids understanding of Bacon's papal variations through its
examination of simulacra activity, products, and institutions. Reading Bacon's papal
portraits through such a lens links and uncovers the underlying issues in his paintings,
ones that engage issues of originality in their conception, process, and result.
Bacon's papal variations can also be understood as precessional simulacra. They
disturb the understanding ofVehizquez' seventeenth-century portrait. Where does the
line fall between the real and the simulacral in the interaction of Bacon's papal portraits,
the mediation of mechanical reproduction, Velazquez' Pope Innocent X, the sitter Pope
60 Baudrillard, Simulacra and Simulation, 12l.
61 Ibid.
61
Innocent X (Giovanni Battista Pamphili), and the authority of the Papacy? For
Baudrillard, each entity is hyperreal, illustrating the instability of signs and meaning.
Given this metastable relationship between signs and meaning, constructed models allow
for breaking of time from a linear, chronological continuum into a non-linear model.
Baudrillard wrote:
Simulation is characterized by a precession ofthe model, of all the models based
on the merest fact.. .The facts no longer have a specific trajectory, they are born
at the intersection of models, a single fact can be engendered by all the models at
once. This anticipation, this precession, this short circuit, this confusion of the
fact with its model. . .is what allows each time for all possible interpretations even
the most contradictory-all true, in the sense that their truth is to be exchanged,
in the image of the models from which they derive. 62
Thus, Bacon's papal variations should be understood as paintings that convey
simulation and not representation. He removes his portraits from their representational
ties--elear trajectories between sign and meaning no longer exist. Bacon's papal
paintings function in their intersection and juxtaposition ofartificial models. They
highlight the "murderous power of images, murderers of the real, murderers of their own
model.,,63 The artist's papal portraits murder the real and act as a powerful substitute for
the real.
As a figurative artist, Bacon strives to "tear down the veils that fact acquires
through time.,,64 Through his papal variations, the artist re-examines the position of
artistic and religious institutions by visually deconstructing the work through his
photographically-based process, portrayal of sensation. Applying simulacral theory to his
62 Ibid, 17.
63Ibid, 5.
64Davies and Yard, Francis Bacon, 110.
62
papal variations provides insights as to how Bacon's process could affect the viewer's
understanding of the "original" and the construction of institutions around them. Bacon's
series of papal portraits depict the discomfort of the truth--the visual embodiment of the
Academy and the Papacy without their "veils," institutions seeking control and structure
in the hope of presiding over humankind which to Bacon is no more than just meat and
flesh, even animal in nature. Bacon's interest in Velazquez and his portrait ofPope
Innocent X functions as more than just a source for appropriation. Bacon's papal
variations depended on the use of photographic reproductions of the Ve1l1zquez portrait in
order to create a series that depicted sensation and provided the framework for his
audience to reflect on the simulacral "reality" of their own lives. This thesis now looks
back at the root ofBacon's appropriation, the Velazquez portrait. In so doing, it aims to
place Bacon's papal portraits within the geme of seated papal portraits. As established in
this chapter, the artist's use of photography enhanced the "aura" of the painting, despite
Bacon's lack of firsthand interaction with it. Read as such, Bacon's variations off of the
work closely fit with pre-existing portrayals ofpopes and should be examined within this
artistic tradition.
63
CHAPTER IV
PUSHING CONVENTIONS OF TRADITION: BACON, VELAzQUEZ, AND THE
ART-HISTORICAL CANON
"I buy book after book with this illustration in it of the Vehlzquez Pope, because it just haunts me, and
opens up all sorts of feelings and areas of~1 was going to say~imagination, even, in me."
-Francis Bacon l
Throughout history, artists have turned to earlier painters and their works for
reasons such as education, inspiration, and social commentary. Scholars such as Wieland
Schmied assert that Bacon's fascination with Velazquez' Pope Innocent X (Figure 2)
borders on an obsessive fixation? In regards to his interest, Bacon replied, "Well it's one
of the most beautiful pictures in the world and I think I'm not at all exceptional as a
painter in being obsessed by it.,,3 To Bacon, his fascination with the painting is not
markedly different from any other person's. While Bacon did look to earlier works of art
such as paintings and drawings by Georges Seurat and Vincent van Gogh, classical Greek
1 David Sylvester, The Brutality a/Fact: Interviews with Francis Bacon (London: Thames and Hudson,
1987),25.
2 Wieland Schmied, Francis Bacon: Commitment and Conflict (Munich: Prestel-Verlag, 1996) focuses a
great deal on his fear and obsession with portrait. The text, in my opinion, dramatizes Bacon's life and
biography. While, I do find Bacon's interest in Pope Innocent X intense, I find it difficult to believe he was
tormented by the image and his admiration for Velazquez.
3 David Sylvester, The Brutality a/Fact: Interviews with Francis Bacon (London: Thames and Hudson,
1987), 72.
64
statues, and Egyptian art for inspiration, he did not repeat their subject matter to the
same extent or in the same way as he did with Velazquez' Pope Innocent x.4 The artist's
intense devotion to Pope Innocent Xbegs the following questions: How do Velazquez'
Pope Innocent X and Bacon's papal variations fit within the tradition of seated papal
portraits? And, what is the relationship between Bacon and Velazquez in regards to the
traditional art-historical canon? To explore these queries, this chapter discusses
Velazquez' artistic career and his creation of Pope Innocent X, the connection between
Velazquez and Bacon, and the reception of Bacon's work.
Velazquez and the Creation of Pope Innocent X
In 1648, Velazquez journeyed on his second trip by boat to Rome to acquire works of art
for the Spanish monarchy. However, while working for the court in a curatorial sort of
position, Velazquez painted portraits for his personal purposes including his portrait of
Pope Innocent X. 5 Employing the papal court as subject matter can be read as a social
and political move to gain favor from the Roman Catholic Church. In 1999, Jonathan
Brown wrote in an essay on Velazquez' identity as an artist and a gentleman "In addition,
the stay in Rome provided an opportunity to pursue a personal goal, to petition Pope
Innocent X for support in his quest for membership in the knightly Order of Santiago.,,6
The formation of powerful social networks would have benefited Velazquez in his pursuit
4 Bacon also copied works by van Gogh. However, I find these less influential due to their relatively small
number and isolated years of production. For more information on his van Gogh studies, see Brendan
Prendeville. "Varying the Self: Bacon's Versions of van Gogh," Oxford Art Journal 27 (2004): 23-42.
5 Dawson W. Carr, Velazquez, exh. cat.(London: National Gallery, 2006),221.
6 Jonathan Brown, Collected Writings on Velazquez (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1999), 191.
65
of noble status, particularly entry into the esteemed Order of Santiago (also known as
Order of Saint James of Compostela). The Order only admitted Catholic believers of
noble birth and was regarded as the most prestigious of Spanish knighthoods. 7
Velazquez' sitter, Giovanni Battista Pamphili, became Pope Innocent X in 1644.
The artist depicted him only six years after his inauguration, on August 13, 1650. Thus,
the portrait represents a relatively recent international, religious, and political event as
well as depicting one of the most powerful leaders in the world at the time. By portraying
the Pope in a painting, Velazquez could also potentially "ensure his international fame."s
Innocent X only sat for a few prominent artists such as Gianlorenzo Bernini and
Alessandro Algardi.9 Importantly, despite Bernini's high level of artistic skill, Innocent X
refused to employ his work. Given this context, it could be read that Velazquez'
employment by the Papacy after Bernini's removal placed him in a position of
heightened artistic rank. Innocent X would not employ the distinguished Italian architect
and sculptor Bernini, but would rather allow a Spanish court painter to depict his image
and by extension the Papacy and entire Roman Catholic Church. Velazquez, after
completing Pope Innocent X, thereby bolstered his artistic reputation internationally,
especially in the arena of elite portraiture.
7 Ibid.
8 Carr, Velazquez, 221.
9 Ibid, 222.
66
Britain and Velazquez
Eighteenth-century British portrait artist and first president of the Royal Society of Arts
Sir Joshua Reynolds claimed that Pope Innocent X was among the best paintings in the
world. 10 Reynolds was by no means the only British citizen who praised Spanish art. A
strong British desire for Spanish art continued to grow well into the nineteenth century,
resulting in a substantial number of Spanish works in British private and public
collections. In an 1848 catalogue raisonne on Ve1<izquez, Sir William Stirling located
almost one-third of the artist's paintings in Britain.]] Today, the number of works by
Velazquez stands much lower at eighteen. 12 However, with nine paintings attributed to
the artist hanging in the National Gallery in London, British artists continued to be
influenced by the artistic style and tradition created by Velazquez. British interest in the
painting is also evidenced by a copy after Velazquez' Pope Innocent X exhibited at the
Apsley House at The Wellington Museum in London. 13
Pope Innocent X and Velazquez' influence in Great Britain continued to spread,
eventually reaching Bacon. As discussed in the previous chapter, the artist did not
encounter the "original" painting firsthand during the time in which he worked on his
papal variations. The proliferation of books on Velazquez containing images of Pope
Innocent X throughout Britain made Bacon's papal series possible. Almost functioning
10 Ibid.
11 Ibid, 92. More than 70 Velazquez paintings out of226 works were located in Britain.
13 Brown, Collected Writings on Velazquez (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1999), 131-137. Brown's
short text on Pope Innocent X discusses copies after the image and the conservation and scientific studies
conducted to determine the steps of replication.
67
symbiotically, Bacon's life and work propelled the reputation and publicity of Pope
Innocent Xby continually referencing it.
Bacon and the National Gallery's The Artist's Eye Program
In October of 1985, the National Gallery in London unveiled an exhibition curated by
Bacon as a part of The Artist's Eye program. 14 The National Gallery invited Bacon, as
they did other prominent British painters, such as Victor Pasmore, Bridget Riley and
Patrick Caulfield, to select artworks from the museum's collection to show in conjunction
with a few of his own paintings. Bacon accepted the curatorial invitation but refused to
display his artwork alongside his selections from the museum. His eclectic exhibition
included eighteen oil paintings created by Masaccio, Michelangelo, Rembrandt, Goya,
Turner, van Gogh, Degas, Manet, Seurat, and, of course, Velazquez. Bacon's choices for
The Artist's Eye exhibition highlight his approach to previous painters and their work.
Significantly, Bacon's curatorial decisions focused on male Western painters from the
fifteenth century to the twentieth century and their figurative subject matter. For example,
Bacon chose Velazquez's Portrait ofPhilip IV o/Spain (1625) (Figure 51) and The
Rokeby Venus (1647-1651) (Figure 52). Bacon's curatorial choices also reflect on
established figural traditions upheld by the art-historical canon. Barbara Steffen wrote of
Bacon's interest in redefining these conventions: "Bacon's objective is not so much to
represent masculine identity as it is to point out that masculinity is a construct, a
stereotype which he fights, making his figures appear weak and unstable by virtue of
14 The National Gallery, London had previously invited and exhibited The Artist's Eye shows with R.J.
Kitaj, Howard Hughes, and David Hockney.
68
their positions and the technique used to paint them.,,!5 Steffen's statement accentuates
the artist's desire to expose the canon's acceptance of a cast of 'stereotypical' characters.
Thus, the human form for Bacon is a vehicle for dismantling traditional models of
painting and representation.
Bacon previously identified many of the artists presented in his exhibition as
int1uences in his work by way of extensive interviews documented and conducted by
Sylvester and Archimbaud. In an interview with Sylvester, Bacon discussed
Michelangelo's influence on his figurative work: "And I've always thought about
Michelangelo; he's always been deeply important in my way of thinking about form. But
although I have this profound admiration for all his work, the work that I like most of all
is the drawings. For me he is one of the very greatest draughtsmen, if not the greatest.,,!6
Bacon's primary interest in Michelangelo's drawings parallels his attraction to Seurat's
work. In an interview with Archimbaud, Bacon claimed, "I admire Seurat a lot. We have
perhaps one of his best pictures here in London, Bathers of Asnieres, which I think is a
magnificent work. ..But above all I like his sketches."!? Among Bacon's selections for
The Artist's Eye exhibition were preparatory works and fragmented canvases, such as oil
sketches by Seurat and the canvas pieces of Manet's The Execution ofMaximilian (1867-
1868) (Figure 53) compiled by Degas.
15 Barbara Steffen, "The Representation of the Body: Velazquez-Bacon" in Francis Bacon and the
Tradition ofArt, eds. Wilfried Seipel, Barbara Steffen and Christoph Vitali (Milan: Skira Editore, 2003),
205.
16 Sylvester. The Brutality ofFact, 114.
17 Archimbaud, Francis Bacon in Conversation, 44.
69
Looking at and esteeming earlier artists' works could have functioned as an
alternative art education for Bacon. Unlike Vellizquez and many of the artists he
discussed or referenced, Bacon was self-trained. Traditional art training requires the
ability to understand and convey the fonn of the human body from life studies. Bacon
lacked this conventional education and actually saw the presence of his sitter as
"inhibiting" his work. i8 Bacon claimed that often his sitters felt uncomfortable due to his
fragmenting of their fonn, an activity that Sylvester has referred to as the "violence" that
Bacon paints on the canvas, and thereby inflicts upon the sitter. While these reasons are
valid, it seems more likely that Bacon wanted to avoid the "original" subject, as he did
with the Vellizquez portrait. Avoiding the "original" allowed him to fully explore the
possibilities present in process of mechanized reproduction, thereby enabling the
repetition and fragmentation of the human sitter. As photographs or partial memories of
interactions with the individuals, Bacon could mesh many concepts that carried
contrasting meaning. Much like his investigation and deconstruction of the authority of
the Papacy, Bacon's lack offonnal education and his avoidance oflive sitters in the
creation of his paintings allowed him to operate outside of conventional institutions and
as a result question their position in society.
Bacon and His "Reinterpretation" of Figurative Painting
However, Bacon's training in painting derived in part from his examination of
reproductions and "originals" of earlier artists' work. All the painters selected by Bacon
in the National Gallery exhibition show a different kind of mastery over the tradition of
18Sylvester. The Brutality afFact, 40.
70
figure painting. Much like his studio at 7 Reece Mews, The Artist's Eye reads as a
visual study of Bacon's own artistic concerns and priorities. By juxtaposing works made
by artists accepted into the art-historical canon, Bacon articulates the stylistic shifts found
in the history of depicting the human form from the Renaissance to his time. Bacon's
papal portraits and Velazquez' Pope Innocent X, therefore, should be considered
according to their innovations to their depictions of the human figure. Davies wrote of
Velazquez and Bacon: "In much the same spirit that Velazquez went to Rome,
determined to vie with the state portraits of Titian and remake them in the image of his
time, Bacon's papal variations are his attempt to reinvent or reinterpret Velazquez's
image in a way that would be valid for the mid-twentieth century.,,19 Davies' concept of
"reinventing/reinterpreting" asserts the importance of stylistic shifts in the depiction of
the human form within both painters' practices. Velazquez challenged Raphael and
Titian's model of papal portraits. Bacon followed in this behavior and challenged
Velazquez. Therefore, the foundation of Bacon's interest in Pope Innocent Xlays in
Velazquez' stylistic breaks from the accepted mode of depicting the human figure, in this
case, the Pope.
A Brief History of Seated Papal Portraits-Beginning with Raphael's Julius II
Historically, papal portrait iconography shifted from a devotional, spiritual focus to an
emphasis on the power of the Papacy in state affairs.2o Stylistically, Velazquez continued
in many of the conventions of the casual seated portrait type established in 1511 by
19 Davies, Francis Bacon: The Papal Portraits of1953, 12.
20 Steffen, "The Papal Portraits," 115-132.
71
Raphael in Julius 11 (Figure 5). Raphael's painting portrays the spiritual and political
authority of Julius II differently from his predecessors by focusing on his individualism.
Introspectively staring out to the lower right portion of the canvas, Julius II sits
seemingly unaware of a viewer. In so doing, Raphael's composition creates a voyeuristic
audience, encountering the Pope in what reads as a genuinely "natural" moment. His
aged face, accentuated by his sagging cheeks, furrowed brow, and white facial hair, does
not support idealized propagandistic readings of state or religious power. For example,
earlier papal paintings depicted the pope in action, blessing crowds of people, clothed in
extravagant papal vestments, most notably the three-tier papal tiara. Instead, Raphael's
compositional and stylistic decisions create a portrait interested in the idiosyncratic
personality of the aging sitter. By focusing on the individuality of the Pope, Raphael
creates a more personal dynamic between Julius II and the viewer. The portrait's
powerful impact roots from the painting's intimacy with the subject. The audience
interacts with this sitter, this man, this Pope rather than the historical authority of the
entire Papacy. Arnold Nesselrath wrote of the artist Raphael, the sitter Julius II, and the
resulting portrait, "Here the extraordinary interaction between patron and artist is
ultimately manifest. It is no surprise therefore that the portrait became the most
influential of all papallikenesses.,,21
Nesselrath's statement is evidenced by Titian's painting Paul III (Figure 20) that
followed in Raphael's seated naturalized style. Paul III sits slightly hunched in the papal
seat evoking the sense of a gentle personality. Despite Titian's decision to push Paul III
21 Hugo Chapman, Tom Henry, Carol Plazzotta, Arnold Nesselrath, and Nicholas Penny, eds. Raphael:
From Urbino to Rome, exh cat. (London: National Gallery, 2004), 281.
72
forward toward the picture plane, the viewer's relationship with the powerful authority
remains like Raphael's Julius II, personal and non-confrontational. Velazquez' Pope
Innocent X continued in Raphael's and Titian's tradition of naturalistically depicted
popes. This continuity is not surprising considering Velazquez' tendency and skill in
mimetic "realism," a talent emphasized throughout his oeuvre and by art historians
subsequently.
However, Velazquez reinterprets the seated papal portrait type by articulating the
complex psychology of Innocent X. Visual likeness for Velazquez relies heavily on the
sitter's inner character and personality. Importantly, Velazquez creates the perception of
more space between the viewer and the Pope than in Raphael and Ttitan's depictions.
Without this additional space, interaction between Innocent X and the viewer would be
too intense and uncomfortable to sustain. Unlike Raphael's Julius II, Innocent X sits fully
upright and makes direct eye contact with the viewer. His strong skeptical gaze penetrates
his audience. His slightly pursed lips read as personal irritation and disapproval toward
the viewer. This visual discomfort accurately reflects psychology and personality of
Innocent X. Steffen wrote, "Innocent's physiognomy was so repulsive and his wrath and
displeasure towards his subordinates was occasionally so great that some of the cardinals
in the papal conclave had spoken out against his election."n
In other regards, however, Velazquez' papal depiction fits within the limits of
earlier papal portrait types. Like Raphael's Julius II, Titian's Paul III and the majority of
papal portraiture after them, Innocent X sits on a sedia gestatoria (portable papal throne).
Velazquez also retains continuity with earlier papal depictions through the sitter's
22 Steffen, "The Papal Portraits," 116.
73
costume. Innocent X wears a crimson carnauro (square cap with three peaks) and
mozzetta (short cape) over a long flowing white vestment. He wears a topaz and gold ring
on his right hand. By wearing these articles rather than other elaborate wardrobe pieces
such as the three-tier papal tiara, Innocent X upholds the casual iconography initiated by
Raphael. Innocent X casually holds a piece of paper in his left hand; the document notes
Vellizquez as the artist of the work and connects the portrait iconographically with earlier
papal portraits. Velazquez also maintains the three-quarter view, a convention most-
commonly applied to portraits.
Bacon's fixation on Pope Innocent X1ies in Velazquez' ability to balance
tradition and innovation. Velazquez alters the reception of the papal portrait, shifting it
from personable and non-threatening to psychological and intimidating. The painter
breaks from tradition and redefines the power of the Church, all while gaining critical
success and recognition. Jo1m Russell claimed in his famous biography on Bacon "In so
far as he was 'influenced' by Velazquez, however, the influence was more subtle than the
mere bOlTowing of a motif... Velazquez's genius lay in the deformations, which in his
hands looked inevitable. Bacon was also moved by the element of continuity in
Vehizquez.,,23 Russell's words reflect the artistic tension between innovation and
tradition found in Velazquez' work, and perhaps, most visually evident in his portrait
Pope Innocent X.
Broadly, Velazquez' artistic style and career show his consistent interest in the
psychology of his sitters, economic handling of paint, stark backgrounds, and aspiration
for a noble status. Bacon's use ofthese signature Ve1azquezian elements with traditional
23 Russell. Francis Bacon, 46.
74
iconographic papal subject matter provide the basis for visual dialogue between
Bacon's papal portraits, Velazquez' Pope Innocent X, geme of seated papal portraits
found the works previously discussed by Raphael and Titian, and the art-historical canon.
While Bacon's forty-four papal oil paintings differ from one another, some
general similarities can be found in the series. Almost all of the papal portraits depict the
sedia gestatoria, carnauro, and mozzetta. The consistency of papal garb and furniture is
crucial to understanding Bacon's variations within the tradition of commissioned seated
papal portraits. It connects Bacon's twentieth-century painting with Raphael's sixteenth-
century Julius II, charting the influence of the casual seated papal pOlirait type. The papal
chair, cap, and cape identify the figure as a pope. In doing so, they also reinforce
symbolic readings of religious and political power vested in papal authority.
Additionally, the papal vestments and furniture hold great significance in
understanding the complex relationships of the figure and identity of the Pope, the
institution of the Papacy, the Pope's human body, the Pope's spiritual body, and the
metaphorical body of the church. To understand Bacon's deviations from the accepted
tradition of papal portraits, one must problematize the identity of the sitter, the Pope.
Velazquez' depiction effectively represents the multifaceted roles of the Pope. The man,
institution, literal and metaphorical body are all emphasized through his realistic
portrayal that includes details of the papal office, documents, vestments, furniture, family
background, and individual character of Pope Innocent X. Bacon's papal series breaks
from this convention to blur the individualized identity of the appropriated Pope. Despite
turning to this particular painting, Bacon is not especially interested in this specific Pope.
His paintings do not work to replicate the likeness found in Velazquez' Pope Innocent X.
75
Instead, Bacon's variations rely 0)1 portraying the larger institution of the Papacy.
Contemporary audiences for Bacon's series do not need to know details on Giovanni
Battista Pamphili's life in order for the works to function effectively. However, Bacon's
series is dependent on the tradition of seated papal portraits and the institutional identity
of the Papacy and Roman Catholic Church.
Despite being an atheist, Bacon painted religious subject matter. Taking the
artist's personal beliefs into consideration, Bacon's disturbing papal variations can be
regarded as a visual critique of the Papacy. Curator Chris Stephens claimed "He was
passionately atheist and saw that as the key thing about living in the 20th century. He set
out to express what it is to be alive when God does not exist-(when) man is just an
animal.,,24 Bacon's papal series, like Velazquez' interaction with earlier papal portraiture,
maintains some continuity with Velazquez while reinterpreting his stylistic depiction of
the human form. Innovation yet again challenges tradition. For example, Bacon's Figure
With Meat (1954) (Figure 11) takes Velazquez' use of subdued stark backgrounds and
pushes it even further away from traditional, naturalistic representation. As with almost
all ofBacon's papal portraits, the artist places the Pope in a vacant black space where
depth is alluded to by loosely demarcated thin pale lines of paint. By depicting this
particular kind ofbackground, Bacon gives greater visual emphasis to the Pope, creates
additional psychological discomfort in the viewer, establishes an environment of
timelessness, and alludes to a sketchy/unfinished quality emphasized throughout his
work, words, and process. The artist's handling of paint recalls Velazquez' economy of
paint. Tight brushstrokes leading to a sophisticated rendering of form are not found in
24 Jill Lawless. "A Retrospective of Horror." Columbia Missourian: 19 September 2008.
76
either artist's work. Again, Bacon reinterprets Pope Innocent Xby distilling
Velazquez's style. Bacon's paint, composed in thin layers and textured with the artist's
personal miicles of clothing strewn about the studio, allows the black background to
penetrate the Pope, throne, and vestments. The Pope, rather than exemplifying papal
authority, screams in pain and victimization.
Bacon's Papal Variations and their Spectatorial Effect on their Audience
Almost all of Bacon's popes look paralyzed. Unable to move or save themselves, their
twisted hands tightly grip the arms of the papal chair. Additionally, all of Bacon's papal
variations portray only one figure-the Pope. While the majority of the artist's oeuvre
revolves around the sole figure, the impact of Bacon's compositional focus on one figure
deepens the painting's psychological effect on the viewer. The audience can visually
locate the victim, but not the perpetrator. Elaine Scarry analyzes conventions of torture in
her text The Body in Pain: The Making and Unmaking ofthe World. 25 In it, she
recognizes that one of the most significant driving factors of torture is complexity and the
paradoxical nature of the pain. The threat ofpain is most effective, in terms of instilling
fear in the recipient, when unable to directly understand their perpetrator. 26 To support
her assertion, Scarry refers to blindfolding, isolation, and changing attitudes in the
aggressor.27
25 Elaine Scarry. The Body in Pain: The Making and Unmaking a/the World (New York: Oxford
University Press, 1985).
26 Ibid, 51-59.
27 Ibid, 165-168.
77
Bacon's papal portraits function in a parallel manner to Scarry's analysis of
torture and pain. The interaction between the viewer and the subject in Bacon's variations
is direct however, details of the encounter are purposely muddled. The artist's papal
series pose the question: Who is causing the pain? In response, the papal portraits provide
only two disturbing options. Either the pain experienced by the Pope is self-int1icted or
the viewer is the cause. Scarry's assertion of the cycle of torture and its dependence on
ambiguity of the source of the pain can be visually understood through the papal
variations. Since it cannot be accurately charted to a specific instrument or person, the
unclear origin of the pain int1icted on the Pope results in the circulation of blame. The
viewer feels dual discomfort. The Pope's distorted and contorted form conveys pain that
leads to sympathetic responses. However, the empathy felt by the audience turns in on
themselves. Perhaps they are the cause ofthe pain; maybe it is their fault. Exceeding
stereotypical issues of Catholic guilt, the viewer feeds into their own painful activity of
viewing and internally conceptualizing the work. Scarry notes that often in torture
activity the victim feels as if they are justly receiving punishment for behavior or
information. Functioning much like this psychological self-in±1iction of pain and guilt,
Bacon's papal portraits cause the self-in±1iction of discomfort visually and emotionally.
The relationship between the Pope and the audience simultaneously operates as a
continuation and disruption from the conventions of traditional seated papal portraits. In
the same traditional vein, Bacon's papal portraits convey the emotive and spiritual power
of the Pope. The Pope, through Bacon's paintings, causes the viewer to question their
relationship with the Catholic Church. The power of the Papacy is maintained, despite the
pained, disfigured Pope, through the viewer's general familiarity of the seated papal
78
portrait type. The Pope, as a mediator between the spiritual and earthly realm, can be
read as a passer ofjudgment on the moral and religious fiber of Christian believers.
Bacon's Pope still conveys his character of critical judgment. However, the visible pain
experienced by the blurred, pale, transparent Pope communicates a character of weakness
and emphasizes the brevity oflife. Consequently, Bacon's papal variations integrate the
psychological complexity ofboth the portrayed and the audience. Velazquez' interest in
the psychology of the sitter is pushed further by Bacon's appropriation. Bacon
diametrically shifts the tradition of casual papal portraits away from its initial purpose.
Bacon's papal series exposes the helplessness and violence of the papacy instead of the
strong propagandistic fa<;ade of Roman Catholic authority found in earlier papal
depictions.
Bacon's artistic process also plays an important role in understanding his papal
series in relationship to the art-historical canon and tradition of seated papal portraiture.
Importantly, the artist directly examined photographic reproductions (Figures 46-49) of
Velazquez' Pope Innocent X while working at 7 Reece Mews. By using reproductions of
the original painting, Velazquez' seventeenth-century papal portrait loses its original
context. The official seated portrait no longer purely operates as a symbol of power of the
Roman Catholic Church but is opened up to an infinite range of meanings. The image is
extended past Rome and out of the control of the patron and artist. 7 Reece Mews, with
its unorganized collection of disparate images, creates almost accidental juxtapositions
within its walls.28 Additionally, the photographic nature of Bacon's exposure to Pope
28 This accidental quality has been linked to surrealism and Bacon's thoughts on chance. For more
information, see Harrison, In Camera.
79
Innocent X further disconnects the image from its original context. This de-
contextualization process gave Bacon's work additional distance from the tradition of
papal portraiture. His process and psychological interpretation of Pope Innocent X is
dependent on images of an earlier painting, rather than the personal exchange between
artist and sitter. Thus, Bacon's process asserts the importance of the historical tradition of
depicting the human form, not the wishes of the patron or sitter.
Bacon's appropriation of such a prominent work in the history of art requires
understanding the atiist's relationship with the art-historical canon. Art history has tended
to situate Bacon as a bohemian artistic genius, a position further bolstered by texts that
highlight his outsider behavior and so-called "violence" in his art. In older writings on
Bacon, he is continually asserted as a personality whose personal obsessions and
psychological makeup dictate his art. His interest in Ve1<izquez' Pope Innocent X,
according to these types of sources, has little to do with his relationship with the canon
and more to do with his unresolved relationship with his father or an uncontrollable
fixation. 29 However, it appears that stylistically, Velazquez' psychological focus and
Bacon's expressionist impulse in portraiture shifted the accepted artistic modes for
depicting the human form. Thus, Bacon's papal variations should be read as continuing
and evolving the tradition of seated papal portraiture originating with Raphael's portrayal
of Julius II.
29 Schmied, Francis Bacon: Commitment and Conflict.
80
CHAPTER V
CONCLUSION
This thesis has shown that Bacon's papal variations exemplify his appropriation
of fragmented photographic material within his idiosyncratic artistic process of painting.
This working process relied heavily on repetition and fragmentation of images within his
large photographic collection to engage issues of originality and identity. I believe with
additional studies on Bacon's process, scholars will shift their attention from his
biography to his artistic technique.
My thesis focused on one significant grouping within Bacon's oeuvre, however,
additional thematic examinations need to occur, such as his use of animals and bodies in
motion. Bacon's work is often discussed broadly because of his repetition of themes,
iconographic markers, and engagement with figurative painting however, these themes
must function uniquely. Perhaps, further investigation of his textual sources, recently
archived by the Hugh Lane Gallery, might allude to narratives, mythic, or literary themes
within his paintings. He was well read and often referred to poetry as the starting point
for some of his paintings such as Triptych Inspired by T. S. Eliot's Poem "Sweeney
Agonistes" (1967). Understanding Bacon's papal variations as a unified series and
outlining their iconographic and stylistic similarities and differences points to the artist's
aesthetic innovations, in addition to his adherence to the conventions of traditional seated
81
papal portraiture. Interestingly, despite his strong beliefs in atheism and lack of formal
commission by the papacy for his series, one of the artist's papal variations, Study for a
Portrait III (1961) hangs among other modem, religious paintings in the Vatican. Its
placement in a site marking the artistic and spiritual pinnacle of Roman Catholicism
attests to the art-historical canon's placement of Bacon's series with the geme of
"official" seated papal portraiture as well as the Church's acceptance of the artist's
derivations.
However, late in his artistic career, Bacon said of his papal series, "I really
consider it a mistake to have done those paintings. I was haunted by that work, by the
reproductions I saw of it. It's such an extraordinary portrait that I wanted to do something
based on it .. .I felt overwhelmed by that image. Unfortunately, the result was far from
satisfactory."] Failure or not, Bacon's series creates dialogue with the tradition of papal
portraits by the way he engages with the subject, the continues to influence artists today
such as Jake and Dinos Chapman appropriation of Francisco Goya's print work,
continuing the historical dialogue between artists and tradition.
1 Michel Archimbaud, Francis Bacon in Conversation (London: Phaidon Press, 1993), 157-159.
APPENDIX
FIGURES
Figure 1: Photograph ofFrancis Bacon's Studio at 7 Reece Mews, South Kensington,
London
82
Figure 2: Diego Velazquez, Pope Innocent X, 1650
83
Figure 3: Francis Bacon. Study after Velazquez's Portrait ofPope Innocent X. 1953
84
Figure 4: Francis Bacon, Study (Pope Pius XlI), 1955
85
Figure 5: Raphael, Julius II, 1511
86
Figure 6: Alberto Giacometti, Walking Man II, 1960
87
Figure 7: Alberto Giacometti, Sketch ofPope Innocent X, 1936
88
Figure 8: Francis Bacon, Studyfor a Head ofa Screaming Pope, 1952
89
Figure 9: Francis Bacon, Studyfor a Pope, 1955
90
Figure 10: Francis Bacon, Study (Imaginary Portrait C?fPope Pius XII), 1955
91
Figure 1I: Francis Bacon, Figure with Meal, 1954
92
Figure 12: Francis Bacon, Head VI, 1949
93
Figure 13: Francis Bacon, Study aiRed Pope, 1962, 1971
94
Figure 14: Francis Bacon, Study for a Pope, 1955
95
Figure 15: Francis Bacon, Portrailofa CardinalI (Popel), 1955
96
Figure 16: Francis Bacon, Seated Figure (Red C£Jrdinal), 1960
97
Figure 17: Francis Bacon, Pope J, 1951
98
Figure 18: Francis Bacon, Study for Portrait ofPope Innocent X, 1965
99
Figure 19: Francis Bacon, Figure Seated (The Cardinal), 1955
100
Figure 20: Titian, Pope Paul Farnese, after 1546
101
Figure 21: Sebastiano delPiombo's Studio, Pope Clement VlJ, 1531-32
102
Figure 22: Francis Bacon, Study after Velazquez, 1950
103
Figure 23: Francis Bacon, Study after Velazquez 11, 1950
104
Figure 24: Francis Bacon, Pope 11 (Pope Shouting), 1951
105
Figure 25: Francis Bacon, Pope III (Pope with Fan Canopy), 1951
106
Figure 26: Francis Bacon, Study for Portrait I, 1953
107
Figure 27: Francis Bacon, Study for Portrait II, 1953
108
Figure 28: Francis Bacon, Study for Portrait III, 1953
109
Figure 29: Francis Bacon, Study for Portrait IV, 1953
110
Figure 30: Francis Bacon, Study for Portrait V (Cardinal V), 1953
111
Figure 31: Francis Bacon, Study for Portrait VI, 1953
112
Figure 32: Francis Bacon, Study for Portrait VII, 1953
113
Figure 33: Francis Bacon, Study for Portrait VlIf, 1953
114
MAN WALKING UPSTAIRS
;.~
"
115
Figure 34: Working Document, Muybridge Motion Study
Figure 35: Working Document Photograph by John Deakin of George Dyer in Soho
116
t ,
[
" 1;;,
~~. - ~~; -.
• ~ ".+ ", -..
.~ -
,
, i..
Figure 36: Francis Bacon, Study for Head ofGeorge Dyer, 1967
117
Figure 37: Francis Bacon, Pope JL 1960
118
Figure 38: Chaim Soutine, Carcass ofBeef, 1925
119
4. .' t ..._-. ..__',..........'__'~4~.'_-"'''''''''''-,'''''_ ,,--. __" __,..-,...,..-.-
COI.D 0101 NT&.
Figure 39: Working Document Illustration ofMeat
120
---------------------------
Figure 40; Francis Bacon, Pope and Chimpanzee, 1962
121
Figure 41: Working Document Film Still from the Battleship Potemkin
122
Figure 42: Francis Bacon, Second Version of 'Study for the Red Pope 1962, ' 1971
123
Figure 43: Unknown, Copy After Vekizquez' Pope Innocent X
124
Figure 44: Pope Innocent X Working Document 1
l25
Figure 45: Pope Innocent X Working Document 2
126
Figure 46: Pope Innocent X Working Document 3
127
Figure 47: Pope Innocent X Working Document 4
128
Figure 48: Working Document, Radiography
129
FIG. <>... AlnlloK" FIKST t'USHI.IGHT 1'1I0H,GKAI'II, 7 JANUARY, I<)U.
Figure 49: Working Document, Phenomena of Materialisation
130
Figure 50: Working Document, Battleship Potemkin, Odessa Steps
131
Figure 51: Diego Velazquez, Portrait ofPhilip IV ofSpain, 1625
132
Figure 52: Diego Velazquez, The Rokeby Venus, 1647-1651
133
Figure 53: EdouardManet, The Execution o/Maximilian, 1867-68
134
135
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Akbar, Arifa. "Inside the Mind of Francis Bacon." Independent, 25 April 2007.
Alley, Ronald and John Rothenstein, eds. Francis Bacon (New York: Viking, 1964).
Alphen, Ernst van. "The Narrative of Perception and the Perception of Narrative."
Poetics Today 11, no. 3 (Autumn 1990): 483-509.
______. Francis Bacon and the Loss ofSeZ[(Cambridge: Harvard University
Press, 1993).
Andrew, Dudley, ed. The Image in Dispute: Art and Cinema in the Age ofPhotography
(Austin, Texas: University of Texas Press, 1997).
Archimbaud, Michel. Francis Bacon in Conversation (London: Phaidon, 1993).
Barthes, Roland. Camera Lucida: Reflections on Photography (New York: Hill and
Wang, 1980).
Ben-Shaul, Nitzan. Film: The Key Concepts (Oxford: Berg, 2007).
Benjamin, Walter. Illuminations (New York: Schocken Books, 1968).
Brown, Jonathan and Cannen Garrido. Velazquez: The Technique ofGenius (New Haven:
Yale University Press, 1998).
Brusher, Joseph S. Popes Through the Ages (Princeton, New Jersey: D.Van Nostrand,
1964).
Camille, Michael. "Simulacrum." In Critical Terms for Art History, 2nd ed. edited by
Robert S. Nelson and Richard Shiff, 35-48. Chicago: University of Chicago
Press, 2003.
Cappelletti, Francesca. Velazquez: El Papa Inocencio X (Madrid: Museo Del Prado,
1996).
Cappock, Margarita. Francis Bacon's Studio (London: Merrell, 2005).
136
Chadwick, Owen. The Popes and European Revolution (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1981).
Collings, Matthew. Blimey! From Bohemia to Britpop: The London Artworldfrom
Francis Bacon to Damien Hirst (Cambridge: 21 Publishing, 1997).
Coppa, Frank 1., ed. Encyclopedia ofthe Vatican and Papacy (Westport, Connecticut:
Greenwood, 1999).
Cotter, Lucy. "Art Stars and Plasters on the Wounds: Why Have There Been No Great
Irish Artists?" Third Text 19 (September 2005): 581-592.
Crow, Thomas. The Rise ofthe Sixties: American and European Art in the Era ofDissent
(New Haven: Yale University Press, 1996).
Daniels, Jim. Blue Jesus (Pittsburgh: Carnegie Mellon University Press, 2000).
Davies, Hugh M. Francis Bacon: The Papal Portraits of1953 (New York: Distributed
Art Publishers, 2001).
Davies, Hugh M. and Sally Yard. Francis Bacon (New York: Abbeville, 1986).
Deleuze, Gilles. Difference and Repetition. Translated by Paul Patton. London:
Continuum, 1994.
Domino, Christophe. Francis Bacon: Painter ofa Dark Vision (New York: Harry N.
Abrams, 1997).
Durham, Scott. "From Magritte to Klossowski: The Simulacrum, between Painting
and Narrative." October 64 (Spring 1993): 16-33.
Edwards, John. 7 Reece Mews: Francis Bacon's Studio (London: Thames and Hudson,
2001).
Farson, Daniel. The Gilded Gutter Life ofFrancis Bacon (London: Century, 1993).
Ferguson, George. Signs and Symbols in Christian Art (Oxford: Oxford University Press,
1954).
Fiddes, Nick. Meat: A Natural Symbol (London: Routledge, 1991).
Fineberg, Jonathan. Art Since 1940: Strategies ofBeing, Second Edition (New York:
Harry N. Abrams, 2000).
137
Fingesten, Peter. "Delimitating the Concept of the Grotesque." The Journal of
Aesthetics and Art Criticism 42, no. 4 (Summer 1984): 419-426.
Foster, Hal, ed. The Anti-Aesthetic: Essays on Postmodern Culture (New York: New
Press, 1998).
Gale, Matthew. "Francis Bacon: Working on Paper." In Francis Bacon: Working on
Paper. Edited by Matthew Gale, 13-36 (London: Tate Gallery, 1999).
Gardner, James. "Eminent Outrage: British Painter Francis Bacon," National Review, 6
August 1990.
Gowing, Lawrence and Sam Hunter. Francis Bacon (London: Thames and Hudson,
1989).
Hall, Marcia B. ed. The Cambridge Companion to Raphael (Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press, 2005).
Harpham, Geoffrey. "The Grotesque: First Principles." The Journal ofAesthetics and Art
Criticism 34, no. 4 (Summer 1976): 461-468.
Harrison, Martin. Transition: The London Art Scene in the Fifties (London: Merrell,
2002).
. "Francis Bacon: Extreme Points of Realism." In Francis Bacon: The
-----
Violence ofthe Real, edited by Armin Zweite, 37-55, London, Thames and
Hudson, 2006.
_____. In Camera: Francis Bacon Photography, Film and the Practice of
Painting (London: Thames and Hudson, 2005).
_____. "Francis Bacon: lost and found: Martin Harrison analyzes the
information that has recently come to light about paintings that Bacon
destroyed, mutilated or radically altered. What do such incidents reveal about
Bacon's attitude to his art?" Apollo (March 2005).
Hatch, John G. "Fatum as Theme and Method in the Work of Francis Bacon." Artibus et
Historiae 19, no. 37 (1998): 163-175.
Hopkins, David. After Modern Art 1945-2000 (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000).
Hyman, James. The Battlefor Realism: Figurative Art in Britain During the Cold War
1945-1960 (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2001).
138
Johns, Christopher M.S. "Papal Patronage and Cultural Bureaucracy in Eighteenth
-Century Rome: Clement XI and the Accademia di San Luca." Eighteenth
-Century Studies 22 (1988): 1-23.
Johnston, John. "Machinic Vision." Critical Inquiry 26, no. 1 (Autumn 1999): 27-48.
Johnson, Paul. The Papacy (London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson, 1997).
Kelly, J.N.D. The Oxford Dictionary ofPopes (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1986).
Kimmelman, Michael. Portraits: Talking with Artists at the Met, the Modern, the Louvre
and Elsewhere (New York: Random House, 1998).
Kolacka, Daria. "Image-Affect: Bacon, Stein and Eisenstein." In Francis Bacon: The
Violence ofthe Real, edited by Armin Zweite, 203-212, London, Thames and
Hudson, 2006.
Krauss, Rosalind. "A Note on Photography and the Simu1acral." October 31 (Winter
1984): 49-68.
Lambirth, Andrew. "The Painter as King." Spectator, 4 November 2006.
_______. "Heaven and Hell." Spectator, 2 December 2006.
Levillain, Philippe, ed. The Papacy: An Encyclopedia (New York: Routledge, 2002).
Maxwell-Stuart, P.G. Chronicle ofthe Popes: The Reign-by-Reign Record ofthe Papacy
From St. Peter to the Present (London: Thames and Hudson, 1997).
Maynard, Patrick. The Engine of Visualization: Thinking Through Photography (Ithaca,
New York: Cornell University Press, 1997).
Mitchell, Paul and Lynn Roberts. A History ofEuropean Picture Frames (Merrell
Hoberton, 1996).
Nalle, Sara T. The Cambridge Companion to Velazquez (Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press, 2002).
Nelson, Robert S. "Appropriation." In Critical Terms for Art History, 2nd ed. Edited by
Robert S. Nelson and Richard Shiff, 160-173. Chicago: University of Chicago
Press, 2003.
O'Doherty, Brian. "On the Strange Case of Francis Bacon." Art Journal 24, no. 3 (Spring
1965): 288-290.
139
Olin, Margaret. "Gaze." In Critical Terms for Art History, 2nd ed. edited by Robert S.
Nelson and Richard Shiff, 318-329. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2003.
Oliva, Achile Bonito ed. Figurabile Francis Bacon (Milan: Electa, 1993).
Paravicini-Bagliani, Agostino. The Pope's Body (Chicago: University of Chicago Press,
2000).
Peppiatt, Michael. Francis Bacon: Anatomy ofan Enigma (New York: Farrar, Straus and
Giroux, 1996).
Prendeville, Brendan. "Varying the Self: Bacon's Versions of van Gogh." Oxford Art
Journal 27 (2004): 23-42.
Rabate, Jean-Michel. Writing the Image After Roland Barthes (Philadelphia: University
of Pennsylvania Press, 1997).
Roberts, Keith. "London." The Burlington Magazine 107. No. 749 (August 1965):440
-441.
_____. "The Artist Speaks?" The Burlington Magazine 117, no. 866 (May
1975): 301-302.
Rosenthal, Nonnan and Mary Anne Stevens, eds. Citizens and Kings: Portraits in the
Age ofRevolution, 1760-1830 (London: Thames & Hudson, 2007).
Savedoff, Barbara E. "Looking at Art through Photographs." The Journal ofAesthetics
and Art Criticism 51, no.3 (Summer 1993): 455-462.
. Transforming Images: How Photography Complicates the Picture
-------(Ithaca, New Yark: Cornell University Press, 2000).
Sawday, Jonathan. The Body Emblazoned: Dissection and the Human Body in
Renaissance Culture (London: Routledge, 1995).
Schmied, Wieland. Francis Bacon: Commitment and Conflict (Munich: Prestel-Verlag,
1996).
Scarry, Elaine. The Body in Pain: The Making and Unmaking ofthe World (Oxford:
Oxford University Press, 1985).
Scruton, Roger. "Photography and Representation." Critical Inquiry 7, no. 3 (Spring
1981): 577-603.
140
Shone, Richard. "Francis Bacon in 1930: An Early Exhibition Rediscovered." The
Burlington Magazine 138, no. 1117 (April 1996): 253-255.
Sinclair, Andrew. Francis Bacon: His Life and Violent Times (New York: Crown, 1993).
Sontag, Susan. On Photography (New York: Anchor Books, 1977).
Souriau, Paul. The Aesthetics ofMovement (Amherst: University of Massachusetts Press,
1983).
Stoichita, Victor 1. The Self-Aware Image: An Insight into Early Modern Meta-Painting
(Cambridge: University of Cambridge Press, 1997).
Stratton-Pruitt, Suzanne L. The Cambridge Companion to Velazquez (Cambridge:
University of Cambridge Press, 2002).
Sylvester, David. The Brutality ofFact: Interviews with Francis Bacon (London: Thames
and Hudson, 1987).
_____. Looking Back At Francis Bacon (London: Thames and Hudson, 2000).
_____. "Bacon's Secret Vice." In Francis Bacon: Working on Paper. Edited by
Matthew Gale, 9-12 (London: Tate Gallery, 1999).
Wallis, Brian, ed. Art After Modernism: Rethinking Representation (New York: New
Museum of Contemporary Art, 1984.)
Walsh, Michael. An Illustrated History ofthe Popes: Saint Peter to John Paul II (New
York: St. Martin's, 1980).
Wells, Liz, ed. The Photography Reader (London: Routledge, 2003).
West, Shearer. Portraiture (London: Oxford University Press, 2004).
Wilcox, Tim, ed. The Pursuit of the Real: British Figurative Paintingfrom Sickert to
Bacon (London: Lund Humphries, 1990).
Yard, Sally. "Francis Bacon." In Francis Bacon: A Retrospective. Edited by Dennis FaIT
and Massimo Martino, 8-17, New York: Harry N. Abrams, 1999.
Zweite, Annin. "Bacon's Scream." In Francis Bacon: The Violence ofthe Real. Edited
by Armin Zweite, 69-104, London, Thames and Hudson, 2006.
_____. "Accident, Instinct, and Inspiration, Affect and the Unconscious." In
Francis Bacon: The Violence ofthe Real, edited by Armin Zweite, 213-236,
London, Thames and Hudson, 2006.
141