- International Tiger Day
- Versace opens new store in Moscow
- Dubrovnik Croatian Women
- Dubrovnik Girl
- To all our Moslem Friends Happy Eid el Fitr عيد مبارك
- Dubrovnik, Croatia
- Costa Concordia reaches end of final voyage
- ‘When Harry Met Sally’ got it wrong 25 years ago
- Lamborghini Huracán LP610-4 2015
- Archi Dior Jewelry: The Finer Things in Life
- Sam Van Aken describes the inspiration behind his fruit tree
- Smart people buy generic brands
- Robotic football Messi v the Machines
- “Money” – Liza Minnelli, Joel Grey
- Liza Money
- American Supercar Hennessey Venom GT Takes Title of ‘World’s Fastest’ From Bugatti
- Content Advertising – The Perfect Partnership
- Internet Junkies
- Reason To Believe Rod Stewart
- Reason To Believe
- The Moth Presents Lt. Dan Choi: Made to be Broken
- Exagon Furtive-eGT
- 12 of the world’s best water parks
- Gloria Mando Diao
- July 2014
- June 2014
- May 2014
- April 2014
- March 2014
- February 2014
- January 2014
- December 2013
- November 2013
- October 2013
- September 2013
- August 2013
- July 2013
- June 2013
- May 2013
- April 2013
- March 2013
- February 2013
- January 2013
- December 2012
- November 2012
- October 2012
- September 2012
- August 2012
- July 2012
- June 2012
- May 2012
- April 2012
- March 2012
- February 2012
- January 2012
- December 2011
- November 2011
- October 2011
- September 2011
- August 2011
- July 2011
- June 2011
- May 2011
Francis Bacon (artist)
Francis Bacon (28 October 1909 – 28 April 1992) was an Irish-born British figurative painter known for his bold, graphic and emotionally raw imagery. Bacon’s painterly but abstract figures typically appear isolated in glass or steel geometrical cages set against flat, nondescript backgrounds. He began painting during his early 20s and worked only sporadically until his mid 30s. Before this time he drifted, earning his living as an interior decorator and designer of furniture and rugs. Later, he admitted that his career was delayed because he had spent too long looking for a subject that would sustain his interest. His breakthrough came with the 1944 triptych Three Studies for Figures at the Base of a Crucifixion, and it was this work and his heads and figures of the late 1940s through to the mid 1950s that sealed his reputation as a notably bleak chronicler of the human condition.
From the mid 1960s, Bacon mainly produced portrait heads of friends. He often said in interviews that he saw images “in series”, and his artistic output often saw him focus on single themes for sustained periods including his crucifixion, Papal heads, and later single and triptych heads series. He began by painting variations on the Crucifixion and later focused on half-human, half-grotesque portraits, best exemplified by the 1949 “Heads in a Room” series. Following the 1971 suicide of his lover George Dyer, Bacon’s art became more personal, inward looking and preoccupied with themes and motifs of death. The climax of this late period came with his 1982 “Study for Self-Portrait”, and his late masterpiece Study for a Self Portrait -Triptych, 1985-86.
Triptych, May–June 1973, Oil on canvas, Esther Grether collection, Switzerland
Despite his existentialist outlook on life expressed through his paintings, Bacon always appeared to be a bon vivant, spending much of his middle and later life eating, drinking and gambling in London’s Soho with Lucian Freud, John Deakin, Daniel Farson, Patrick Swift, Jeffrey Bernard, Muriel Belcher and Henrietta Moraes, among others. Following Dyer’s death he distanced himself from this circle and became less involved with rough trade to settle in a platonic relationship with his eventual heir, John Edwards. Since his death in 1992, Bacon’s reputation has steadily grown. Despite Margaret Thatcher having famously described him as “that man who paints those dreadful pictures”, he was the subject of two major Tate retrospectives during his lifetime and received a third in 2008. Bacon always professed not to depend on preparatory works and was resolute that he never drew. Yet since his death, a number of sketches have emerged and although the Tate recognised them as canon, they have not yet been acknowledged as such by the art market. In addition, in the late 1990s, several presumed destroyed major works, including Popes from the early 1950s and Heads from the 1960s, surfaced on the art market, some of which are considered equal to any of his “official” output.
birthplace at 63 Baggot Street Dublin
Francis Bacon was born in Dublin at 63 Lower Baggot Street, to parents of British descent. Captain Anthony Edward Mortimer (“Eddy”) Bacon, his father, was a veteran of the Boer War who became aracehorse trainer. Christina Winifred “Winnie” Firth, his mother, was an heiress to a Sheffield steel business and coal mine. It is believed that his father was a direct descendant of Sir Nicholas Bacon, the elder half-brother of Sir Francis Bacon, the Elizabethan statesman, philosopher and essayist. His beautiful great-great-grandmother, Lady Charlotte Harley, was intimately acquainted with Lord Byron, who called her “Ianthe”, so much so that he dedicated his famous poem, Childe Harold’s Pilgrimage, to her. When Bacon’s paternal grandfather was given the chance to revive the family title of Lord Oxford by Queen Victoria, he refused for financial reasons.
He had an older brother, Harley, five years his senior, two younger sisters, Ianthe and Winifred, and a younger brother, Edward. He was raised by the family nanny, a woman from Cornwall, Jessie Lightfoot. Known by Francis as ‘Nanny Lightfoot’, she would continue to play a key role in the artist’s development even after his exile by Captain Bacon. During Bacon’s early years, before he found fame with his first masterpiece, Three Studies for Figures at the Base of a Crucifixion in 1945, he continually drifted throughout rental homes in England, accompanied by Lightfoot. Bacon created his own Mother within Lightfoot, using her as a filler for the lack of a maternal figure in his childhood. Lightfoot, despite her age, was said to sleep on the kitchen table, as there was not a spare bed in their accommodation The family shifted houses often, moving back and forth between Ireland and England several times during this period, leading to a feeling of displacement that would remain with the artist throughout his life. In 1911 the family lived in Cannycourt Housenear Kilcullen, County Kildare, but later moved to Westbourne Terrace, London, close to where Bacon’s father worked at the Territorial Force Records Office.
Three Studies for Figures at the Base of a Crucifixion, 1944. Oil and pastel on Sundeala board. Tate Britain, London
On returning to Ireland after World War I, Bacon was sent to live for a time with his maternal grandmother and step-grandfather, Winifred and Kerry Supple, at Farmleigh, Abbeyleix, County Laois, though they soon moved again to Straffan Lodge near Naas, County Kildare, his mother’s birthplace. Although shy, he enjoyed dressing up. This, coupled with his effeminate manner, often enraged his father and created a distance between them. A story emerged in 1992 of his father having had Francis horsewhipped by their groom. In 1924 his parents moved to Gloucestershire, first to Prescott House in Gotherington, then to Linton Hall, situated near the border with Herefordshire. Francis spent eighteen months boarding at Dean Close School, Cheltenham, from the third term of 1924 until April 1926. This was to be his only brush with a formal education as he quit the school right before he was to be expelled.
Head I (1948)
At a fancy-dress party at the Firth family house of Cavendish Hall, Suffolk, Francis dressed up as a flapper with an Eton crop, beaded dress, lipstick, high heels, and a long cigarette holder. In 1926, the family moved back to Straffan Lodge. His sister, Ianthe, twelve years his junior, recalled that Bacon made drawings of ladies with cloche hats and long cigarette holders. Later that year, Francis was banished from Straffan Lodge following an incident in which his father found him admiring himself in front of a large mirror draped in his mother’s underwear.
Head VI (1948) (Arts Council of England)
London, Berlin and Paris
Bacon spent the autumn and winter of 1926 in London, with the help of an allowance of £3 a week from his mother’s trust fund, living on his instincts, simply ‘drifting’, and reading Nietzsche. When he was broke, Bacon found that by the simple expedient of rent-dodging and petty theft, he could manage a reasonable economy. To supplement his income, he briefly tried his hand at domestic service, but although he enjoyed cooking, he quickly became bored and resigned. He was sacked from a telephone answering position at a shop selling women’s clothes in Poland Street, Soho, after writing a poison pen letter to the owner.
Still from Sergei Eisenstein’s 1925 silent film The Battleship Potemkin
Early on he was aware that he was able to attract a certain type of rich man, a fact he was quick to take advantage of, having developed a taste for good food and wine. One of the men was an ex-army friend of his father, another breeder of racehorses, named Harcourt-Smith. Bacon later claimed that his father had asked this friend to take him ‘in-hand’ and ‘make a man of him’. Francis had a difficult relationship with his father, once admitting to being sexually attracted to him. In 1927, Bacon was taken by Harcourt-Smith to the opulent, decadent, “wide open” Berlin of the Weimar Republic, where they stayed together at the Hotel Adlon. Bacon likely saw Fritz Lang’s Metropolis around this time.
Bacon spent two months in Berlin, though Harcourt-Smith left after just one – “He soon got tired of me, of course, and went off with a woman … I didn’t really know what to do, so I hung on for a while, and then, since I’d managed to keep a bit of money, I decided to go to Paris.” Bacon then spent the next year and a half in Paris. He met Yvonne Bocquentin, pianist and connoisseur, at the opening of an exhibition. Aware of his own need to learn French, Bacon lived for three months with Madame Bocquentin and her family at their house near Chantilly. He travelled into Paris to visit the city’s art galleries. At the Château de Chantilly(Musée Condé) he saw Nicolas Poussin’s Massacre of the Innocents, a painting to which he was often to refer in his own later work. From Chantilly, he went to an exhibition that was largely to inspire him to take up painting. His visit to a 1927 exhibition of 106 drawings by Picasso at the Galerie Paul Rosenberg, Paris, aroused his artistic interest, and he often took the train into Paris five or more times a week to see shows and art exhibitions. Bacon saw Abel Gance’s epic silent film Napoléon at the Paris Opéra when it premiered in April 1927. From the autumn of 1927, Bacon stayed at the Paris Hôtel Delambre in Montparnasse.
Return to London
Bacon returned to London late in 1928 or early 1929, and started work as an interior designer. He took a studio at 17 Queensberry Mews West, South Kensington, and shared the upper floor with Eric Alden – later to become his first collector – and his childhood nanny, Jessie Lightfoot. Bacon advertised himself as a “gentleman’s companion” in The Times, on the front page (then reserved for personal messages and insertions). Among the many answers carefully vetted by Nanny Lightfoot was one from an elderly cousin of Douglas Cooper, at that time owner of one of the finest collections of modern art in England. The gentleman, having paid Bacon for his services, found him part-time work as a telephone operator in a London club and further sought Cooper’s help in promoting Bacon’s developing skill as a designer of furniture and interiors. Cooper also commissioned a desk from Bacon in battleship grey around this time.
In 1929 he met Eric Hall at the Bath Club, Dover Street, where Bacon was working at the telephone exchange. Hall was to be both patron and lover to Bacon, in an often torturous relationship. The first show in the winter of 1929, at Queensberry Mews, was of Bacon’s carpet rugs and furniture, and may have included Painted screen (ca. 1929–1930) and Watercolour (1929). Watercolour (1929) his earliest surviving painting, seems to have evolved from his rug designs, in turn influenced by the paintings and tapestries of Jean Lurçat.
Sydney Butler (daughter of Samuel Courtauld and wife of Rab Butler) commissioned a glass and steel table and a set of stools for the dining room of her Smith Square house…. Bacon’s Queensberry Mews studio was featured in the August 1930 issue of The Studio magazine, in a double page article entitled “The 1930 Look in British Decoration”. The piece showed work including a large round mirror, some rugs and tubular steel and glass furniture largely influenced by the International Style, Marcel Breuer, Le Corbusier/Charlotte Perriand and Eileen Gray.
He returned to Germany in 1930. A dramatic studio portrait taken of Bacon by Helmar Lerski, a Swiss photographer and cinematographer, probably dates from this visit. Bacon was later to tell Stephen Spender that he had been very impressed by the work of a photographer who had produced striking effects using mirrors and natural light filtered through screens, but that he could not remember the artist’s name.
Later that year Francis Bacon met Roy de Maistre, an Australian painter who was to become a close friend and mentor. De Maistre’s circle included Graham Sutherland, Henry Moore, Patrick White and Douglas Cooper. A second exhibition was held between 4–22 November at 17 Queensberry Mews. Alongside de Maistre and Jean Sheppeard, Bacon showed four paintings and one print. Gouache (1929) may be the piece titled as A Brick Wall in the hand-list. Painting (1929–1930) (probably the work listed as Tree by the Sea) is Bacon’s earliest surviving oil painting. Both were bought by Alden. The two other paintings (Self-portrait and Two Brothers) and print (Dark Child in an edition of three) are now lost.
Portrait of Lucian Freud
Bacon left the Queensberry Mews West studio in 1931, and was not to have a settled space for some years. Bacon probably shared a studio with Roy de Maistre, circa 1931/32, at Carlyle Studios (just off the Kings Road) in Chelsea. Portrait(1932) and Portrait (ca. 1931–1932) (the latter bought by Diana Watson) both show a round-faced youth with diseased skin (painted after Bacon saw Ibsen’s Ghosts), and date from a brief stay in a studio on the Fulham Road. In 1932, Bacon was commissioned by Gladys MacDermot, an Irish woman who had lived in Australia, to redesign much of the decoration and furniture of her flat at 98 Ridgmount Gardens in Bloomsbury. Bacon recalled that she was “always filling me up with food”.
Study of a Dog
Bacon visited Paris in 1935, purchasing there a second-hand book on diseases of the mouth containing high quality hand-coloured plates of both open mouths and oral interiors, which haunted and obsessed him for the remainder of his life. In 1935 he saw Eisenstein’s The Battleship Potemkin, the scene of the nurse screaming on the Odessa steps later becoming a major theme in his paintings, with the angularity of Eisenstein’s image often combined with the thick red palette of his recently purchased medical tome.
Etude de tauromachie
In winter of 1935–36, Roland Penrose and Herbert Read, making a first selection for the International Surrealist Exhibition, visited his studio at 71 Royal Hospital Road, Chelsea, saw “three or four large canvases including one with a grandfather clock,” but found his work “insufficiently surreal to be included in the show”. Bacon claimed Penrose told him “Mr. Bacon, don’t you realise a lot has happened in painting since the Impressionists?” In 1936 or 1937 Bacon moved from 71 Royal Hospital Road to the top floor of 1 Glebe Place, Chelsea, which Eric Hall had rented. The following year, White moved to the top two floors of the building where de Maistre now had his studio, on Eccleston Street, and commissioned from Bacon, who was by now a friend, a writing desk (with wide drawers and a red linoleum top).
White also bought the glass and steel dining table from Rab and Sydney Butler.
In January 1937, at Thomas Agnew and Sons, 43 Old Bond Street, London, Bacon was in a group show, Young British Painters, which included Graham Sutherland, Victor Pasmore, and Roy de Maistre. Eric Hall, also a friend of Jerry Agnew, organised the show; Agnew’s was then known for shows of Old Master paintings. Four works by Bacon were shown: Figures in a Garden (1936), purchased by Diana Watson; Abstraction, and Abstraction from the Human Form, known from magazine photographs (they prefigure Three Studies for Figures at the Base of a Crucifixion (1944) in variously having a tripod structure (Abstraction), bared teeth (Abstraction from the Human Form), and both being biomorphic in form); Seated Figure is lost entirely.
On 1 June 1940 Bacon’s father died. Bacon was named sole Trustee/Executor of his father’s will, which requested that the funeral be as “private and simple as possible”. Unfit for active wartime service, Bacon volunteered for civil defence and worked full-time in the ARP (Air Raid Precautions) rescue service. But the fine dust of bombed London worsened his asthma and he was discharged.
At the height of the Blitz, Eric Hall rented a cottage for Bacon and himself at Bedales Lodge, Steep, near Petersfield, Hampshire. Figure Getting Out of a Car (ca. 1939 – 1940) was painted here but is known only from an early 1946 photograph taken by Peter Rose Pulham (taken shortly before it was painted over by Bacon and retitled Landscape with Car). An ancestor to the biomorphic form of the central panel of Three Studies for Figures at the Base of a Crucifixion(1944), the composition was suggested by a photograph of Hitler getting out of a car at one of the Nuremberg rallies, (Bacon claims to have “copied the car and not much else”.)
Returning from Hampshire at the latter part of 1943, Bacon and Hall took the ground floor of 7 Cromwell Place, South Kensington, John Everett Millais’ old house and studio. High vaulted and north lit, it had had its roof recently bombed – Bacon was able to adapt a large old billiard room at the back of the house as his own studio. Nanny Lightfoot, lacking an alternative location, slept on the kitchen table. Illicit roulette parties were held there, organised by Bacon with assistance by Hall, to the financial benefit of both.
Three Studies for Figures at the Base of a Crucifixion
Bacon considered his 1944 Three Studies for Figures at the Base of a Crucifixion (1944) as his fons et origo and did not want any of his earlier works to enter his canon.Graham Sutherland saw his Painting (1946) in the Cromwell Place studio, and urged his dealer, Erica Brausen, then of the Redfern Gallery, to go to see the painting and to buy it. Brausen wrote to Bacon several times, and visited his studio in early autumn 1946 and promptly bought the work for £200. Painting (1946) was shown in several group shows including in the British section of Exposition internationale d’arte moderne (18 November – 28 December 1946) at the Musée National d’Art Moderne, for which Bacon travelled to Paris. Within a fortnight of the sale of Painting (1946) to the Hanover Gallery Bacon used the proceeeds to decamp from London to Monte Carlo. After staying at a succession of hotels and flats, including the Hôtel de Ré, Bacon settled in a large villa, La Frontalière, in the hills above the town. Hall and Lightfoot would come to stay. Bacon spent much of the next few years in Monte Carlo, short visits to London apart. From Monte Carlo, Bacon wrote to Graham Sutherland and Erica Brausen. His letters to Erica Brausen show that he did paint there, but no paintings are known to survive. In 1948, Painting (1946) sold to Alfred Barr for the Museum of Modern Art in New York for £240. Bacon wrote to Sutherland asking that he apply fixative to the patches of pastel on Painting (1946) before it was shipped to New York. Painting (1946) is now too fragile to be moved from MoMA for exhibition elsewhere.
At least one visit to Paris in 1946 brought Bacon into more immediate contact with French post-war painting and Left Bank ideas such as Existentialism. He had, by this time, embarked on his life-long friendship with Isabel Rawsthorne, a painter closely involved with Giacometti and the Left Bank set. They shared many interests including ethnography and classical literature.
Triptych Inspired by the Oresteia of Aeschylus
Bacon returned to London and Cromwell Place to paint, late in 1948. Head I was shown at the Summer Exhibition at the Redfern gallery from July to September 1948. By the end of 1948 Erica Brausen, who had advanced Bacon money for works, left the Redfern Gallery. Brausen had found private capital to start her own gallery in Mayfair. In the spring, Bacon’s Head I was displayed at her new Hanover Gallery (and was noted by Wyndham Lewis, as a preview of the main show, in an exhibition review of 12 May 1949). Held between 8 November and 10 December 1949 at the Hanover Gallery, Francis Bacon: Paintings; Robert Ironside: Coloured Drawings, was his first professional one-man show (Robert Ironside’s watercolours were on an upper floor). A series of six paintings Head I to Head VI, with Study from the Human Body (1949) and Study for Portrait (1949) formed the core of the show with four other paintings by Bacon.
Portrait of Michel Leiris
Bacon’s paintings attracted the support of Wyndham Lewis writing in The Listener. “The Hanover [Gallery] Show is of exceptional importance. Of the younger painters none actually paints so beautifully as Francis Bacon”, Lewis wrote, adding: “Bacon is one of the most powerful artists in Europe today and he is perfectly in tune with his time”. The following year he wrote of another exhibition: “Three large new canvases by Bacon prove him once more to be the most astonishingly sinister artist in England, and one of the most original”.
Well, I was living once down in Monte Carlo and I had lost all my money, and, I had no canvases left and so, the few I had I just turned them, and I found that the, that the, what is called the wrong side, the unprimed side of the canvas worked for me very much better. So I’ve always used them. So it was just by chance that I had no money to buy canvases with.” – Excerpt from an interview with Melvyn Bragg in Francis Bacon (1985), for the South Bank Show for London Weekend Television.
Portrait of John Edwards
Head II is, for Bacon, very thickly painted, this was one of very few instances when he had been able to ‘rescue’ a painting after it had become overworked and the weave of the canvas clogged(as happened with two abandoned works on canvas from the Head series, from 1949, also in the 1949 Hanover show). The arrow, or pointer, motif in Head II is taken from the book Positioning inRadiography by Kathleen Clara Clark, 1939.
Study for Portrait of John Edwards (Right Panel from Original Triptych)
Head VI was Bacon’s first surviving engagement with Velázquez’s great Portrait of Pope Innocent X (three ‘popes’ were painted in Monte Carlo in 1946 but were destroyed). The Cobalt Violet mozzetta, crimson in Velázquez’s painting, may reflect Bacon’s use of printed reproductions of the painting. Bacon later said that, although he admired “the magnificent color” of the Velázquez, Velázquez “wanted to make it as much like a Titian as possible but, in a curious way he cooled Titian”.
Study after Velázquez’s Portrait of Pope Innocent X, 1953
The Colony Room was a private drinking club at 41 Dean Street, Soho, also known as Muriel’s after Muriel Belcher, the formidable proprietor. Belcher, who had run a club called the Music-box inLeicester Square during the war, had secured a 3 pm – 11pm drinking licence for the Colony Room bar as a private-members club (public houses had to, by law, close at 2:30 pm). Bacon was a founding member, and joined the day after its opening in 1948. He was ‘adopted’ by Belcher as a ‘daughter’, and was allowed free drinks and £10 a week to bring in friends and rich patrons. It was here that Bacon became friends with Lady Rose McLaren.
Oedipus and the Sphinx after Ingres
Bacon met the painter and illustrator John Minton in 1948. Minton was soon to become a regular at Muriel’s, as were the painters Lucian Freud, Frank Auerbach, Patrick Swift, Timothy Behrens,Michael Andrews, the two Roberts, Colquhoun and MacBride (all of whom were involved with Swift’s ‘X’ magazine), and above all the sometime Vogue photographer, John Deakin. In 1950, Bacon met the art critic David Sylvester, then best known for his writing on Henry Moore and praise for Alberto Giacometti’s work. Sylvester had admired and written about his work (first writing about Bacon for a French periodical, L’Age nouveau, in 1948) but had erroneously perceived it to be a form of Expressionism. Head I, in particular, at the 1949 Hanover Gallery show, was, for Sylvester, proof of Bacon’s importance as a painter. John Minton left for the West Indies in September 1950. Aware that Bacon was in need of money, Minton asked him to take over his post as a tutor at the school of painting at the Royal College of Art. On condition that he did no formal teaching, Bacon agreed. So for three months, he was on hand to talk to the students for two days a week.
Left Panel from Triptych 1974-1977
In 1960 Bacon met the then young Irish painter Reginald Gray who painted a small egg tempera on wood portrait of Bacon. The work was the first portrait of Bacon to enter The National Portrait Gallery, London, when, in 1975, it was gifted to the Gallery by the collector Aubrey Beese. By 1950, Bacon’s affair with Eric Hall had come to an end – he no longer appears on the electoral register with Bacon and Jessie Lightfoot at 7 Cromwell Place, but Hall remained a loyal patron, friend and supporter. During November 1950, Bacon visited his mother in South Africa, which suited his asthma.
Bacon was impressed by the African landscapes and wildlife, and took photographs in Kruger National Park. On his return journey he spent a few days in Cairo, and wrote to Erica Brausen of his intent to visit Karnak and Luxor, and then viaAlexandria to Marseilles. The visit confirmed his belief in the supremacy of Egyptian art, embodied by the Sphinx. He returned in the spring of 1951. On 30 April 1951, Jessie Lightfoot, Bacon’s childhood nurse, died at Cromwell Place. Bacon was gambling in Nice when he learned of her death. Lightfoot was Bacon’s closest companion and had joined him in London on his return from Paris, and lived with him and Eric Alden at Queensberry Mews West, and later with him and Eric Hall at the cottage near Petersfield, in Monte Carlo and at Cromwell Place. Stricken, Bacon sold the 7 Cromwell Place apartment.
Study for the Head of George Dyer (1966)
Death of George Dyer
Bacon met George Dyer in 1964 when, he claimed, he caught the young man breaking into his home. Dyer was then about thirty years old and had grown up in the East End of London in a family steeped in crime. He had spent his life drifting between theft, juvenile detention centre and jail.
Bacon’s relationships prior to Dyer had all been with older men who were as tumultuous in temperament as the artist himself, but each had been the dominating presence. Peter Lacy, his first lover, would often tear up the young artist’s paintings, beat him up in drunken rages, and leave him on the street half-conscious. Bacon was attracted to Dyer’s vulnerability and trusting nature. Dyer was impressed by Bacon’s self-confidence and his artistic success, and Bacon acted as a protector and father figure to the insecure younger man. Dyer was, like Bacon, a borderline alcoholic and similarly took obsessive care with his appearance. Pale-faced and a chain-smoker, Dyer typically confronted his daily hangovers by drinking again. His compact and athletic build belied a docile and inwardly tortured personality; the art critic Michael Peppiatt described him as having the air of a man who could “land a decisive punch”. Their behaviours eventually overwhelmed their affair, and by 1970, Bacon was merely providing Dyer with enough money to stay more or less permanently drunk.
Studies of Male Back, 1970
As Bacon’s work moved from the extreme subject matter of his early paintings to portraits of friends in the mid-1960s, Dyer became a dominating presence in the artist’s work. Bacon’s treatment of his lover in these canvasses emphasises his subject’s physicality while remaining uncharacteristically tender. More than any other of the artist’s close friends portrayed during this period, Dyer came to feel inseparable from his effigies. The paintings gave him stature, a raison d’etre, and offered meaning to what Bacon described as Dyer’s “brief interlude between life and death”. Many critics have cited Dyer’s portraits as favourites, including Michel Leiris and Lawrence Gowling. Yet as Dyer’s novelty diminished within Bacon’s circle of sophisticated intellectuals, the younger man became increasingly bitter and ill at ease. Although Dyer welcomed the attention the paintings brought him, he did not pretend to understand or even like them. “All that money an’ I fink they’re reely ‘orrible”, he observed with choked pride.
He abandoned crime but soon descended into alcoholism. Bacon’s money allowed Dyer to attract hangers-on who would accompany him on massive benders around London’s Soho. Withdrawn and reserved when sober, Dyer was insuppressible when drunk, and would often attempt to “pull a Bacon” by buying large rounds and paying for expensive dinners for his wide circle. Dyer’s erratic behaviour inevitably wore thin—with his cronies, with Bacon, and with Bacon’s friends. Most of Bacon’s art world associates regarded Dyer as a nuisance—an intrusion into the world of high culture to which theirBacon belonged. Dyer reacted by becoming increasingly needy and dependent. By 1971, he was drinking alone and was only in occasional contact with his former lover.
Man Writing Reflected in a Mirror
In October 1971, Dyer accompanied Bacon to Paris for the opening of the artist’s retrospective at the Grand Palais. The show was the high point of Bacon’s career to date, and he was now being described as Britain’s “greatest living painter”. Dyer was now a desperate man, and although he was “allowed” to attend, he was well aware that he was “slipping”, in every sense, out of the picture. To draw Bacon’s attention he earlier planted cannabis in Bacon’s flat, then phoned the police, and he had attempted suicide on a number of occasions. On the eve of the Paris exhibition, Bacon and Dyer shared a hotel room, and Bacon spent the next day surrounded by people eager to meet him. In mid-evening he was informed that Dyer had taken an overdose of barbiturates and was dead. Though devastated, Bacon continued with the retrospective and displayed powers of self-control “to which few of us could aspire”, according to Russell Bacon was deeply affected by the loss of Dyer, and he had recently lost four other friends and his nanny. From this point on, death haunted his life and work. Though he gave a stoic appearance at the time, he was inwardly broken. He did not express his feelings to critics, but later admitted to friends that “daemons, disaster and loss” now stalked him as if his own version of the Eumenides. Bacon spent the remainder of his stay in Paris attending to promotional activities and funeral arrangements. He returned to London later that week to comfort Dyer’s family. The funeral proved to be an emotional affair for all, and many of Dyer’s friends, including hardened East-End criminals, broke down in tears. As the coffin was lowered into the grave one attendant screamed “you bloody fool!”. Although Bacon remained stoic throughout, in the following months Dyer preoccupied his imagination as never before. To confront his loss, he painted a number of tributes on small canvasses and his three “Black Triptych” masterpieces.
Three Studies for a Self Portrait
Later life and death
In 1974, Bacon met John Edwards, another young man from the East End, with whom he formed one of his most enduring friendships. While holidaying in Madrid in 1992, Bacon was admitted to the Handmaids of Maria, a private clinic, where he was cared for by Sister Mercedes. His chronic asthma, which had plagued him all his life, had developed into a respiratory condition and he could not talk or breathe very well. He died of cardiac arrest on 28 April 1992, attempts to resuscitate him having failed. He bequeathed his entire estate (then valued at £11 million) to John Edwards. Edwards, in turn, donated the contents of Francis Bacon’s chaotic studio at 7 Reece Mews, South Kensington, to the Hugh Lane Gallery in Dublin. Bacon’s studio contents were moved and the studio carefully reconstructed in the gallery. Additionally draft materials, perhaps intended for destruction, were bequeathed to Barry Joule who later forwarded most of the materials to create the Barry Joule Archive in Dublin with other parts of the collection given later to the Tate museum.
Study of the Human Body from a drawing by Ingres
The tiny and cramped nature of Bacon’s London studio and apartment were subjected to some critical analysis in an article in The Guardian by Aida Edemariam. She claims Bacon being frequently locked screaming for hours in a cupboard as a young boy, by a nanny, formed the basis of his preference for working in cramped conditions and his unwillingness to work in a larger space. The article states: “That cupboard”, Bacon apparently said years later, “was the making of me”.
The imagery of the crucifixion weighs heavily in the work of Francis Bacon. The critic John Russell wrote that the crucifixion in Bacon’s work is a “generic name for an environment in which bodily harm is done to one or more persons and one or more other persons gather to watch”. Bacon admitted that he saw the scene as “a magnificent armature on which you can hang all types of feeling and sensation”. He believed that the imagery of the crucifixion allowed him to examine “certain areas of human behaviour” in a unique way, as the armature of the theme had been accumulated by so many old masters.
Study for the Human Body, 1981
Though he came to painting relatively late in life – he did not begin to paint seriously until his late 30s – crucifixion scenes can be found in his earliest works. In 1933, his then-patron Eric Hall commissioned a series of three paintings based on the subject. These early paintings were influenced by such old masters as Matthias Grünewald, Diego Velázquez and Rembrandt, but also by Picasso’s late 1920s/early 1930s biomorphs and the early work of the Surrealists.
Bacon called the image of a screaming mouth a catalyst for his work, and incorporated the shape of the mouth when painting the chimera. Bacon’s finding of the theme is examined in one of his first surviving works, Abstraction from the Human Form. By the early 1950s it became an obsessive concern, to the point, according to art critic and Bacon biographer Michael Peppiatt, “it would be no exaggeration to say that, if one could really explain the origins and implications of this scream, one would be far closer to understanding the whole art of Francis Bacon.” The inspiration for the recurring motif of the screaming mouths in many Bacons of the late 1940s and early 1950s were drawn from a number of sources, including medical text books, the works of Matthias Grünewald and photographic stills of the nurse in the Odessa Steps scene in Sergei Eisenstein’s 1925 silent The Battleship Potemkin. Bacon first saw the film in 1935, and viewed it frequently thereafter. In his studio, he kept a photographic still of the scene which showed a close-up of the nurse’s head which showed her screaming in panic and terror and with broken pince-nez spectacles hanging from her blood-stained face. He referred to the image throughout his career, using it as a source of inspiration. One can relate this particular image to that of Nanny Lightfoot, as she, like the wounded nurse, wore the same oval spectacles.
Bacon’s Soho life was portrayed by John Maybury, with Derek Jacobi as Bacon and Daniel Craig as George Dyer (and with Tilda Swinton as Muriel Belcher), in the film Love Is the Devil (1998), based onDaniel Farson’s 1993 biography The Gilded Gutter Life of Francis Bacon.
On 14 May 2008, the Triptych, 1976, “a landmark of the 20th-century canon,” sold at Sotheby’s contemporary art sale for €55.465 million ($86.28 million), a record for the artist and the highest price ever paid for a post-war work of art at auction. Sold by the Moueix family, producers of Château Pétrus wines, it was bought by the Russian billionaire Roman Abramovich. The sale broke the 2007 record for his work of €34.212 million ($52.68 million). The triptych had remained in the same European collection since its 1977 purchase from a London gallery.
A major retrospective of Bacon’s work opened on 11 September 2008 at Tate Britain, London. It was billed as the largest retrospective of his work ever mounted, containing around sixty of his works. In January 2009, it travelled on to the Prado Gallery in Madrid, Spain, where it was exhibited until April 2009. Then it travelled on to the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York, “where it ended in the summer of 2009″.
وأوردت تقارير صحفية منذ قليل ، خرج كثير من الفنانين من قاعة المحكمة الآن وهم يرددون هتافات “حرية حرية.. يسقط يسقط حكم المرشد” ، بعدما صدر الحكم ضد الفنان عادل إمام أول أمس بالسجن 3 أشهر ودفع كفالة مالية 100 ألف جنية .Share on Facebook
■ الخضيرى يهدد بالقتل والشاطر يعود للكفاح المسلح!
■ رغم أنف الجنرالات.. الانتخابات الرئاسية فى موعدها.. وفشل البرلمان فى وضع الدستور يفقده مبرر وجوده ويفرض حله وانتخاب غيره!
■ الإخوان يريدون السيطرة على الجيش.. والجيش لن يرحل عن السلطة لو جاءت حكومة دينية!
ما خرج من «فم» المستشار محمود الخضيرى تحت قبة مجلس الشعب يوم الخميس الماضى.. لم يكن كلمات.. وإنما خناجر ومسامير وجنازير.
كانت المناقشة ملتهبة ومتوترة حول ما عرف بقانون «سليمان» عندما قام القاضى العريق ليلقى بكل حكمة وخبرة وسطوة العدالة التى جمعها فى نصف قرن من منصات المحاكم تحت حذائه.. ويقول: «لو كنا قد قتلنا مبارك وسليمان لم يكن ليحاسبنا أحد».. «ثوار ليبيا قتلوا القذافى ولم يحاسبهم أحد».
لم يفرق الرجل بين البرلمان والسلخانة.. ولا بين تطبيق القانون وقطع الطريق.. ولا بين الدستور والحزام الناسف.. وخرجت من صدره أسراب مكبوتة من الطيور الجارحة الشرسة التى تنقر كل ما يقترب منها.
وجاء النائب حسن البرنس ليقبل يده.. إعجابا.. بصاحب الفضيلة.. وابتسم رئيس المجلس سعد الكتاتنى تشجيعا.. وقبولا.. لنجد أمامنا رقصة متوحشة.. تجاوزت الإيقاعات الديمقراطية الراقية لتصبح هى نفسها إيقاعا مؤلما.
ولو كنت واحدا من مئات المتقاضين الذين وقفوا ذات يوم أمام المستشار محمود الخضيرى لاستخدمت نص عباراته تحت القبة.. كى أطالب بإعادة النظر فيما حكم به ضدى.. فالقاضى الذى يفكر ويتكلم ويتصرف بهذه الطريقة لابد أن يفقد صلاحيته.. وبأثر رجعى.
بل.. إن ما قاله جريمة يعاقبه عليها القضاة من زملائه وتلاميذه.. لكن.. من يجرؤ على محاسبته ونحن فى دولة انفرط عقدها.. وتجاوزت عقلها.. وانتقلت فيها جماعات سياسية ودينية من الشرعية إلى البلطجة.
وعلى تويتر خيرت الشاطر وجدناه يقول: «جاهزون للكفاح المسلح إذا ما فاز الفلول بالرئاسة».. وأنا أصدقه تماما.. ولا أصدق نفيه الذى نشره فى اليوم التالى.. فالطبع يغلب التطبع.. والذئب سيظل ذئبا مهما تنكر فى ثياب الجدة العجوز.. كما فى حكاية «ذات الرداء الأحمر».
ولو كان عمر سليمان ينسب فى شهادته أمام محكمة مبارك كثيرا من العنف، خاصة ضد أقسام الشرطة «لتيارات».. فإن هذا يفسر الهجوم الشرس على الرجل وتهديده بالقتل لو اقترب من السلطة.. فوجوده بالنسبة إليهم أصبح مسألة حياة أو موت.. ولا يفسر النسب العالية التى حصل عليها فى استفتاءات الرأى العام سوى أن الناس تشعر بالخوف من الإرهاب الدينى، وإن تغطى هذه المرة بورقة توت مكتوب عليها «الحفاظ على الثورة».
وهنا.. أستسمح الدكتور أحمد عكاشة أن يستخدم خبرته العميقة فى تحليل هذه المشاهد نفسيا.. وإنسانيا.. ورسم صورة حقيقية لمثل هذه الأنماط البشرية.. فلو كانوا، وهم على البر، يهددوننا بكل هذه الجرأة، فما الذى سيفعلونه بنا لو ركبوا الحكم «ودلدلوا رجليهم»؟
لكن.. الأخطر.. أنهم ليسوا وحدهم.. هناك غيرهم.. لا حصر لهم.. ينتمون لتيارات دينية متأسلمة.. كشفوا عما فى نفوسهم من رغبات مكبوتة وقديمة فى القتل والنسف والاغتيال والتفجير.. وهى رغبات تؤكد أن العنف جزء من طبيعتهم التنظيمية.. وملفاتهم التاريخية.. وجيناتهم الوراثية.. السياسية.
إن الجهاز العسكرى السرى لهذه الجماعات جاهز على ما يبدو لتنفيذ ما يؤمر به.. وربما لو تتبعنا مسار مئات الأسلحة التى سرقت وتسللت واشتريت.. لوصلنا إلى نتيجة ستثير فزعنا جميعا.. ولن أفاجأ لو تحولت مصر من جديد إلى بحور من الدماء.. فهذه القوى ترى أن ثمرة السلطة أصبحت قريبة من يدها.. ولن تتركها تفر من يدها هذه المرة مهما كان حجم الضحايا.
إن ما يقال همسا تحت الأرض فى التنظيمات السرية، لا يجوز أن يقال علنا فى مجلس الشعب.. أعلى سلطة تشريعية ورقابية فى البلاد.. ولغة النواب غير لغة المولوتوف.. لغة النواب راقية.. ولغة المولوتوف حارقة.. وأصول التشريع تختلف عن التمرد على القانون.. أصول التشريع تقوم على أسس متعارف عليها.. يجب مراعاتها.. والتمرد على القانون هو انحراف عن استخدامه.. وسوء قصد فى التغطية به.
لقد انحازت إلى المجلس العسكرى كى يصفيا معا قوى الثورة.. ثم انقلبت عليه.. دافعت عن الاستفتاء وشجعت الانتخابات البرلمانية وأجلت الدستور ورفضت المليونيات وشرعت فى سن قانون يمنع التظاهر ثم حشدت أنصارها يوم الجمعة الماضى للضغط على المشير حسين طنطاوى كى يعتمد قانون «سليمان» الذى يحرم نائب الرئيس السابق من دخول الانتخابات الرئاسية.. وكان شعارها هو «إعادة إحياء الثورة».. والشعار جذاب.. فالثورة فعلا فى حاجة إلى إعادة إحياء ولكن ليسوا هم من يمنحونها قبلة الحياة.. فهم الذين خنقوها وأجهضوها وهى فى مهدها.
لعب بالبيضة والحجر.. وإخراج كل ما فى جراب الحاوى من أرانب وكتاكيت وفئران وشرائط ملونة لا تبهر سوى الأبرياء من البشر الذين لا يصدقون أن خفة اليد نوع من الخداع.
والمثير للسخرية أن ضميرهم الثورى لم يستيقظ إلا بعد أن نام فى العسل طوال الشهور الماضية.. وفور أن قدَّم عمر سليمان أوراق ترشحه للرئاسة.. قاموا فزعين على كابوس مرعب.. لم يعانوا منه يوم رشح عمرو موسى نفسه وكان وزيرا مميزا فى نظام مبارك.. ولم يؤرق فراشهم يوم نزل أحمد شفيق السباق وكان مقربا من النظام السابق.. فما هو سبب هيستيريا سليمان التى أصابتهم؟
إن عمر سليمان بحكم عمله فى جهاز المخابرات العامة نحو عشرين عاما يعرف كل صغيرة وكبيرة عن كل التنظيمات والقيادات الدينية المختلفة.. لا أتحدث عن معلومات الفضائح الشخصية.. فأخلاق الرجل وجذوره الصعيدية تمنعه من استخدام معلومات شخصية عرفها بحكم عمله.. لكنى.. أتحدث عن المعلومات المؤثرة فى السلطة.. مثل الأموال التى يتلقونها.. والأسلحة التى يجمعونها.. والميليشيات التى يدربونها.. والمؤامرات التى يدبرونها.. والتحالفات الداخلية والخارجية المتورطين فيها.
لا أحد منهم سيقدر على تكذيبه لو تحدث عما اقترفوه فى ضرب الاستقرار.. وتخريب البلاد.. وتجاوز المصلحة العليا للوطن.
ويسهل على أصغر طالب حقوق مبتدئ أن يكتشف ببساطة أن القانون جرى تفصيله لينال من عمر سليمان وحده.. ولو أخذ غيره فى «الرجلين».. وهم أنفسهم اعترفوا بذلك.. كما أنهم أعفوا من مسودته الوزراء الذين عينهم مبارك كى لا يجدوا أنفسهم فى ورطة مع المشير وهو وزير دفاع بقرار من مبارك.
وقد نجا المشير من تطبيق القانون عليه.. لكنه.. لم ينج من الضغوط القوية بمليونيات التحرير الأخيرة كى يقره.. ويصدق عليه.. وقبل ذلك وجد المشير نفسه فى موقف حرج عندما لم يسمع مجلس الشعب تحذير وزير العدل «وهو عضو فى حكومة مسئول المشير عن أعمالها» من عدم دستورية القانون.. وهو أمر لم يحدث من قبل فى تاريخ البرلمانات المصرية.. «نقول ثور.. يقولوا احلبوه».
فإما وزير العدل على حق.. ومن ثم على المشير القائم مقام رئيس الجمهورية أن يسانده.. وينسف القانون.. أو يكون وزير العدل على باطل.. فيقيله المشير.. والمؤكد أن الوزير على حق.. ولكن.. غير المؤكد أنه سيجد دعما مناسبا فى موقفه.. وسيواصل المجلس العسكرى ارتداء ثوب الحياد.. ويترك المحكمة الدستورية تتصرف نيابة عنه.
والحقيقة أن العودة إلى الميادين هى تحدٍ للسلطة العسكرية وإظهار العين الحمراء لها.. فلو لم تشارك فى إقصاء عمر سليمان ستهدد بالوقوف ضدها.. وضد مجلسها الأعلى.. بل ضد المشير نفسه.. وليس صدفة أن الهتافات واللافتات كانت ضده فى التظاهرات الأخيرة.. بل إن صبحى صالح الذى اختاره الجنرالات ليكون عضوا فى لجنة التعديلات الدستورية وصفهم علنا بأنهم كفار قريش.. وكفار قريش إما يؤمنون بالإخوان أصحاب توكيل الإيمان وإما يقتلون وتقطع أيديهم وأرجلهم من خلاف.
ولا شك أن نزول الإخوان وشركائهم إلى الميادين من جديد دليل على فشلهم فى تحقيق ما يريدون بالبرلمان الذى يتمتعون فيه بأغلبية.. فلماذا لا يحل البرلمان إذا كانوا عاجزين عن التشريع المحكم.. وفاشلين فى تحقيق ما يريدون بالقانون الصحيح؟
وحسب ما جرى فيما قبل.. لم يستطع أحد العبث بالقانون.. مهما كانت الحالة السياسية التى عليها البلاد.
عندما قامت ثورة يوليو رفض النائب العام وقتها، حافظ سابا، استخدام القضاء فى تصفية النظام الملكى.. وترك هذه المهمة الثقيلة إلى محاكم عسكرية.. فيما عرف بمحاكمات الثورة.. وتولى هذه المهمة على نور الدين.. وحافظ جمال عبد الناصر ورفاقه على نقاء العدالة وشفافيتها.. وعدم تلوينها بصبغة سياسية.. أو دينية.. أو ثورية.
وبعد أحداث 15 مايو 1971 تكرر الموقف من جديد.. فعندما انتهت النيابة العامة إلى أن رجال عبد الناصر المقدمين للتحقيق لم يرتكبوا جريمة الخيانة العظمى كما أراد أنور السادات.. فكان أن تحولت القضية إلى المدعى العام الاشتراكى.. وهو سلطة قضائية استثنائية.. ومن جديد حافظت العدالة على طهارتها.
لكن.. يبدو أن هذه السوابق السياسية لا تجد بين الأغلبية الإخوانية والسلفية من يحترمها.. وتخلط بين ما هو قانونى بما هو استثنائى.. وتمزج الزيت بالماء.. فى حالة من التضليل المتعمد من أجل الوصول إلى السلطة.. ولو كان ذلك بلعبة الثلاث ورقات.
ولو كانت الأغلبية تريد أن تفرض ما تريد بالذوق أو بالقوة فما جدوى بقاء المؤسسات الدستورية؟.. ولو كان الحديث قد عاد فجأة عن الإجراءات الثورية الاستثنائية غير القانونية بعد كل هذه الشهور التى مرت على الثورة.. فلماذا رفضوها فور قيام الثورة؟.. لماذا تحدثوا وقتها عن شرعية الاستفتاء والانتخابات؟
إن علم «السياسية الواقعية» لا يعترف إلا بالقوى المؤثرة على الأرض.. سواء كانت شرعية.. أو غاصبة.. وليس أمامنا على خريطة هذه القوى سوى الإخوان والمجلس العسكرى.. وقد صدما معا قوى الثورة الوليدة والبريئة.. ثم استدار كل منهما للآخر.
مهما كان ما يقال من كلمات ناعمة حروفها من عنب وتين وزهور.. فإن الإخوان لن يهدأوا إلا إذا سيطروا على القوات المسلحة.. وتحجيمها فى حدود ثكناتها.. كى لا تؤثر فى شئون الحكم خارجها.. واستقلالها صورة بالكربون من استقلال القضاء.. أو استقلال اتحاد الإذاعة والتليفزيون.. وفى الوقت نفسه يرى العسكريون أنهم سينفذون تعهدهم بعدم تسليم البلاد لدولة دينية.. على جثتهم.. ولو كان مثل هذا الكلام تدخلا فى النوايا فليعلن الطرفان ما فى أعماقهما إذا كانا صادقين.
وفى خطوة مباغتة طالب المشير الأحزاب السياسية المختلفة ( العدد فى الليمون) بأن تعد الدستور قبل الانتخابات الرئاسية كى تحدد صلاحيات الرئيس القادم قبل أن يتولى الحكم.. وهو ما فسره البعض بمماطلة من الجنرالات كى تؤجل أو تلغى الانتخابات الرئاسية.. وتمد الفترة الانتقالية.. ليظل من فى السلطة الآن مستمتعا بها.. مانحاً نفسه مزيدا من الوقت كى يجد حجة أخرى للاستمرار.
وحسب تحليل المستشار عدلى حسين (الرئيس السابق لاسئناف القاهرة) فإن العودة لقاعدة الدستور أولا التى تجاهلها الإسلاميون والعسكريون لا يقصد بها تأجيل الانتخابات الرئاسية.. فهذه الانتخابات خرجت عن طوع المجلس العسكرى وأصبحت فى ذمة لجنة الانتخابات الرئاسية التى ستجبر على الالتزام بالمواعيد التى حددتها والبرامج الزمنية التى فرضتها.. ولكن.. دعوة المشير للتعجيل بالدستور سببها التحفيز على الإسراع بوضعه.
وحسب الإعلان الدستورى فإن وضع الدستور هو المهمة الرئيسية والقومية والجليلة للبرلمان ( سواء اختار أعضاء لجنته التأسيسية منه أو من خارجه) وهى مهمة تفوق مهمتى التشريع والرقابة.. وهما مهمتان معطلتان بحكم الإعلان الدستورى.. فلا البرلمان يستطيع سحب الثقة من الحكومة.. ولا هو قادر على إصدار القوانين دون الرجوع للمشير.. ومن ثم فإن وضع الدستور هو وظيفته الوحيدة.. العاجلة.. لو فشل فيها فقد مبرر استمراره.. ويصبح من الطبيعى حله وانتخاب برلمان غيره قادر على ذلك.
وحسب الإعلان التجارى الشهير.. مصر.. الدنيا لسه فيها أكتر.Share on Facebook
أكد اتحاد شباب الثورة، أن عودة جماعة الإخوان المسلمين إلى ميدان التحرير، يعد دليلاً على عجز البرلمان، الذى يستحوذ على غالبية مقاعده نواب الجماعة وحزبها، عن اتخاذ القرارات.
وقال عمرو حامد، المتحدث الرسمى باسم الاتحاد، إن “شباب الثورة” لن يشارك فى مليونية غد، والتى دعت إليها جماعة الإخوان، موضحاً فى تصريحات لـ”اليوم السابع”، أن الاتحاد يتفق مع مطالب المليونية، وعلى رأسها إلغاء المادة 28 من الإعلان الدستورى، لكنه لن يشارك بشكل تنظيمى، لغياب التنسيق مع الداعين للمليونية.
وأضاف حامد، “لن ندخل طرفاً فى مطالب غير معلنة لجماعة الإخوان، التى تريد الضغط على المجلس العسكرى لمصالحها الخاصة فقط”. وتابع، “الجماعة أدركت أن البرلمان لا صلاحيات له، والسلطة الحقيقية فى يد المجلس العسكرى، خاصة بعدما عجز البرلمان عن سحب الثقة من الحكومة أو تمرير تشكيل الجمعية التأسيسية للدستور”.
واستطرد، “تأكد الإخوان من أنه لا شرعية إلا الشرعية الثورية، بعدما خالف المجلس العسكرى الاتفاقات معهم ونزول عمر سليمان للانتخابات الرئاسية، ورغبته فى تصفيتهم جسدياً فوجدوا فى ميدان التحرير الملاذ الوحيد لتحقيق مطالبهم”.Share on Facebook
خميس 26 أبريل 2012 – 12:46 م الدستور الأصلي مصر
أثناء الاعتداء على الناشط إبراهيم كامل
تداول نشطاء على الـ«فيسبوك» فيديو يظهر عدد من شباب قالوا أنهم من جماعة الإخوان المسلمين وهم يعتدون على بعض النشطاء أثناء تنظيمهم وقفة أمام مقر حزب الحرية والعدالة في الإبراهيمة بالإسكندرية أمس احتجاجا منهم على تعرض زملاءهم من النشطاء والصحفيين للضرب أثناء مؤتمرا للمرشح الإخواني محمد مرسي.
ويظهر الفيديو اعتداء بعض الأفراد الملتحين على الناشط إبراهيم كامل وعندما لاحظوا تصويرهم من قبل الناشطة دعاء نبيل توجهوا لها وحاولوا خطف هاتفها لمنعها من التصوير ، وعندها حزرتهم من الاقتراب منها وأكدت أنها لن توقف التصوير ثم يظهر الفيدو أحد الأفراد وهو يخطف منها الهاتف وسط صوت صراخها.
كان عددا من النشطاء قد نظموا وقفة أمس أمام مقر حزب الحرية والعدالة التابع لجماعة الإخوان المسلمين بمنظقة الإبراهيمية بالإسكندرية للتنديد بالاعتداء على زملاءهم من الصحفيين والنشطاء أثناء مؤتمر لمحمد مرسي والذ أدى لإصابة أكثر من 20 ناشط.Share on Facebook
1. The Effects of the Persian Conquest.
A. Immigration restrictions against the Greeks are removed and is thrown open to Greek research.
Owing to the practice of piracy, in which the Ionians and Carians were active, the Egyptians were forced to make immigration laws restricting the immigration of the Greeks and punishing their infringement by capital punishment, i.e., the sacrifice of the victim. Before the time of Psammitichus, the Greeks were not allowed to go beyond the coast of Lower Egypt, but during his reign and that of Amasis, those conditions were modified. For the first time in Egyptian history Ionians and Carians were employed as Mercenaries in the Egyptian Army (670 B.C.), interpretation was organized through a body of interpreters, and the Greeks began to gain useful information concerning the culture of the Egyptians.
In addition to these changes, King Amasis removed the restrictions against the Greeks and permitted them to enter Egypt and settle in Naucratis. About this same time, i.e., the reign of Amasis, the Persians, through Cambyses invaded Egypt, and the whole country was thrown open to the researches of the Greeks.
B. The Genesis of Greek Enlightenment.
The Persian invasion, did not only provide the Greeks with ample research, but stimulated the creation of prose history in Ionia. Heretofore, the Greeks had little or no accurate knowledge of Egyptian culture: but their contact with Egypt resulted in the genesis of their enlightenment
C. Students from Ionia and the Islands of the Aegean visit Egypt for their Education.
Just as in our modern times, countries like the United States, England, and France are attracting students from all parts of the world, on account of their leadership in culture; so was it in ancient times, Egypt was supreme in the leadership of civilization, and students from all parts, flocked to that land, seeking admission into her mysteries or wisdom system.
The immigration of Greeks to Egypt for the purpose of their education, began as a result of the Persian invasion (525 B.C.), and continued until the Greeks gained possession of that land and access to the Royal Library, through the conquest of Alexander the Great. Alexandria was converted into a Greek city, a centre of research and the capital of the newly created Greek empire, under the rule of Ptolemies. Egyptian culture survived and flourished, under the name and control of the Greeks, until the edicts of Theodosius in the 4th century A.D., and that of Justinian in the 6th century A.D., which closed the Mystery Temples and Schools, as elsewhere mentioned. Concerning the fact that Egypt was the greatest education centre of the ancient world which was also visited by the Greeks, reference must again be made to Plato in the Timaeus who tells us that Greek aspirants to wisdom visited Egypt for initiation, and that the priests of Sais used to refer to them as children in the Mysteries.
As regards the visit of Greek students to Egypt for the purpose of their education, the following are mentioned simply to establish the fact that Egypt was regarded as the educational centre of the ancient world and that like the Jews, the Greeks also visited Egypt and received their education.
(1) It is true that during the reign of Amasis, Thales who is said to have been born about 585 B.C., visited Egypt and was initiated by the Egyptian Priests into the Mystery System and science of the Egyptians. We are also told that during his residence in Egypt, he learnt astronomy, land surveying, mensuration, engineering and Egyptian Theology.
(2)It is true that , a native of Samos, travelled frequently to Egypt for the purpose of his education. Like every aspirant, he had to secure the consent and favour of the Priests, and we are informed by Diogenes that a friendship existed between Polycrates of Samos and Amasis King of Egypt, that Polycrates gave Pythagoras letters of introduction to the King, who secured for him an introduction to the Priests; first to the Priest of Heliopolis, then to the Priest of Memphis, and lastly to the Priests of Thebes, to each of whom Pythagoras gave a silver goblet We are also further informed through Herodotus, Jablonsk and Pliny, that after severe trials, including circumcision, had been imposed upon him by the Egyptian Priests, he was finally initiated into all their secrets. That he learnt the doctrine of metempsychosis; of which there was no trace before in the Greek religion; that his knowledge of medicine and strict system of dietetic rules, distinguished him as a product of Egypt, where medicine had attained its highest perfection; and that his attainments in geometry corresponded with the ascertained fact that Egypt was the birth place of that Science. In addition we have the statements of Plutarch, Demetrius and Antisthenes that Pythagoras founded the Science of Mathematics among the Greeks, and that he sacrificed to the Muses, when the Priests explained to him the properties of the right angled triangle. Pythagoras was also trained in music by the Egyptian priests.
(3) According to Diogenes Laertius and Herodotus, Democritus is said to have been born about 400 B.C. and to
have been a native of Abdera in Miletus. We are also told by Demetrius in his treatise on “People of the Same Name”, and by Antisthenes in his treatise on “Succession”, that Democritus travelled to Egypt for the purpose of his education and received the instruction of the Priests. We also learn from Diogenes and Herodotus that he spent five years under the instruction of the Egyptian Priests and that after the completion of his education, he wrote a treatise on the sacred characters of Meroe.
In this respect we further learn from Origen, that circumcision was compulsory, and one of the necessary conditions of initiation to a knowledge of the hieroglyphics and sciences of the Egyptians, and it is obvious that Democritus, in order to obtain such knowledge, must have submitted also to that rite. Origen, who was a native of Egypt wrote as follows:—
“Apud Aegyptios nullus aut geometrica studebat, aut astronomiae secreta remabatur, nisi circumcisione suscepta.” (No one among the Egyptians, either studied geometry, or investigated the secrets of Astronomy, unless circumcision had been undertaken).
(4) Concerning Plato’s travels we are told by Hermodorus that at the age of 28 Plato visited Euclid at Megara in company with other pupils of Socrates; and that for the next ten years he visited Cyrene, Italy and finally Egypt, where he received instruction from the Egyptian Priests.
(5) With regards to Socrates and and the majority of pre-Socratic philosophers, history seems to be silent on the question of their travelling to Egypt like the few other students here mentioned, for the purpose of their education. It is enough to say, that in this case the exceptions have proved the rule, that ail students, who had the means, went to Egypt to complete their education. The fact that history fails to supply a fuller account of this type of immigration, might be due to some or all of the following reasons:
Grant of a parcel of land by an individual to a temple. Dated to the first year of Amasis II, on display at the
(a) The immigration laws against the Greeks up to the time of King Amasis and the Persian Invasion,
(b) Prose history was undeveloped among the Greeks during the period of their educational immigration to Egypt.
(c) The Greek authorities persecuted and drove students of into hiding and consequently,
(d) Students of the Mystery System concealed their movements.
Let us remember that Anaxagoras was indicted and imprisoned; that he escaped and fled to his home in Ionia, that Socrates was indicted, imprisoned and condemned to death; and that both Plato and fled from Athens under great suspicion
Alexander the Great
2. The Effects of the Conquest of Egypt by Alexander the Great.
A. The Royal Library and Museum together with Temples and other Libraries are Looted.
As elsewhere mentioned, it was an ancient custom of invading armies to loot libraries and temples in order to capture books and manuscripts, which were regarded as great treasures. A few instances would be enough to verify this custom:
(a) we are informed that during the Persian Invasion beginning with Cambyses, the temples of Egypt were not only stripped of their gold and silver, but rifled for their ancient records. Every Egyptian Temple carried a secret library with secret manuscripts and books.
(b) We are also informed that when Athens was captured by the Romans in 84 B.C. the library of books said to have belonged to Aristotle was also captured and taken to Rome. Just as in the invasion of Egypt by the Persians, the invading armies stripped the temples of their gold, silver and sacred books; and just as in the capture of Athens by the Romans Sulla carried off the only library of books which he found; so it is to be expected of Alexander the Great, in his invasion of Egypt. One of the first things that he and his companions and armies would do, would be to search for the treasures of the land and capture them. These were kept in temples and libraries and consisted of gold and silver out of which the gods and ceremonial vessels were made, and sacred books and, manuscripts kept both in libraries and in the “Holy of Holies” of Temples.
It is my firm belief that this indeed was the great opportunity which Alexander gave Aristotle and enabled him and his pupils to carry off as many books as they wanted from the Royal Library and to convert it into a research centre. Apart from the Royal Library at Alexandria, there was also another famous library near by: The “Royal Library of Thebes”; “The Menephtheion”, which was founded by Pharaoh, Setei. The Menephtheion was completed by Rameses II; but little occurs in history about this greatest of Egyptian Royal Libraries.
However, any invading army would first loot the Royal Library of Alexandria and then would turn their attention to the Menephtheion at Thebes. They would also visit the cities of Memphis and Heliopolis and likewise loot their libraries and temples. This was the ancient custom and certainly one of the ways in which the Greeks received their education from Egyptians. It is therefore an erroneous belief that the Greeks, on Egyptian soil, and through their own native ability, set up a great university at Alexandria and turned out great scholars. On the other hand, since it is a well known fact that Egypt was the land of temples and libraries, we can see how comparatively easy it was for the Greeks to strip other Egyptian libraries of their books in order to maintain the new Library at Alexandria, after it had been already looted by Aristotle and his pupils. The Greeks (i.e., Alexander the Great, Aristotle’s school and the succeeding Ptolemies) converted the Royal Library of Alexandria into a research centre, by transferring
Aristotle’s school and pupils from Athens to this great Egyptian Library, and therefore the students who studied there received instructions from Egyptian priests and teachers, until they died out. The difficulty of language and interpretation made it imperative for the Greeks to use Egyptian teachers.
The Greeks did not carry culture and learning to Egypt, but found it already there, and wisely settled in that country, in order to absorb as much as possible of its culture.
B. The Royal Library of Thebes: The Menephtheion is described. It was also looted by invading armies.
But when we read a brief sketch of the magnificence of the Theban Royal Library; The Menephtheion, we even see a better picture and are bound to admit that Egypt was the store house of ancient culture and that that culture was preserved in the form of literature stored away in her great libraries and temples. Great as the Royal Library of Alexandria might have been, we see in the Theban Royal Library something far more magnificent and far more representative of the true greatness of our Ancient Egypt.
On the left of the steps leading to the second court, there is still seen the pedestal of the enormous granite statue of Rameses; the largest, that ever existed in Egypt, according to Diodorus. Its height has been calculated at fifty-four feet, and its weight, at 887¼ tons; a marvel to the modern mind. The interior face of the wall of the pylon represents the wars of Rameses III. The Osiride pillars of the second court, are the monolithal figures, sixteen cubits in height, supplying the place of columns, and at the foot of the steps leading from the court to the next hall beyond, there were two sitting statues of the King. The head of one of these was of red granite, known by the name of “Young Memon”, was taken away by Belzoni, and is now a principal ornament of the British Museum.
Beyond this are the remains of a hall 133 feet broad by 100 feet long, supported by 48 columns, twelve of which are thirty-two feet in height and 21 feet in circumference. On different parts of the columns, and the walls are represented acts of homage by the king to the principal Deities of the Theban Pantheon, and the gracious promises which they make him in return.
In another sculpture the two chief Divinities of Egypt invest him with the emblems of military and civil dominion, i.e., the Scimitar, the Scourge and the Pedum. Beneath, the twenty-three sons of Rameses appear in procession, bearing the emblems of their respective high offices in the state, their names being inscribed above them. Nine smaller apartments, two of them still preserved, and supported by columns, lay behind the hall. On the jambs of the first of these apartments are sculptured Thoth: the Inventor of Letters, and the Goddess Saf, with the title of ‘Lady of Letters’; and ‘President of the Hall of Books’, accompanied the former with an emblem of the sense of sight, and the latter of hearing.
There is no doubt that this is the “Sacred Library” which Diodorus describes as the inscribed “Dispensary of the Mind”. It had an astronomical ceiling, in which the twelve Egyptian months are represented, with an inscription from which important inferences have been drawn respecting the chronology of the reign of Rameses III.
On the walls is a procession of priests, carrying the Sacred Arts, and in the next apartment, the last that now remains, the king is presenting offerings to the various Divinities
C. Museum and the Library of Alexander were used as a University.
The Museum and Library of Alexandria were so famous in ancient times, that we wonder why more information concerning this centre of learning, has not come down to us. A few references to authoritative sources might no doubt help to enlighten us on this matter.
That after the death of Alexander the Great in 323 B.C., his vast empire was divided among his generals, and that Alexandria, the new Egyptian capital fell to Ptolemy. That the city, barely ten years old, soon became the centre of the learned world, and that by 300 B.C., the Museum (i.e., the seat of the Muses), was founded, and became a veritable university of Greek learning.
That to the Museum was attached a great library, with a dining hall and lecture rooms for professors, and this became a school of philosophers, mathematicians and astronomers. Here for the next 700 years, science had its chief abiding place.
Here however, it should be remembered that the above statement of Sedgwick and Tyler is misleading, since the Greeks did not carry a civilization of their own to Egypt, but on the contrary found a very highly developed Egyptian culture, the survival of which was maintained by the use of Egyptian Priests and Scholars as teachers.
D. A Military Policy of the Greeks to Commandeer Information From the Egyptians was put in operation.
One of the military policies adopted by the Greek military authorities at Alexandria was the issue of commands to the leading Egyptian Priests for information concerning the Egyptian history, philosophy and religion. As a custom this is no less ancient than modern, since it is also a custom in modern times for victorious armies to confer with the men of science of an invaded country, in order to discover whether or not, there is anything new in the field of science, which they might possess. We would recall how at the end of World War II, the American scientists conferred with the Japanese scientists at Tokio.
Share on Facebook
Ptolemy I Soter
Accordingly, we are told that Ptolemy I Soter, in order to elicit the secrets of Egyptian wisdom or mystery system, ordered Manetho, the High Priest of the temple of Isis at Sebennytus in Lower Egypt, to write the philosophy, and the history of the religion of the Egyptians.
Accordingly, Manetho published several volumes concerning these respective fields, and Ptolemy issued an order prohibiting the translation of these books which had to be kept on reserve in the Library, for instruction of the Greeks by the Egyptian Priests. Here it becomes quite clear that the first professors of the Alexandrine School were the Egyptian Priests, and that the Scholarchs and pupils of Aristotle’s transferred school, received their training directly from the Egyptian Priests. It is also well to note that the chief text books of the Alexandrine School were Manetho’s books.
We are told by Apollodorus from whom Syncellus drew his information, that Ptolemy II ordered Eratosthenes, the Cyrenean (i.e., a black man and native of Cyrene) and librarian of the Alexandrine Library, to write a chronology of the Theban Kings, and that Eratosthenes did so with the aid of the Egyptian Hierophants at Thebes
Furthermore, it became the custom during the Greek and Roman occupation to use the services of Egyptian Priests and Scholars, as professors at the Alexandrine School. We are told that during the reign of Theodosius (378–395 A.D.), the Egyptian Professor Horapollo wrote a system of the Egyptian hieroglyphics: The Hieroglyphica of Horapollo, which has been regarded as the best that has come down to modern times. We are also told that this professor taught not only at the Alexandrine School, but also at that of Constantinople.
3. The Egyptians Were the First to Civilize the Greeks.
Greece was first civilized by colonies from Egypt, then from
Phoenicia and Thrace. These were under the government of wise men, who not only subdued the ferocity of an ignorant populace by civil institutions, but also cast about them the strong chain of religion and the fear of the gods. Whatever dogmas they had been taught in their respective countries, concerning things divine and human, they delivered to these newly formed societies, with the object of bringing them under the restraint of virtuous discipline. Phoroneus and Cecrops were Egyptians, Cadmus a Phoenician and Orpheus a Thracian, and each of them, through their colonies carried into Greece the religious and philosophical tenets of his respective country.
The practice of teaching the doctrines of religion to people under the guise of myths originated from the Egyptians and was adopted by the Phoenicians and Thracians, and subsequently introduced to the Greeks.
According to Strabo, it was not possible in ancient times to lead a promiscuous multitude to religion and virtue by philosophical harangues. This could be effected only by the aid of superstition, by prodigies and fables. The thunder bolt, the aegis, the trident, the spear, torches and snakes were the instruments made use of by the founders of States, to terrify the ignorant and vulgar into subjection. These references must speak for themselves.
Cheops and Cecrops were the names which the Greeks used for the Egyptian Khufu, who belonged to the 4th Dynasty of the Egyptians or the pyramid age, i.e., 2800 B.C.
4. Alexander Visits the Oracle of Ammon in the Oasis of Siwah.
No discussion on Alexander’s invasion of Egypt would be complete without reference to his famous visit to the Oracle of Ammon, situated in the Oasis of Siwah. Alexander had placed a garrison in Pelusium, whence he marched through the desert along the eastern bank of the Nile to Heliopolis where he crossed the river to Memphis, where his fleet had been awaiting him, and where he was welcomed by the Egyptians and crowned as Pharaoh. Having sacrificed to Apis and other Gods, Alexander descended the Nile by the Canopic branch and set out on his journey to the Oracle of Ammon in the Oasis of Siwah. His route was along the coast of Libya, as far as Paraetonium, whence he marched through the desert to the Oasis of Siwah. What do we suppose was Alexander’s motive for visiting the Temple of Ammon? Perhaps a brief description of the religious and economic importance of Heliopolis, Memphis, Thebes and Ammonium might help us to determine what it was.
In the first place these cities were strongholds of the Egyptian religion, where there were many rich temples, schools and Priests, and therefore were representative of the Egyptian religious life. In the second place these cities were centres of education, and after the Persian invasion, Greek students who travelled to Egypt for the purpose of their education, received their training from the Priests of one or all of these cities, as elsewhere mentioned.
When Pythagoras went to Egypt, he carried a letter of introduction from Polycrates of Samos to King Amasis, who in turn gave him letters of introduction to the Priests of Heliopolis, Memphis, and Thebes. As centres of education, the temples and libraries of these cities contained very valuable books; and in the third place, these regions had previously been captured by the Persians for the very fact of their wealth. This should explain why they included these districts in their Satrapy which paid them an enormous annual tribute amounting to 700 talents of gold, together with the produce of the fisheries of Lake Moeris which amounted to a talent a day, during the six months that the water flowed in from the Nile; and a third part of that sum, during the afflux. In addition Egypt furnished 120 thousand medicini of corn as rations for the Persian troops who were stationed in the White Fort of Memphis.
The equivalent of this tribute was 170 thousand pounds sterling, and shows the underlying motive not only of the Persian invading armies, but also of all invading armies of antiquity. In the case of Alexander there is no exception.
According to history, the Persians were in occupation of Egypt, and Alexander having mustered superior forces, went there and drove them out and took possession himself. May I ask this question: was this a joke, or was there a motive? And if there was a motive, what else could it have been but that Alexander wanted the wealth in books, gold, silver, ivory, slaves, and tribute which the Persians were extorting from the unfortunate Egyptians?
In ancient times, the Oracle of Ammon at Siwah was the most celebrated, and Heliopolis, Memphis and Thebes were representatives of the best of Egyptian culture.
Temples for Higher learning