Judith Slayer Holofernes, by Artemisia Gentileschi

Of the many, the first painting we look at is “Judith Slaying Holofernes” by Artemisia Gentileschi. This painting dates back to 1612-1613, however, it depicts a Biblical scene in which a bold woman, Judith, is determined to commit an act of violence, uncharacteristic of women during her time period.  Painted by Artemisia, the most famous European female artist, she was a highly charged figure. After being raped by her father’s assistant artists, she vigorously painted a series of paintings as a reflection to her scream to the world that woman too can evoke power. Thus, she painted “Judith Slaying Holofernes” with much passion. Her unique portrayal of Judith used a style from the Baroque period, by using harsh contrasts in order to add a dramatic effect of viciousness and desire.

As you can see, two women are trying to cut off a man’s head on a bed. This painting is the famous Biblical assassination of which Judith, a Jewish lady, with her maid, Abra, slay Holofernes, the Assyrian general, in order to save her village. The story goes that she first got him drunk then got him to go to bed with her. Before he passed out, the two women get to work, and that is the scene Gentileschi decided to choose. Rather than choosing a scene of which Judith is carrying the severed head as a trophy, she decided to choose a scene in which Judith is in the thick of it, the carving blade still in his neck, and their bodies tangled. By choosing this scene, the killing isn’t pictured as a heroic deed. Contrary, the picture stresses the difficulties and strain of murder. With arms fully extended, sleeves rolled up, and face slightly averted; the two women try to stay out of the fight as far as possible. This suggests that murder is not glorious, but an ongoing business, never seeming to end.

Vietnam War, by Eddie Adams

Next, we have a picture of an incident during the Vietnam War. This incident took place on the second day of the Tet Offensive in 1968, a watershed battle that changed public perceptions of the war. Prior to the picture, a Vietcong warrior is pulled from a building and General Nguyen Ngoc Loan raised a pistol to his head. Normally, this is a method of interrogation as it creates fear of death, however, the general just raised the pistol and pulled the trigger. One of Adams’ frames was the very instant in which bullet entered the man’s head, which he named “Vietnam War”.

From this picture, we can see the gun, the expression of the victim, the soldier wincing at the left corner. The victim is grimacing, right before his death. This iconic picture served as symbol for the intensifying anti-war movement. The overall gloom and sympathy given off from this image suggests that murder is always dishonorable, no matter what the victim has done or will do. The black and white tone always adds to this effect; war isn’t as glorious as we make it seem.

The Third of May, by Michael Goya (1814)

The next picture depicts a scene from 1808, in which the image shows the random executions of the Spanish citizenry resulting from the fighting in the Puerto del Sol area of Madrid. An uprising in Spain followed and other artists repeated this painting “The Third of May” by Goya as a sign of fury and shock. Previously, Goya had admired the freedom the French “enlightenment” had promised. However, when the people found out that it was a fraud, they rose up in Madrid against the French invaders. As a result, they received a barbaric punishment the following day.

This violet image depicts the pubic execution of insurgents on May 3, 1808. While the Spanish were gaining the upper hand, the French decided to massacre the civilians. Goya painted this scene in the most eye-catching colors – white, gold, and scarlet. These men are immobilized by the guns, some of which are already soaked in blood and others already dead on the floor. However, the key aspect of this painting is that the victims have faces, and the killers do not. The killers are dressed in uniform with hats on and heads pointed down, while most of the victims are in shock or weeping in fear. This suggests that war is simply anonymous killing and that each individual victim has their own life. In addition, the dark sky in the background adds a sad and gloomy tone and the palace looks lifeless, having lost all its grandeur. Once again, this suggests that murder is never glorious.