Various images were intended
for various audiences/markets—often based the cost of
the engravings, medals, jetons, etc. produced. Some were
intended for the mass audience (and were cheaper) and
some for a more educated/wealthy audience (and were generally
more expensive and of finer quality). This is certainly
the case for medals, medallions, and jetons. Thus knowing
the numbers of images produced, knowing how much they
sold for, and knowing more about some of the creators
would help to address some of these questions.
I think that understanding the intent of the creators
of these images is easier to surmise (as compared to
their reception), as Barbara’s essay (in particular)
alludes to, but I still wonder about how much of a
modern analysis is imposed by historians (again, some
of the ideas discussed, not only in Barbara’s essay,
but in Joan’s as well). There is also the question
of was the intent of the image consciously (or even
unconsciously) understood by the various audiences
of the images.
In my analysis of the “Vivre Libre ou Mourir” medal,
for example, I noted that specific classical symbols
were included in the image, but did the audience of
the jeton realize that the sixteen reeds of the fasces
represented the sections of Paris? From Parker’s work
on cult of antiquity and Dowd’s work on David’s designs
for the various festivals we know that the Revolutionary
leaders sought to educate the audience about the meanings
of various images, but does the intent to educate equate
with popular understanding of the imagery?
It seems to me that these types of questions, in the
absence of additional evidence, can only be answered
obliquely or by inference. Would the frequency of advertising
for specific (or types of) images and a study of the
listed prices of those images, for example, reveal
more about the relative success of a given image (or
genre)? Which newspapers advertised which images? Who
read those newspapers? Did the advertised price of
those images change over time? When did the advertisements
appear (ie. what contemporary events might have added
to the audience’s understanding of the image)?
In my own analysis of the early propaganda efforts
of General Bonaparte, for example, it appears that
continued reports of his victories led to an increased
advertising for geography books that corresponded with
his areas of operation and that advertisements for
engravings of Bonaparte/or his victories generally
ebbed and flowed with the news of his successes. Knowing
these types of tangential details would greatly enhance
our understanding of how the various audiences of these
images received them. |
