Painting 'The dock at Sveaborg' by Elias Martin

Sveaborg is a place located on several islands near Helsinki. It has a long history, reaching back more than 250 years. The fortress was built by Sweden from 1748, during the Age of Liberty, to repel the growing influence of Russia in the Baltic Sea region after the Swedish–Russian wars of 1700–1721 and 1741–1743. Construction work on the fortress began in 1748, and on the dry dock, as one of its central facilities, as early as 1750. The dock was meant to maintain and enlarge the Archipelago Fleet, in order to give Sweden a decisive advantage on the Baltic Sea. Under the name 'Sveaborg' (translates to 'the fortress of Sweden'), it served the Swedish army as a defence fortress for several centuries. During this time, Augustin Ehrensvärd (1710–1772), the field marshal and creator of Sveaborg, asked the painter Elias Martin (1739–1818) to work as an architectural draughtsman for the fortification. It was in this role that he painted a number of motifs of Sveaborg. He observed the military place and captured them using different techniques. One such work is the painting 'Skeppsdockan på Sveaborg' (translates to 'The dock at Sveaborg'), which was painted in oil on canvas at some point between 1763 and 1766. It now forms part of the collection of the Nationalmuseum, Stockholm. Elias Martin knew the historical place of the dock at Sveaborg and depicted various aspects of it, such as the ships and the steep walls of the dock. Corresponding parts of the painting resemble these aspects visually. This resemblance is made possible by Martin having learnt how to draw, a skill that he also passed on to others in Sveaborg in his role as a drawing teacher. It is by no means the case that Martin depicted the place exactly as he perceived it. Although he had the intention of creating a representation of the historical place, it can be assumed that he also wanted to assign further qualities to the place communicated by the painting. It is doubtful, for example, that the many people depicted were working so diligently in the very locations in which they are depicted. Further, Martin portrays how heavy labour was largely done by hand. The dock is being built and ships are being constructed. The efforts of the labourers remain yet hidden from the viewer. It can also be assumed that the ships depicted are representative of the numerous ships that were built or maintained there and that the two ships depicted stand only metaphorically for these many ships. The viewers of the painting thus create their own idea of the place by looking at it. The interplay of sunlit surfaces and contrasting shadows is particularly interesting. Elias Martin likely studied how sunlight creates shadows and influences the way colours appear, which allowed him to depict the effect of sunlight in the painting. By intentionally including this effect of sunlight, a positive, enthusiastic, and pleasant atmosphere is metaphorically attributed to the place. Such atmosphere is central to the painting, which is why the painting can be understood as aesthetically exemplifying this atmosphere. Through viewing and understanding the expression of the painting, the positive, enthusiastic, and pleasant atmosphere of the painting is imputed on the place that is created through viewing the painting. The painting still evokes its effect today, even if Martin did likely never have present-day viewers in mind. People interested in culture and art, viewing the painting by Martin, will create an understanding of what the place was like during the Age of Liberty. They have never formed part of the historic place but create their own idea of it through experiencing the painting. When viewing the image, knowledge about the historical context blends with the experience of the painting. The idea of the place is not created through the place making of the Age of Liberty place but through the representation making, and it is only made possible through exhibiting the painting such that people can view it. As it is the painting that creates an idea of the historic place in the viewer, the viewer may mistakenly assume that idea of the historic place and the actual historical place are identical, or otherwise that the idea of the historic place represents the actual historic place. The latter makes the present-day idea of the historic place denote the actual historic place but usually without the people recognizing this.