1.0- “Edvard Munch created what may be called a ‘spiritual climate’. Two, even three generations of artists have produced works under his influence and spiritual inspiration. He was the initiator of the style of art termed Expressionism, defined as ‘expressiveness’”. (J.P. Hodin) No painter previously achieved such a revolutionary distinct break from the visible world as Edvard Munch. Drawing from personal traumatic experiences, Munch portrayed incredibly powerful works that depicted psychological rigours of the everyday man; something that Edvard had a distinct experience of. (Hatje Cantz)
There never existed a painter with a greater desire for a lyrical emotional life: but his unhappy intellect never lets him forget the worm concealed in every bud, the grimacing skull beneath every face, the beast lurking behind every passion, nature’s arbitrary whims in every painful sensation: and with dazed amazement, beckoned on by mocking insanity with outstretched arms, he walks through the inferno of this life as someone atavistically burdened with talent. (Reinhold Heller)
2.0- It is within the purpose of this essay to compare and contrast three publications relating to Munch’s influence on Expressionism and therefore Modernism. Moreover, analysing how Edvard’s technique and psychological situation throughout his life defined his works. The first of these publications
3.0- J.P Hodin’s ‘Edvard Munch’ describes a tortured man who depicted the “condition of modern man, in a time which was not yet conscious of its own predicament.”(J.P Hodin) It was this predicament that Munch proclaimed to be the content and meaning of his art. Munch saw art and its future as an “epoch that exhausts itself in experimenting with form without the appearance of any meaning.”(J.P Hodin) Adverse to the doctrine of ‘art for art’s sake’; a doctrine that was substantiated to save art from “relegation to a role of utility within a mechanized society.”(J.P Hodin) To this extent the doctrine could have been justified. But when the formula is taken to the outer-most limits in which the work of art is deprived of any form of meaning, then a reaction was inevitable.
“Behind Expressionist art stand men who regard it as a sin against the spirit to produce anything by coldly rational means.”(J.P Hodin) The Ex...
... middle of paper ...
... time, and perhaps he would then feel the same way as I do now as I write and think about this.
Similar aphorisms are echoed in the writings of painter Caspar David Friedrich:
The painter should depict not only what he sees before him, but also what he sees inside himself… Close your physical eyes so that you see your picture first with your spiritual eye. Then bring forth what you saw inside you so that it works on others from the exterior to their spirit. (Heller)
This is a Romantic viewpoint, that the spiritual state of the painter seeks and outlet of expression through which to communicate itself to others.(Heller) German Romantics, discovered this within themselves, in introspection, in their own emotions, and visually interpreted it through landscape, creating mood painting demanding a sympathetic reaction within the viewer. “If Munich can claim direct descent from Romanticism, it is through a revival of Romanticism.”(Heller)
This can be seen in Munch’s Evening, index .3.
The content and format of Evening, with tis vaguely melancholy mood, was essentially a resurrection of Romantic formulae; the limitations of Naturalism were overcome by a reversion to prenaturalist
One reason Simon is regarded as the Christ figure in Lord of the Flies is that he commits many selfless acts just like Jesus Christ did. Simon chooses to stay and help Ralph build huts rather than go play with the other inhabitants. Ralph compliments Simon by saying “Simon. He Helps. All the rest rushed off. He’s done as much as I have” (54). Golding also illustrates Simon’s generosity when “Simon pulled off the choicest fr...
While they agree that the beast is not a traditional monster, it is Simon’s philosophical understanding that allows him to fully realize the meaning of the beast. At the assembly, Ralph plans to discuss the beast, hoping to bring the fear to an end. Simon suggests that the boys themselves are the beast. Later, when Simon encounters the “Lord of the Flies” in a hallucination, the reader learns the extent of his understanding. The Lord of the Flies mocks Simon by saying, “Fancy you thinking the Beast was something you could hunt and kill...You knew, didn’t you? I’m part of you?”(128). Simon realizes that there is something within humans that can cause them to act savagely. However, at the assembly, in an effort to understand what Simon meant about the beast, the boys suggest that the beast could be a ghost. Piggy firmly rejects this idea because he approaches the beast in the same way he handles most situations: logically and scientifically. As Piggy states, “Life… is scientific, that’s what it is…. I know there isn’t no beast- not with claws and all that, I mean- but I know there isn’t no fear either… unless we get afraid of people” (72). Piggy understands fear can have detrimental effects, but he does not yet understand that fear is within every person, and this is the “beast” that can cause people to act without
At the end of chapter 8, Simon finds what is called “The Lord of the Flies”. The significance of this event is this is the first time the reader is introduced to the object in which the novel is titled after. Secondly, it depicts good versus evil, the good being Simon. Simon is different from the rest of the boys; he has a sense of moral uprightness that doesn’t seem to fade with each passing day the boys are exiled and sets him apart from the others. He’s the one person on the island whose actions are out of love and the goodness of his heart. He is also the only one to help Ralph set up shelters (Golding 50). When the biguns’ hunt for the “beast” went on longer than expected he was the only one willing to go through the forest alone to tell Piggy. While he often wanders the forest alone, he still finds time to care for the littluns; whom others don’t pay much attention to at all. Constantly committing selfless acts, clearly Golding has put Simon on the island to represent goodness.
As Jack hunts his “frustration seemed bolting and nearly mad” which shines in his slowly deranging eyes (Golding 67). In Lord Of The Flies by William Golding, stranded boys struggle to find order and civilization on an island with no other humans. After their plane crash lands, a few boys, such as Ralph and Piggy, are quick to set up standard rules. But, not everyone agrees that rules and rescue are what is most important. Jack, a boy who cares more about hunting, disrupts the goodness and order that remains in the boys. When a simulated hunting influenced and led by Jack goes awry, the boys kill Simon. The now deceased Simon is the purest and kindest of the boys. Jack leads the elimination of the only good left on their island. Whether it is his intention to kill him or not, Jack should be held responsible for Simon’s demise because he leads the group to kill him, regardless of his age.
Since its emergence over 30,000 years ago, one of visual art’s main purposes has been to act as an instrument of personal expression and catharsis. Through the mastery of paint, pencil, clay, and other mediums, artists can articulate and make sense of their current situation or past experiences, by portraying their complex, abstract emotions in a concrete form. The act of creation gives the artist a feeling of authority or control over these situations and emotions. Seen in the work of Michelangelo, Frida Kahlo, Jean Michel-Basquiat, and others, artists’ cathartic use of visual art is universal, giving it symbolic value in literature. In Natasha Trethewey's Native Guard, Kazuo Ishiguro’s Never Let Me Go, and Joseph Conrad’s Heart of Darkness,
The lack of civilization and human goodness leads the young children to evils and a bad environment that they have never faced. Simon, a “skinny, vivid boy, (pg. 24)” is a member of Jack’s choir but soon leaves his tribe and joins Ralph because he is not able to deal with the cruel leadership. As all the other characters fail to maintain responsibilities and their commitments to the rules of the island, Simon is the only person who dedicates to them as things begin to fall apart. He is a character with a respectful, spiritual personality and has a human goodness with nature as he deals with the littluns and the older boys. For example, he helps the littluns pick fruit to eat, recovers Piggy’s glasses when they fly off his face, gives Piggy his own share of meat when he was refused a piece and gives ...
Golding makes very good use of characters in Lord of the Flies, he shows both good and evil through each of the characters. One of the characters that represents goodness is Simon. He is very good and pure, and has the most positive outlook. Simon is very different from the other boys, he seems to always be helping the Littluns and many other vulnerable boys such as Piggy. "Simon sitting between the twins and Piggy, wiped his mouth and shoved his piece of meat over the rocks to Piggy, who grabbed it." (Golding, pg.74) This quote interprets an example of a time when Simon helped Piggy by giving him food, it shows Simon's wholeheartedness. Another example would be when Simon helps the Littluns pick fruit from high to reach places. All in all Golding tries to portray Simon as a Christ like figure.
Art is a severe Goddess, who in return for her smiles demands many sacrifices. No one did more to please her, and no one was so insufficiently rewarded as Van Gogh. Several times the blows that she dealt him were painful enough to make any reasonable man resign. Only fanaticism and faith in her would permit one to leap the abyss between reality and desire. With cruel, merciless method, art asked from Van Gogh everything. It was a loan that multiplied with time and was never paid back. It haunted him within the recesses of his soul, it flirted with him and raises his hopes, it took away from him everything that was dear, and when it could finally take no more, it decided to take his life.
It appears to me that pictures have been over-valued; held up by a blind admiration as ideal things, and almost as standards by which nature is to be judged rather than the reverse; and this false estimate has been sanctioned by the extravagant epithets that have been applied to painters, and "the divine," "the inspired," and so forth. Yet in reality, what are the most sublime productions of the pencil but selections of some of the forms of nature, and copies of a few of her evanescent effects, and this is the result, not of inspiration, but of long and patient study, under the instruction of much good sense…
In conclusion, Golding presents Simon as a boy who is prophet-like, mentally powerful and at one with nature. These traits added together give us a goodhearted boy who knows his right from wrong and tries to stick to it as much as possible. The role of Simon in Lord of the Flies is to represent the good traits of the human, which the other boys begin to loose as the book unveils. Overall, Golding tries to show us that not everyone is evil and that there is good in every situation. However by the death of Simon, Golding could be trying to warn the reader that evil overpowers good in this society.
Simon is perhaps the most important character in the novel for he is the first and only character to come to the realization that the Beast is inside them all, and is not represented by a physical manifestation. Simon is a follower, not a leader. He believes and trusts what Ralph, his leader, says. That’s why he mentions that the beast could be inside all of them once, and immediately discards that because Ralph doesn’t think so. His confrontation with the Lord of the Flies is the only way he can liberate that information to himself. The encounter begins with “Even if he shut his eyes the sow’s head still remained like an after-image.” This represents the beginning of the fixation Simon is having on the head, thinking of it even after he shuts his eyes. Golding then points out that the pig had half shut eyes and were dim with infinite cynicism of adult life. Those details come back a little later. It’s at this point where Simon asks himself a question and answers it aloud. “ ‘I know that.’ Simon discovered that he had spoken aloud”. “He opened his eyes quickly and there was the head grinning amusedly in the strange daylight, ignoring the flies, the spilled guts, even ignoring the indignity of being spiked on a stick.” That sentence shows the continuing evolution of the fixation Simon has in this encounter. The first thing he sees when he opens his eyes is the head, and he ignores every detail around it. This is when Simon comes to the realization that his original conclusion is credible, the one he let be because of Ralph. He looks away, trying to forget the head even exists, but cannot accomplish that task.. He pulls himself back to the head “Might not the beast come for it?”, simply because he believes the Beast is not a physical manifestation, therefore being impossible for it to come. According to Simon, the head seems to agree with him. At this point, he knows the Beast doesn’t exist physically, but he is hesitant none-the-less. The head says “Run away […] go back to the others. It was a joke really—why should you bother? You were wrong, that’s all. A little headache, something you ate, perhaps. Go back, child.” Simon is making excuses for himself through the pig. Here, the fixation on the head is nearly complete.
Munch popularity is due to his extraordinary ability to convey a deep and raw emotion from the unconscious onto the canvas leaving it to the viewers to interpret, feel and reflect. He stood out from other artists of his time, as he varied away from the norms and focused on the feelings and state of the work, rather than details and perfection. Anxiety evolved as the main point of Munch art. This essay goes through Edvard Munch’s childhood focusing on the events that caused him anxiety, how the anxiety affected his relationship with women and love, and how his idea of anxiety was supported by the theories of Søren Kierkegaard. These elements act as a support of an analysis of three of his works ‘Evening on Karl Johan’, ‘Melancholy’ and ‘The woman in three stages’. This essay should be seen as a work within the subject Visual Arts as it analyses three works of Munch focusing on anxiety. The analysis will contain an analysis of the form, content and context of each of the works. Having experienced the Edvard Munch: Angst/Anxiety exhibition at AROS Museum of Art in Aarhus, Denmark, I found and developed curiosity and inspiration to this essay. I find it worthy of a study as Munch changed the view and concept of art, and provided the public with a concept of art that was not the norm around the 19th centu...
Kandinsky here states that pursuing beauty will make art fit only for meaningless decoration of commercial items. Aiming for beauty alone, Kandinsky says, restricts humanity from understanding the true purpose of color and form and from reaching point of harmony. In these two passages, beauty is both a superficial quality and a distracting and restrictive characteristic. This use of beauty, though so far consistent, still manages to perplex the reader. Outside the realm of Kandinsky’s essay, beauty is synonymous with goodness; it is a positive attribute, one to seek out in the world. It is therefore perplexing that Kandinsky here undermines the association of beauty and goodness. Furthermore, in the greater world, beauty has a multitude of definitions, each with subtle differences that distinguish them. Because of the fact that none of the many working definitions of beauty which exist outside of Kandinsky’s essay align with the way beauty is presented here, along with the lack of a definitive definition of the beauty which Kandinsky utilizes in these examples, he cannot use it to qualify art, even in the negative
and thoughts that were overlaid into his paintings and masterpieces. He was living in a time
The aesthetic movement was an artistic and literary movement that was centered on the saying “art for art’s sake” and arguing that art was not to be utilitarian or practical. The movement wanted art to exist for the sake of its beauty alone, and that it did not need to serve any political or didactic purpose. The pieces of art created by the artists in the movement did not tell stories or sermons; their art was visual, delightful, hinting at sensual desires; their poetry was pure. The proponents of the movement say that the experience of art is the most intense experience available in life and that nothing should be allowed to restrict it. The intensity of the aesthetic experience is the dominant goal in human life. If there are morally unwanted things of art, they do not really matter in contrast to this all-important experience which art can give.