Reflection paper

Reflection Paper (English)

Upon coming into homeroom on the first day of school, I finally received my schedule which was filled with teachers I would expect to have, except for one, Mr. Gallagher. I didn’t know what to expect, I never met him, I didn’t have him freshman year, and I was agonizing over whether or not I should be concerned about my senior year. In retrospect, I should have been but that had nothing to do with Mr. G or his teaching style. I had just come off a year of English which was by far the best English class I had ever had in my life, where we wrote a lot and talked a lot and read a lot.
When I received the first book we read this year, The Stranger by Albert Camus, I had been misled. The book seemed like light reading with maybe a little bit of needed analysis, but I never believed that I would have to think so much about a book I in general didn’t really care about. When Mr. G was ranting about these characters and books I was dumbfounded, because I mean really who cares this much about the smallest of occurrences in novels? The first quarter ended up coming as a reality check to me, as I found that I could not B.S. the papers like I had done successfully for the previous years and my grade, unfortunately my grade reflected that philosophy.
I didn’t enjoy most of the group work to be honest, for many reasons that may remain obvious and be reflected by the following assignments. The analytical essays in the Portrait book, proved to be time wasters for the members of our discussion groups, because it came down to me and “another” (not going to release name because of public blogging etiquette) member of my group doing all the real analyzing, but I am not grudging. It proved to be a life lesson and class lesson that I would never forget, always read the book and its contents because you will be left for dead.
I do not much care for art or artists, because they encourage the extinction of the written word. However, the research paper was quite involved and complex. I did like my artist, Max Ernst, and his life and history. I remember spending my entire day off on Saturday, going to the library and running home to craft my paper. Surely enough, six hours later I had a well written paper that was an amazing twelve pages long. That is another thing I grew to love this year, my growing attention to the details that matter about my writing. I was able to use these developing skills even further on the school newspaper, The Blue and Gold, to review the works of underclassmen and make it even better.
I mean that was another thing I did not quite grasp during the year was all the focus on art work because it really had nothing to do with the curriculum until the fourth quarter (I know that is criticism, but I am making a point). I mean what is the real point of describing a picture in a thousand words or more? All those paintings were just a bunch of coincidental likelihoods that followed the stories in which we were reading.
Reflecting back on the year, I learned a hell of a lot from Mr. G. Judging from what I was expecting or not the year I feel would prove to be good preparation for college and the papers I plan to perfect in my newer surroundings. Because of this I feel it is my obligation to thank Mr. G for seeing the true essence of literature and what it means to write.

Research Paper Final

MAX ERNST: A MARRIAGE OF ART AND POLITICS


















Alexander Assetta
Mr. Gallagher
English 12, H Period 6
May 19, 2008




Max Ernst

Max Ernst was born on April 2, 1891 in Bruhl, Germany to Phillip Ernst and Louise Kepp (Drost 18). At a young age Ernst did not seem destined to be the legendary artist he would later become. Growing up he looked down upon his father as a symbol of his youthful rebellion (Caulfield 38). He originally enrolled at the University of Bonn in 1909 to study philosophy which would prove effective in his formation of Surrealist works (Spies 18). Because Surrealism is an art form that uses the artist’s conscious presence in order to formulate a work of art, it came as no surprise that he became interested in art soon after (Introduction to Max Ernst). Ernst had suffered an interruption during his intellectual coming of age, when he joined the German forces in World War I. After his duty, Ernst would later become a cultural figure in the later stages of the Dada movement in Western Europe.
Before the rise of Nazi power in Europe, Ernst became the designer of a technique called frottage which was described as, taking a pencil or other drawing tool and makes a "rubbing" over a textured surface. The technique would later become associated with the foundations of surrealism.
After his creative peak, he fled the Nazi controlled France in 1938 with a painting entrepreneur, Peggy Guggenheim (Spies 29). They later had a love affair and married briefly and would later be Ernst’s most popular marriage. After his final marriage to Dorothea Tanning, he spent time circling the country and later settled in the cultural capital of the world New York City. With his newfound fame and fortune Ernst decided it would be necessary to move back to Paris, where the war had ended and artist were allowed to have their creative freedoms returned to them. Soon after his return, Ernst passed away exactly one day before his 85th birthday on April 1, 1976 at his home in Paris.
Max Ernst, as a founding father of surrealism, used complex techniques to create a political and social expression through the means of art. Surrealism delves into what the viewer sees deep in his or her subconscious and accurately portrays the political and even spiritual tides of Europe. The symbolism in his paintings follows him from his earliest works to the post war eras. Through works like Europe after the Rain (1942), L’Ange du Foyer (1937), and Celebes, just to name a few, have a historical and social representation of artistic struggle throughout the twentieth century.
When Ernst originally pioneered the field of Surrealism, he had imagined it would be the start of a historical culture movement throughout Europe and eventually the rest of the world. However, the movement is now remembered as a period of time in the early 20th century in which artists and writers used elements of psychology to analyze events and actions of real life and bring these to the forefront. Surrealism was more than that; it was a time of new techniques and artistic rebellion, all which were important to Ernst who had worked so hard to make art innovative.
Surrealism by standard definitions is defined as “a style of art and literature developed principally in the 20th century, stressing the subconscious or non-rational significance of imagery (Warner 95).” Also, defined in a historical context as “a cultural movement that began in the early 20th century and is best known for the visual artwork and writings of the group members (Hopps 15).” None of these definitions really solidify the individual accomplishments of technique and innovation and capture the real meaning of the paintings. As Ernst had demonstrated, there is no real consistency amongst the paintings. Some paintings may be dark or playful then at the very same time have a romanticism era feel to them. Popular techniques and styles created during the era such as collage, decalcomania, and frottage were founded and advertised by Ernst.
Take for example the art form known as frottage, which had been created by Ernst. By definition, frottage was used, and still is used, as a method in which an artist creates rubbings of surfaces and finding starting points for images. Frottage was a word used to amplify and refine the amateur technique recording images on a relief surface (Drost 28). The technique proved to be rather fitting to the art form of surrealism because the underlying action of “rubbing” could be connected to psychoanalytic forms of art and surrealism as a primarily psychological art form utilized the automatic part of the brain.
To clearly demonstrate the use of frottage, Ernst’s 1942 painting Europe after The Rain II, highlights many of the social and political highlights of Europe during the time frame. Ernst had spent about two years working on this particular painting during the middle of World War II.
When first looking upon this painting, the setting is unclear, but whatever has happened to this place has left an impression upon the rest of the world. The one thing that seems to have remained in tact are two statues and very intentionally can not directly tell if these two figures are humans or merely statues of the previous life. Upon first glance at the picture they look like a male and female. Together they seem mesmerized by the damage that has been caused. The bronzed looking man appears as if he is hung from a large pole while the green woman is looking away. Familiarly, the woman is reminiscent of the Lady Justice, the one who they say is blind.
The next primary feature of this painting is the invisible and metaphorical divide in the picture. The right is tarnished by rubble and the disorder while the left side of the painting is cleaner and well refurbished. The right possibly representing the east side of Europe (Russia) and the Left possibly representing the western countries who will be victorious and can re-establish themselves easily after the war. The emerald green that the middle tower is composed of represents the economical repercussions of the war. The green tower in the picture seems to be tinted in black creating an image that there is a bomb at the top of it prepared to go off. I think that it is not a coincidence that Ernst had thought of something that could be this devastating to humankind as well as to the people who create such a disastrous outcome. Looking at the picture further there are no particular features in which are completely in tact “after the rain.” The lack of order represents the further implication that post and pre-war Europe will always be disorderly and incapable of recovery.
Next to the two figures lie piles of animals, birds, and human remains. Looking closer we can see that the male figure is not a human, but rather a man with a bird’s head. Ironically, the man who typically represents the brutality of war is turning toward the female figure observing the tragedy who I think represents the art of peace. The “war bird” sees the woman and seems to turn away, maybe frightened by the very notion of peace and harmony.
The colors introduce a sort of perspective that we see in the rubble. The sky, even though it has produced a storm, seems rather unfazed. The sky is cloudy and blue while what remains on Earth is nothing but a mist that can’t even be comprehensively seen with the naked eye. The color yellow, associated in the literary world with cowardly instincts and the sun’s power over humans, acts as a contrast to the bright, humanly blue skies.
The title of the painting is an interesting perspective of what a storm really is. The colors black, blue, green, yellow, and white are the different features of the storm. All these contribute to the paintings effect on the conscious mind, an important guideline to the art form of surrealism. Creating abstract pieces of art using the images the viewer sees in their mind helps create what it is we are supposed to be seeing.
Red is an image seen in the left proportion of the painting in the one of the few stable atmospheres present. Evil is evident as the effects of rain and the red associated with the painting is common to devastation. Hate is ever present in the flames of glory. In later allusions to post World War II art and imagery, the skies in Hiroshima and Nagasaki are orange and red from the effects that mankind has produced. The painting could be looked as a foreshadowing effort in the world of surrealist philosophy. After all that is what surrealism in essence is, a philosophy in which artists use their own minds to create works of art that channel the outside world.
Ernst, as a Spanish born painter working in Paris during this era, can associate with the horrors that are going on at this same timeframe. Paris, occupied by Nazi forces, was a pioneering player in the field of surrealist arts. They had realized that there cruel lives could be used for such an important cause. They could use their artistic ability to portray the long term effects on the existence of mankind.
Ernst had viewed the “western world” as bankrupt he had then continued his pre WWI goals in art. These included not including Dada as a reaction against expressionism (Spies 20). Along with many other artists such as Salvador Dali and Andre Breton, he had left the Dada movement of the early 20th century because surrealism was seen as a more active forum for artist. Surrealism was founded as a early form of counterculture revolution. “Being a Dadaist, he said, by profession was a contradiction of terms.” (Spies 19). His (Ernst’s) argument was that there was no such thing as an unchanging state of revolution. Ernst said this at the annual Dada exposition in Paris, France when he said this, a country with a long history of socialism and revolutionary ties. This ended up being rather beneficial to him at the prequel of war in Europe during this time.
Stemming from this incident Ernst improved upon an old technique, called collage. As one might be familiar with the craft, collage is the exploitation of the chance meeting of two distant realities on an unfamiliar plane. The culture of systematic displacement and its effects and the spark of poetry that leaps across the gap as the two hard realities converge (Beyond Painting). In other words, collages have layers of meaning on a single plane of artwork. His most famous work concerning this was the 1921 piece, Celebes.
Upon first glance at the painting, we see a giant, rusted green machine in an undisclosed location. There are several features about this machine that are easily detected. First, the object has a long, tubular throat like a giraffe or an elephant’s trunk. If we were to use the elephant imagery, than Ernst may have used it to point out an obvious problem in life, hence the phrase “the elephant in the room.” Next, there is a headless female figure in the room and one may assume that we are to use our imagination to fill in her role. Her psychological presence may appear to be a nurturing figure to the demon. Her physical appearance is nude and in turn is “stripped” of all meaning to life. In the recorded trials of Ernst, he had said that the central rotund shape in this painting derives from a photograph of a Sudanese corn-bin, which Ernst has transformed into a sinister mechanical monster (“Celebes”).
The painting itself is a demonstration of collage that can easily be distinguished. First, on top of the machine you can see the vast outlying images of fish swimming among the clouds and as often the case with Ernst’s works they are chasing birds. On top of the mighty machine is some kind of odd structure that is very different from the other objects in the painting. It look like a combination of a miniature piano sideways, and an aqua blue bucket holding a handheld saw. Within a hole inside the bucket lies another eye. Compared to the earlier works of Ernst such as The Horse, He’s Sick, the elements of the painting are very separated and each image in the picture has it’s own space. Along the right-hand side of the painting lies a setup that is composed of what looks like teapots that are the exact same color as the monster. At the feet/hooves/floor of the monster there is what appears to be a pencil lodged into the floor. In the distinct background, there appears to be a peephole with the faint view of an eye peeking in, indicating that somebody or something is watching the carnage ensue.
Note the misplacement of the images in the painting, these are intentional. Ernst had often used random images from things around him to include in most of his paintings. Ernst had frequently used these images in collages because like most surreal art, it would appear to be a spontaneous occurrence. The disorganized landscape could be composed to that of a dream in which surreal thoughts lay deep inside the foundation.
Some thought should fall to the title of the painting “Celebes.” Though not spelled the same way it is interesting to note the possible sexual imagery could reference celibacy, or the act of refraining from sexual interaction. The image of the girl with the missing head and the giant creature in the room could very clearly represent this belief. The giant creature is man’s brain and heart that it could be to envious, green, or too large that it is bound to create problems wherever it goes. To support this notion, the title of the painting is derived from a German school limerick that is too inappropriate here.
Tying this back to politics, the elephant/demon/monster in the room could represent Ernst’s socialist views. In a way the monster could represent the western bourgeois’ power grip on the rest of the world. Ernst might have believed in painting this that he could show the world that if the United States, for example, would use up power too quickly as the rest of the world sat back and watched.
However, when analyzing the picture it is not very likely that this is in a real “plane.” It appears that without the clear background that this might all be a dream, but much like political and social leaders of history their dreams always have an ending.
During WWII, Ernst is considered a political enemy by Nazi controlled France and flees the country with distinguished artists, Marcel Duchamp and Marc Chagall. Upon arriving in New York City in 1941, Ernst is detained by authorities and later travels throughout the United States. Also, the group of artists created a new line of creative thought referred to as Abstract Expressionism. In an apparent contradiction to surrealist thought the new artistic belief wanted to influence the intensity of the art as opposed to the inner most subjunctive thought process. After his migration to America, Ernst had traveled to the southwest where he effectively restarted his career after several marriages and breaks in art as well as history. From this point forward he had retreated back to some rather ancient methods of art known as Decalcomania. The technique, in brief, has a “carbon copy” effect on art because it involves rubbings of surfaces which then get pressed to larger surfaces (“Ernst” Humanities).
By this point in Ernst’s life he had already gone through several hardships and quite possibly realized that the world was not ready to adapt to him so he adapted to art, which is grandeur for thought and emotions. His 1937 painting L’Ange du Foyer represented his disgruntlement with the surrealist movement and in a more historical context envied the works of other artist such as Picasso and Dali. The beginning of WWII intertwined with the rise of fascism and communist rule in Europe. Ernst said about the painting, “It was the impression I had at the time of what was likely to happen in the world, and I was right (Turpin 33).” In the picture there is a recurrence of a monster figure very different from that of Celebes who is not clearly defined in most contextual portrayals.
The title directly translates to The Angel of Hearth and Home, and it is quite ironic. The creature we see in the painting is no angel and the setting does not provide the viewer with a sense of hearth and home. It appears that the monster is roaming the plains of Europe carelessly trouncing all that it sees. There is no real distinction amongst the colors of the monster, but incorporated into the demon’s pant leg is a dragon that is following his lead. Oddly, the dragon’s tail looks like the crown of the Statue of Liberty, implying that America is the dramatic monster following his tracks into the world. The original title of the painting was to be called The Triumph of Surrealism as a joke about the art’s status during the rise of fascism. Sigmund Freud held that repression was at once a malevolent inhibition of natural instincts leading to illness and operations for carrying out civilization (Turpin 33), Surrealism whose attempts at releasing the unconscious mind from rationale were confronted by a spectacle of a destructive force roaming Europe (Turpin 33).
From destruction to love, Ernst had never really had much success with women and love. He originally married Luise Straus in 1918 at the end of his service in WWI and they had a son, his only one, she later tragically died at Auschwitz in 1944. Next, he had a love affair with Loenora Carrington and she soon after had a mental breakdown. Then, he briefly became involved with art entrepreneur, Peggy Guggenheim that would last briefly, but also be his most famous marriage to date. Lastly, he married Dorothea Tanning and they remained together until he died 30 years later in a villa in Paris. Sadly, his death occurred one day before his birthday on April 1, 1976.
One of his final pieces or art was The Marriage of Heaven and Earth, in which with little detail he is able to make a contrast and connection to his real life and his art life. In the image all we see is a mustard yellow background or foreground covered by a black mass of light. One may say the luminous glow of yellow represents the sun or heaven whereas the black mass represents Earth. Cold and calculating is the Earth is to refuse to see such light given upon it everyday. In retrospect, the combination of images looks like a human’s face met at the eye and nose abridge. The lesson may very well be that people are a combination of hate and love. Those with love hate that the world around them is not as luminous as they would like it to be. The people with hate see the world in black and white, possibly a reference to the Nazi ethnic cleansing campaign in Germany.
Though not written by Ernst one of the founding principles of surrealism, created by André Breton, is that “so strong is the belief in life, in what is most fragile in real life. I mean-that in the end this belief is lost (Breton 17).” The prime purpose to Ernst’s paintings is the foundation of politics. In a specified perspective, politics can be seen as the belief in which people and organizations govern their own lives. It would end up making sense that the first human belief would be to live for as long as possible. For writers and artists like Ernst, you would have to believe strongly in the belief of life in order to find ones purpose in the world. In the world of politics there are leaders who seek to rectify the evils of society. In Ernst’s case, he may very well have intended to be a leader, but a bigger question stemming from his art may have been what it was he desired to change. It may have been the decline of art during the 1920’s or possibly to cure one of the diseases of Europe during the century the restrictions of artist and intellectuals.
Perhaps that was just the kind of luck Ernst had always had. He had never really been in love, his family was a pain to his early development, and he could not change history and politics through his art work when all was said and done. However, Ernst had started a new wave or a new breed of artistic revolution, so in that regards he succeeded. His works often went to show that fate was really a bunch of crap. We all get what is coming to us much like the enemies of both world wars found out to harshly. Much like in the real world all around us, Ernst was right. Whether it involves the passing of one’s who are ever so close to us or whether it is being active in our communities we all bear some responsibility for the actions of civilization. When a politician is sworn into office he or she is sworn to uphold our basic beliefs, or human rights and when they are being violated everyday we have lost a battle. That is what Ernst, and other surrealist, had tried to prove that if people didn’t change that in turn art wouldn’t change. In reality what was so different between art and human life? The answers could vary, but Surrealism proved that we are not alone out here, there are people who all have voices with a stroke of the brush or by the stroke of a fist, we all have a voice. Max Ernst is a folk hero for political activist everywhere because as one of the founding fathers of Surrealism was it not the responsibility of cultural influences to reach out to people.





Works Cited

Breton, Andre. Manifestoes of Surrealism. Ed. Jean-Jacques Pauvert. Paris, France 1924.

The book is a building block for the art form of surrealism. The elements of the work would prove to be effective for Ernst as well as other counterparts in the art world. The book acts as a guideline for the uses of Surrealism acts a political influence and statement.

“Celebes.” Tate Collection. < http://www.tate.org.uk/servlet/ViewWork?workid=4136>

An oil canvas painting that is being biographied by the publisher. It is solely a buying and selling site that includes some biographical information about the painting and Ernst.

Camfield, William. Dada and The Dawn of Surrealism Berlin: Prestel, 1993.

This book studies specifically how Ernst shaped the way future artist used special techniques that pioneered his works. The book documents the extinction of Dadaism and Ernst gateway to the art forms of the future.

Drost, Julia. “Biographical Notes.” Max Ernst: Life and Work. Ed. Werner Spies. Germany, 2005. 17-30

This essay is a description of Ernst’s techniques and biographies are documented from a third party perspective. The essay also explores a more feminist view of the works of Ernst. Following this essay there is another that describes many similar items in the life of Ernst. The other essay included in the anthology explains Ernst’s role in history from a more masculine and psychological setting.


Ernst, Max. Max Ernst: Life and Work. Ed. Werner Spies. Germany: Dumont, 2005.

A highly detailed chronicles of the connections of Dad and more importantly Surrealism and it’s effect on 20th century art.

Max Ernst. Max Ernst: Life and Work. Trans. John Gabriel. Berlin, Germany. Thomas & Hudson, 2005.

Much like the other translations in my research, these documents chronicle the struggle that the Nazis imposed on artistic pioneers. The reports also show the creative struggle and abilities that arise from these struggles.

“Max Ernst.” Humanities Web 3 January 2002. http://www.humanitiesweb.org/human.PHP?s=G&P=a&a=i&ID=1159

A description of Ernst’s pioneered techniques in the field of Dadaism and Surrealism. The site is more of a comprehensive study of Ernst’s life. The site questions art lovers knowledge of Ernst and his works.

Hopps, Walter. “Preface.” Dada and The Dawn of Surrealism. Ed. Simon Haviland. Germany: Prestel, 1993. 9-16

Describes the conditions of Europe in post WWII era Europe. The conditions became the foundation of Dada works then into the more popularized form of art known as Surrealism.

“Introduction to Max Ernst: A Retrospective.” The Artchive. 1991 March. http://www.artchive.com/artchive/E/Ernst.html

Talks of scandals associated with Max Ernst. His works sparked the attentions of bourgeois members. Documents post WWII atmosphere. Living in a socialist rich nation, Ernst encouraged himself to speak out against the effect that capitalism, war, had had on Europe.

Spies, Werner. “An Open-Ended Oeuvre.” Dada and the Dawn of Surrealism. Ed. Simon Haviland. Germany: Prestel, 1993. 17-30.

Mentions the works of correspondence and chronicles the works of the early 20th century and the darker side of art after WWII. Also, the work follows the path Ernst took to get to the top of an art elitist pyramid.


Turpin, Ian. Ernst. Hong Kong: Haidon, 1979

Mostly, an artistic retrospective of Ernst’s works throughout the years. Each comes with a brief synopsis of the paintings and text. Like other works, words document the rise to the top of an art world. Works well as an analytical piece, but suffered from a lack of hard detail.

Warner, Pamela. Max Ernst: Life and Work. Trans. Max Ernst. Paris, France: Thames & Hudson, 2005.

Circles the life of Ernst through letters written by prisoners, supporters, and admirers. Some letters even are written by Ernst himself. Follows Ernst stay in Paris before the Nazi occupation.





Works Consulted

Eluard, Paul. “Dear Mr. President.” Max Ernst: Life and Work. Trans. Pamela J. Warner. Paris, France: Private Collection

As a political enemy, an artistic intellectual, Protests were made on part of Ernst for exile. These are demonstrations of anti-Nazi creativity. Ernst was an inspiration for cultural revolutionist during the period of both World Wars.

Ernst, Max. “Untitled.” 1920. Le Havre’ Max Ernst: Life and Work. Ed. Werner Spies. Germany, 2005.

The painting displayed on the page translates a use of Ernst’s creative struggle in Berlin. The work implores the use of a close eye and open mind on the art.

Feaver, William. “The Great Dictators.” ARTnews Summer 2007: 178-181.

In the article by Feaver, the death of Stalin is praised as a resurrection of lost talents. Picasso’s painting of Stalin had proved a disappointment in the French art world. However the time frame in which the painting is made is a recovery from the lack of creative breakthrough post 1800’s Europe.

“Max Ernst.” Eyeconart http://www.eyeconart.net/history/surrealism.html

The site provides information on the founders of surrealism. The primary figure of the movement was Max Ernst who introduced the technique of frottage. The site also identifies others involved in surrealism.

Spies, Werner. “Directions For Use.” Max Ernst: Life and Work. Ed. Werner Spies. Germany: Thames & Hudson, 2006. 7-17.

Background of Dada and Surrealist thoughts. Explores how Ernst desired to use surrealism to further the progression of art in Europe.

Max Ernst Rough Draft

Max Ernst

Max Ernst was born on April 2, 1891 in Bruhl, Germany to Phillip Ernst and Louise Kepp (Drost 18). At a young age Ernst did not seem destined to be the legendary artist he would later become. Growing up he looked down upon his father as a symbol of his youthful rebellion (Caulfield 38). He originally enrolled at the University of Bonn in 1909 to study philosophy which would prove effective in his formation of Surrealist works (Spies 18). Because Surrealism is an art form that uses the artist’s conscious presence in order to formulate a work of art, it came as no surprise that he became interested in art soon after (Introduction to Max Ernst). Ernst had suffered an interruption during his intellectual coming of age, when he joined the German forces in World War I. After his duty, Ernst would later become a cultural figure in the later stages of the Dada movement in Western Europe.
Before the rise of Nazi power in Europe, Ernst became the designer of a technique called frottage which was described as, taking a pencil or other drawing tool and makes a "rubbing" over a textured surface. The technique would later become associated with the foundations of surrealism.
After his creative peak, he fled the Nazi controlled France in 1938 with a painting entrepreneur, Peggy Guggenheim (Spies 29). They later had a love affair and married briefly and would later be Ernst’s most popular marriage. After his final marriage to Dorothea Tanning, he spent time circling the country and later settled in the cultural capital of the world New York City. With his newfound fame and fortune Ernst decided it would be necessary to move back to Paris, where the war had ended and artist were allowed to have their creative freedoms returned to them. Soon after his return, Ernst passed away exactly one day before his 85th birthday on April 1, 1976 at his home in Paris.
Max Ernst, as a founding father of surrealism, used complex techniques to create a political and social expression through the means of art. Surrealism delves into what the viewer sees deep in their subconscious and accurately portrays the political and even spiritual tides of Europe. The symbolism in his paintings follows him from his earliest works to the post war eras. Through works like Europe after the Rain (1942), L’Ange du Foyer (1937), and Celebes, just to name a few, have a historical and social representation of artistic struggle throughout the twentieth century.
To understand Max Ernst and his impact on art history, the knowledge of surrealism is vital to the topic. Surrealism has had many different definitions because it is an art form that is never changing. When Ernst originally pioneered the field of Surrealism, he had imagined it would be the start of a historical culture movement throughout Europe and eventually the rest of the world. However, the movement is now remembered as a period of time in the early 20th century in which artists and writers used elements of psychology to analyze events and actions of real life and bring these to the forefront. Surrealism was more than that; it was a time of new techniques and artistic rebellion, all which were important to Ernst who had worked so hard to make art innovative.
Surrealism by standard definitions is defined as “a style of art and literature developed principally in the 20th century, stressing the subconscious or non-rational significance of imagery (Warner 95).” Also, defined in a historical context as “a cultural movement that began in the early 20th century and is best known for the visual artwork and writings of the group members (Hopps 15).” None of these definitions really solidify the individual accomplishments of technique and innovation and capture the real meaning of the paintings. As Ernst had demonstrated, there is no real consistency amongst the paintings. Some paintings may be dark or playful then at the very same time have a romanticism era feel to them. Popular techniques and styles created during the era such as collage, decalcomania, and frottage were founded and advertised by Ernst.
Take for example the art form known as frottage, which had been created by Ernst. By definition, frottage was used, and still is used, as a method in which an artist creates rubbings of surfaces and finding starting points for images. Frottage was a word used to amplify and refine the amateur technique recording images on a relief surface (Drost 28). The technique proved to be rather fitting to the art form of surrealism because the underlying action of “rubbing” could be connected to psychoanalytic forms of art and surrealism as a primarily psychological art form utilized the automatic part of the brain.
To clearly demonstrate the use of frottage, Ernst’s 1942 painting Europe after The Rain II, highlights many of the social and political highlights of Europe during the time frame. Ernst had spent about two years working on this particular painting during the middle of World War II.
When first looking upon this painting, the setting is unclear, but whatever has happened to this place has left an impression upon the rest of the world. The one thing that seems to have remained in tact are two statues and very intentionally we can not directly tell if these two figures are humans or merely statues of the previous life. Upon first glance at the picture they look like a male and female. Together they seem mesmerized by the damage that has been caused. The bronzed looking man appears as if he is hung from a large pole while the green woman is looking away. Familiarly, the woman reminds me of the Lady Justice, the one who they say is blind.
The next primary feature of this painting is the invisible and metaphorical divide in the picture. The right is tarnished by rubble and the disorder while the left side of the painting is cleaner and well refurbished. The right possibly representing the east side of Europe (Russia) and the Left possibly representing the western countries who will be victorious and can re-establish themselves easily after the war. The emerald green that the middle tower is composed of could represent the economical repercussions of the war. The green tower in the picture seems to be tinted in black creating an image that there is a bomb at the top of it prepared to go off. I think that it is not a coincidence that Ernst had thought of something that could be this devastating to humankind as well as to the people who create such a disastrous outcome. Looking at the picture further there are no particular features in which are completely in tact “after the rain.” The lack of order represents the further implication that post and pre-war Europe will always be disorderly and incapable of recovery.
Next to the two figures lie piles of animals, birds, and human remains. Looking closer we can see that the male figure is not a human, but rather a man with a bird’s head. Ironically, the man who typically represents the brutality of war is turning toward the female figure observing the tragedy who I think represents the art of peace. The “war bird” sees the woman and seems to turn away, maybe frightened by the very notion of peace and harmony.
The colors introduce a sort of perspective that we see in the rubble. The sky, even though it has produced a storm, seems rather unfazed. The sky is cloudy and blue while what remains on Earth is nothing but a mist that can’t even be comprehensively seen with the naked eye. The color yellow, associated in the literary world with cowardly instincts and the sun’s power over humans, acts as a contrast to the bright, humanly blue skies.
The title of the painting is an interesting perspective of what a storm really is. The colors black, blue, green, yellow, and white are the different features of the storm. All these contribute to the paintings effect on the conscious mind, an important guideline to the art form of surrealism. Creating abstract pieces of art using the images you see in your mind helps create what it is we are supposed to be seeing.
Red is an image seen in the left proportion of the painting in the one of the few stable atmospheres present. Evil is evident as the effects of rain and the red associated with the painting is common to devastation. Hate is ever present in the flames of glory. In later allusions to post World War II art and imagery, the skies in Hiroshima and Nagasaki are orange and red from the effects that mankind has produced. The painting could be looked as a foreshadowing effort in the world of surrealist philosophy. After all that is what surrealism in essence is, a philosophy in which artists use their own minds to create works of art that channel the outside world.
Ernst, as a Spanish born painter working in Paris during this era, can associate with the horrors that are going on at this same timeframe. Paris, occupied by Nazi forces, was a pioneering player in the field of surrealist arts. They had realized that there cruel lives could be used for such an important cause. They could use their artistic ability to portray the long term effects on the existence of mankind.
Ernst had viewed the “western world” as bankrupt he had then continued his pre WWI goals in art. These included not including Dada as a reaction against expressionism (Spies 20). Along with many other artists such as Salvador Dali and Andre Breton, he had left the Dada movement of the early 20th century because surrealism was seen as a more active forum for artist. Surrealism was founded as a early form of counterculture revolution. “Being a Dadaist, he said, by profession was a contradiction of terms.” (Spies 19). His (Ernst’s) argument was that there was no such thing as an unchanging state of revolution. Ernst said this at the annual Dada exposition in Paris, France when he said this, a country with a long history of socialism and revolutionary ties. This ended up being rather beneficial to him at the prequel of war in Europe during this time.
Stemming from this incident Ernst improved upon an old technique, called collage. As one might be familiar with the craft, collage is the exploitation of the chance meeting of two distant realities on an unfamiliar plane. The culture of systematic displacement and its effects and the spark of poetry that leaps across the gap as the two hard realities converge (Beyond Painting). In other words, collages have layers of meaning on a single plane of artwork. His most famous work concerning this was the 1921 piece, Celebes.
Upon first glance at the painting, we see a giant, rusted green machine in an undisclosed location. There are several features about this machine that are easily detected. First, the object has a long, tubular throat like a giraffe or an elephant’s trunk. If we were to use the elephant imagery, than Ernst may have used it to point out an obvious problem in life, hence the phrase “the elephant in the room.” Next, there is a headless female figure in the room and one may assume that we are to use our imagination to fill in her role. Her psychological presence may appear to be a nurturing figure to the demon. Her physical appearance is nude and in turn is “stripped” of all meaning to life. In the recorded trials of Ernst, he had said that the central rotund shape in this painting derives from a photograph of a Sudanese corn-bin, which Ernst has transformed into a sinister mechanical monster (“Celebes”).
The painting itself is a demonstration of collage that can easily be distinguished. First, on top of the machine you can see the vast outlying images of fish swimming among the clouds and as often the case with Ernst’s works they are chasing birds. On top of the mighty machine is some kind of odd structure that is very different from the other objects in the painting. It look like a combination of a miniature piano sideways, and an aqua blue bucket holding a handheld saw. Within a hole inside the bucket lies another eye. Compared to the earlier works of Ernst such as The Horse, He’s Sick or The Massacre of the Innocents, the elements of the painting are very separated and each image in the picture has it’s own space. Along the right-hand side of the painting you see a setup that is composed of what looks like teapots that are the exact same color as the monster. At the feet/hooves/floor of the monster there is what appears to be a pencil lodged into the floor. In the distinct background, there appears to be a peephole with the faint view of an eye peeking in, indicating that somebody or something is watching the carnage ensue.
Note the misplacement of the images in the painting, these are intentional. Ernst had often used random images from things around him to include in most of his paintings. Ernst had frequently used these images in collages because like most surreal art, it would appear to be a spontaneous occurrence. The disorganized landscape could be composed to that of a dream in which surreal thoughts lay deep inside the foundation.
Some thought should fall to the title of the painting “Celebes.” Though not spelled the same way it is interesting to note the possible sexual imagery could reference celibacy, or the act of refraining from sexual interaction. The image of the girl with the missing head and the giant creature in the room could very clearly represent this belief. The giant creature is man’s brain and heart that it could be to envious, green, or too large that it is bound to create problems wherever it goes. To support this notion, the title of the painting is derived from a German school limerick that is too inappropriate here.
Tying this back to politics, the elephant/demon/monster in the room could represent Ernst’s socialist views. In a way the monster could represent the western bourgeois’ power grip on the rest of the world. Ernst might have believed in painting this that he could show the world that if the United States, for example, would use up power too quickly as the rest of the world sat back and watched.
However, when analyzing the picture it is not very likely that this is in a real “plane.” It appears that without the clear background that this might all be a dream, but much like political and social leaders of history their dreams always have an ending.
During WWII, Ernst is considered a political enemy by Nazi controlled France and flees the country with distinguished artists, Marcel Duchamp and Marc Chagall. Upon arriving in New York City in 1941, Ernst is detained by authorities and later travels throughout the United States. Also, the group of artists created a new line of creative thought referred to as Abstract Expressionism. In an apparent contradiction to surrealist thought the new artistic belief wanted to influence the intensity of the art as opposed to the inner most subjunctive thought process. After his migration to America, Ernst had traveled to the southwest where he effectively restarted his career after several marriages and breaks in art as well as history. From this point forward he had retreated back to some rather ancient methods of art known as Decalcomania. The technique, in brief, has a “carbon copy” effect on art because it involves rubbings of surfaces which then get pressed to larger surfaces (“Ernst” Humanities).
By this point in Ernst’s life he had already gone through several hardships and quite possibly realized that the world was not ready to adapt to him so he adapted to art, which is grandeur for thought and emotions. His 1937 painting L’Ange du Foyer represented his disgruntlement with the surrealist movement and in a more historical context envied the works of other artist such as Picasso and Dali. The beginning of WWII intertwined with the rise of fascism and communist rule in Europe. Ernst said about the painting, “It was the impression I had at the time of what was likely to happen in the world, and I was right (Turpin 33).” In the picture there is a recurrence of a monster figure very different from that of Celebes who is not clearly defined in most contextual portrayals.
The title directly translates to The Angel of Hearth and Home, and it is quite ironic. The creature we see in the painting is no angel and the setting does not provide the viewer with a sense of hearth and home. It appears that the monster is roaming the plains of Europe carelessly trouncing all that it sees. There is no real distinction amongst the colors of the monster, but incorporated into the demon’s pant leg is a dragon that is following his lead. Oddly, the dragon’s tail looks like the crown of the Statue of Liberty, implying that America is the dramatic monster following his tracks into the world. The original title of the painting was to be called The Triumph of Surrealism as a joke about the art’s status during the rise of fascism. Sigmund Freud held that repression was at once a malevolent inhibition of natural instincts leading to illness and operations for carrying out civilization (Turpin 33), Surrealism whose attempts at releasing the unconscious mind from rationale were confronted by a spectacle of a destructive force roaming Europe (Turpin 33).
From destruction to love, Ernst had never really had much success with women and love. He originally married Luise Straus in 1918 at the end of his service in WWI and they had a son, his only one, she later tragically died at Auschwitz in 1944. Next, he had a love affair with Loenora Carrington and she soon after had a mental breakdown. Then, he briefly became involved with art entrepreneur, Peggy Guggenheim that would last briefly, but also be his most famous marriage to date. Lastly, he married Dorothea Tanning and they remained together until he died 30 years later in a villa in Paris. Sadly, his death occurred one day before his birthday on April 1, 1976.
One of his final pieces or art was The Marriage of Heaven and Earth, in which with little detail he is able to make a contrast and connection to his real life and his art life. In the image all we see is a mustard yellow background or foreground covered by a black mass of light. One may say the luminous glow of yellow represents the sun or heaven whereas the black mass represents Earth. Cold and calculating, the Earth who refuses to see such light given upon it everyday. In retrospect, the combination of images looks like a human’s face met at the eye and nose abridge. The lesson may very well be that people are a combination of hate and love. Those with love hate that the world around them is not as luminous as they would like it to be. The people with hate see the world in black and white, possibly a reference to the Nazi ethnic cleansing campaign in Germany.
Though not written by Ernst one of the founding principles of surrealism, created by Andre Breton, is that “so strong is the belief in life, in what is most fragile in real life. I mean-that in the end this belief is lost (Breton 17).” The prime purpose to Ernst’s paintings is the foundation of politics. In a specified perspective, politics can be seen as the belief in which people and organizations govern their own lives. It would end up making sense that the first human belief would be to live for as long as possible. For writers and artists like Ernst, you would have to believe strongly in the belief of life in order to find ones purpose in the world. In the world of politics there are leaders who seek to rectify the evils of society. In Ernst’s case, he may very well have intended to be a leader, but a bigger question stemming from his art may have been what it was he desired to change. It may have been the decline of art during the 1920’s or possibly to cure one of the diseases of Europe during the century the restrictions of artist and intellectuals.
Perhaps that was just the kind of luck Ernst had always had. He had never really been in love, his family was a pain to his early development, and he could not change history and politics through his art work when all was said and done. However, Ernst had started a new wave or a new breed of artistic revolution, so in that regards he succeeded. His works often went to show that fate was really a bunch of crap. We all get what is coming to us much like the enemies of both world wars found out to harshly. Much like in the real world all around us, Ernst was right. Whether it involves the passing of one’s who are ever so close to us or whether it is being active in our communities we all bear some responsibility for the actions of civilization. When a politician is sworn into office he or she is sworn to uphold our basic beliefs, or human rights and when they are being violated everyday we have lost a battle. That is what Ernst, and other surrealist, had tried to prove that if people didn’t change that in turn art wouldn’t change. In reality what was so different between art and human life? The answers could vary, but Surrealism proved that we are not alone out here, there are people who all have voices with a stroke of the brush or by the stroke of a fist we all have a voice. Max Ernst is a folk hero for political activist everywhere because as one of the founding fathers of Surrealism was it not the responsibility of cultural influences to reach out to people.

Max Ernst and Europe after the rain

Max Ernst’s 1942 painting “Europe After The Rain” is a perfect representation of the art form of surrealism. Ernst had spent about two years working on this particular painting during the middle of World War II.
When first looking upon this painting, the setting is unclear, but whatever has happened to this place has left an impression upon the rest of the world. The one thing that seems to have remained in tact are two statues and very intentionally we can not directly tell if these two figures are humans or merely statues of the previous life. Upon first glance at the picture they look like a male and female. Together they seem mesmerized by the damage that has been caused. The bronzed looking man appears as if he is hung from a large pole while the green woman is looking away. Familiarly, the woman reminds me of the Lady Justice, the one who they say is blind.
The next primary feature of this painting is the invisible and metaphorical divide in the picture. The right is tarnished by rubble and the disorder while the left side of the painting is cleaner and well refurbished. The right possibly representing the east side of Europe (Russia) and the Left possibly representing the western countries who will be victorious and can re-establish themselves easily after the war. The emerald green that the middle tower is composed of could represent the economical repercussions of the war. The green tower in the picture seems to be tinted in black creating an image that there is a bomb at the top of it prepared to go off. I think that it is not a coincidence that Ernst had thought of something that could be this devastating to humankind as well as to the people who create such a disastrous outcome. Looking at the picture further there are no particular features in which are completely in tact “after the rain.” The lack of order represents the further implication that post and pre-war Europe will always be disorderly and incapable of recovery.
Next to the two figures lie piles of animals, birds, and human remains. Looking closer we can see that the male figure is not a human, but rather a man with a bird’s head. Ironically, the man who typically represents the brutality of war is turning toward the female figure observing the tragedy who I think represents the art of peace. The “war bird” sees the woman and seems to turn away, maybe frightened by the very notion of peace and harmony.
The colors introduce a sort of perspective that we see in the rubble. The sky, even though it has produced a storm, seems rather unfazed. The sky is cloudy and blue while what remains on Earth is nothing but a mist that can’t even be comprehensively seen with the naked eye. The color yellow, associated in the literary world with cowardly instincts and the sun’s power over humans, acts as a contrast to the bright, humanly blue skies.
The title of the painting is an interesting perspective of what a storm really is. The colors black, blue, green, yellow, and white are the different features of the storm. All these contribute to the paintings effect on the conscious mind, an important guideline to the art form of surrealism. Creating abstract pieces of art using the images you see in your mind helps create what it is we are supposed to be seeing.
Red is an image seen in the left proportion of the painting in the one of the few stable atmospheres present. Evil is evident as the effects of rain and the red associated with the painting is common to devastation. Hate is ever present in the flames of glory. In later allusions to post World War II art and imagery, the skies in Hiroshima and Nagasaki are orange and red from the effects that mankind has produced. The painting could be looked as a foreshadowing effort in the world of surrealist philosophy. After all that is what surrealism in essence is, a philosophy in which artists use their own minds to create works of art that channel the outside world.
Ernst, as a Spanish born painter working in Paris during this era, can associate with the horrors that are going on at this same timeframe. Paris, occupied by Nazi forces, was a pioneering player in the field of surrealist arts. They had realized that there cruel lives could be used for such an important cause. They could use their artistic ability to portray the long term effects on the existence of mankind.

Brueghel Post

When I first witnessed the picture of The Fall of Icarus by Bruegel, there was a quite unique concept about the color structure he used. In the background there is an aluminous sky shaded by the yellow shadow that represents a form of purity and well-being. The rest of the background is hard to make out but the clouds provide a contradictory image of the eternally lit flame of the sun. This may be foreshadowed as the danger that may come from the death of Icarus and the clouds are the warning sign of dangerous times. Next, the richness of the Mediterranean Sea is pictured oh so elegantly by Brueghel. The radiance of the sea is perfected in the blue shadings. The color really captures the importance of the sea as if it were human and the painting is fairly adequate when measuring the prolific empire of mythology and how we interpret it. The image of the boat is amazing in the sense of how steady it is against the calm blue sea. The Island is portrayed as a prison in the myth, but seems filled with people who seem to enjoy the time they have. The title of the painting, The Fall of Icarus, obviously represents the tragedy that will be faced by the title character. The painting seems to pick up just after the incident has occurred judging from the fallen angel wings in the water trying obsessively to swim back up to the heavens. The painting also focuses on the ignorance of the peasants or farm workers or the workers with the Earth, The man in red who plows on by while he had just admired the significance of the fly. The Shepard who is turned away from the fall and sees nothing of the incident could signify the accepting of the Gods while Icarus has defied these same gods by flying higher than he thought he could and making the workers believe as if he were indeed a God. As Icarus falls into the water, his father Deadalus tries to reach into the water and save his son. He fails and the painter does not offer the sort of emotions that one, Deadalus, should express by the death of his son. When glanced at a second time I realized that the first image that strikes me as odd is the effect the painting has on the impact of the plowman. He takes up a large portion of the left side of the picture. He is also one of the only characters to be clearly displayed with symbolic amounts of color. The red suit personifying rage and evil stemming from in this case the entrapment on the island that is evident through the eternal suffering Deadalus must now submit himself to. The shadows are clustered in the region in which Icarus drowns is blackened and darkened to emphasize the effect of the death and the darkness that is soon to follow the orders of Gods and their wrath. While on the other side of the equation there is a light that is illuminating on the clear water, however some may see this as a clear path to the Promised Land and that is something nobody on the island will ever be able to achieve further symbolizes the imagery of the Sun as a sign of rage and passion that is burning continuously as the events continue to unfold. The next thing I notice is the select amount of sheep that are different colors who still roam with the other normally colored sheep. I can make an assumption about the fact that they are “black sheep” which in this case could be used to apply Deadalus and Icarus as out of place in this prison island of Crete. They are different because of their fight with nature. The herdsman and Shepard and plowman are all one with nature and they work with the gods something that both Deadalus and Icarus fight by inventing things and defying the laws of gravity and in doing so anger the Gods so much as to do something as inhumane as grossly murder the son of Deadalus. The painting also show the deep and unfortunate aspects of the universe are and how all beings on the earth are trapped their. In a deep thought this one island is the rest of the universe. The workers and prisoners are trapped their for as long as I can see and the end is symbolized by the death or fall of Icarus and just how badly one can come to an end as quickly as it is put on earth. The color green is used in the mix of the ocean which is ironic of the reason Deadalus is on the island in the first place. He murders his own nephew because of his jealousy, or to be more fitting, or envy which is commonly applied to the color green to represent something that is a sin under the bible’s definition of the terms. Also, the green is being applied to the pastures that are being plowed indicating the turn of spring and the trees of which are not fully grown are still brown. This was possibly to emphasize the immaturity of youth and how when youth is not fully experienced it can wither easily in the passing time. Icarus learned this lesson based on his ego trip that angered an elder God(s), it was Icarus’ dream to be just like a God by flying so high while intellectually being a lesser being, a child. It is important to see the pictures of what it is that we read. In this case a myth about youth or about man facing off against nature, by looking at the picture we can gather an even larger mental picture of the actions at hand. We learn about emotions, we learn about patterns and how they are represented by different colors and objects that are symbolic of the people involved in the picture or painting. What else do we learn from a picture? Do we really see everything on first glance? Is there more than meets the eye?

Tom Phillips

Humument
On page 11 of Tom Phillips’ A Humument, Phillips suggests there is some kind of battle between good and evil and more importantly how it affects the human element. Phillips uses fire and the presence of blue as a resistant force against the fire of red. By using traditionally involved colors with themes, Phillips presents this battle and how it intends to play out.

To start there is a breach in the very title of the page that presents a question right off the top. The inferno red hides the “an doc” part of the Human Document. Now it could be interpreted as a questioning of what the picture really is. The picture is a test to the intellectual capabilities of the observer. The fire can be seen as the shape of a dragon, a mythological creature who presents chaos and destruction. The fire can be seen arising from the depths of hell. Phillips contrasts this by using the blue base of the painting to represent the ocean which has been used in literary works to traditionally represent a cleansing region. The water represents the rising force that pushes away the immoral acts being committed on the written words.
With the focus changed to the top “half” of the page there is a noticeable point in the highlighted words that appear. Phillips talks of the “book” that is given to a “reader” and tells the reader that he can not reveal what it is indeed that he has changed. Phillips makes these words the first primary highlight of his page. It is from here that the flaming red terror eats up the rest of the page and proceeds to wear away at it’s meaning. The scarlet is fractured at spots, possibly indicating that there is something of some importance to the words he presents. Phillips preserves the words of his play “but..it is a hum.. ument” which brings about the essential thought process behind the picture.

Phillips prepares to reach his point by the second “half” of his artwork. He labels the second half of his painting “The Characters.” There is an influence that the characters play in preserving the work created by artists. The usage of the first line, “the history viola” provides something comforting to match the teal blue of the imagery of the ocean or force of good and well-being. A violin however is also associated with the song of departure and ever lasting depression. As it applies to the page, the violin can be used as a romantic ballad to incorporate the cooperation of love and hate in the battle for literary equality. The turquoise and rose align to describe the two realities that Phillips’ sees affecting the everyday words and the threats they pose in society.

The blue box is set off with the red raging from the depths and acting as it’s own unit in the page. The page also goes to show the old adage that you can’t fit a square inside a circle which might help represent the contrast of ideas associated with Phillips skepticism of the written word and the threats that are opposed to this everyday.

The characters are representing the root of all good that can come from a work. Demonstrated by the strands of roots that stem from the title feature are damaged elements of writing that could be fixed by features of the blue texts. The furthest from the strand involves people or the fractured word of people. The establishment of this word’s distance implicates that people are different from characters. There are features such as the operation and togetherness that separate these two factors of literature. Much like the words on the page there is no connection and thus creates an interpretation of what the rest of the text really means. The page is a message from Phillips and from the large scale literary world that tells the watcher that there is indeed a battle that thinkers face and the changes that are to occur soon are going to be forever repressed.

Hamlet's Soliloquy

Hamlet Soliloquy (Laurence Olivier)

In the 1948 version of Shakespeare’s tragedy, Hamlet, Sir Laurence Olivier captures the heart and soul of the title character during his famous soliloquy while often not even talking. As an established actor of the twentieth century, Olivier has had a variety of roles that portray him as a tragic hero, Spartacus and Othello come to mind, that accurately prepare him for the role of importance. It is his seemingly fluent understanding of Hamlet’s importance and eloquence in his soliloquy.

To open the scene, there is a rustle of waves that hit up against the stones upon which Hamlet graces to set up for an opportune setting later in the scene. Olivier captures the tone and emotion that Hamlet is experiencing as he begins his speech. “To be or not to be, that is the question,” (line 55) implicates that Hamlet is at a standstill because he does not know whether there is an ultimate goal to the existence given his own situation. What is being questioned can be clarified in lines 56-59, “Whether ‘tis nobler in the mind to suffer….Or to take arms against a sea of troubles and by opposing, end them.” The ultimate debate is whether Hamlet should use the “arms against his sea of troubles” in order to act swiftly to King Claudius or rather to suffer from guilt. The setting proves to be all too fitting in context to the play as the ocean waves are attacking the shore an image that represents the crisis Hamlet endures. It is important to note that Hamlet at this time is still in a state of depression over not being able to cope with his father’s death and Olivier does an accurate job of portraying doubt and how Hamlet should feel about the revelry Denmark has to endure.

In a more philosophical approach, Hamlet uses the lines, “To die, to sleep” (58,63) repetitively in order to branch off of the emotions he looks to pass off during his soliloquy. “in that sleep of death what dreams may come,” implies a feeling that if death is but a prolonged moment of silence and vacancy of the mind, or a clean slate. The act of death may be an entrance way to the cleansing of these evil thoughts. Hamlet further prolongs the feelings of suicide by “bearing those ills we have, than to fly to others that we know not of,” (80-81) acting as if we are cowards for considering the notion of suicide.

The scene within the play is a representation of the most literal form of a soliloquy in which he is all to himself. While in the play he is still surrounded by Ophelia, Hamlet is assessing his thoughts all by himself. The interpretation of the speech leaves the viewer to a mystery, is this scene really at the seashore or is this occurring in the actual mind of Hamlet. At this point in the play, the readers much like the characters are not sure whether or not Hamlet is going insane or faking. By the acted, or overacted, version of the speech it appears he is still insane, but is conflicted with all these unfortunate images of suicide and the “undiscover’d country” (78) of the post-life.

Though there are a few inaccuracies in the scene, the portrayal is stunning in the capturing of emotions. What is lost in text is realized in thoroughness of acting. Olivier’s version relies more on the lack of a special effect element and by using a natural setting creates a deeper meaning.