Sunday, August 22, 2004

What a Scream!

By

Read full article...

Posted 08/22 | Add a Comment

    Comments:

    You must register to comment.

    Login | Register

  1. Hey Art Critic and Underground Activist.  You made me laugh again.

    He was an octogenarian when he created the icon, and he had seen enough of what civilization had wrought by the time the nineteenth century came to a close. The work is truly a shimmering sight of sickness without an antidote.

    He painted the icon when he was 30.  He didn’t become an octogenarian for another 50 years.
    With that out of the way, I learned that The Scream was inspired by Munch’s sister’s death from tuberculosis--which would explain sight of sickness without an antidote, is that yours?

    So was it, as he said, a reflection of growing up with the anxiety and fear of losing his sibling to the wanton hand of Nature or is it the late 20th Century analysis/imposition that the painting is commentary on how modern civilization had shaped him?

    Posted by Jeff from  on  08/22  at  07:28 PM

  2. You mean you don’t know that Munch lived to be 131?  Sorry and a HUGE THANKS for correcting the grievous oversight...that slipped in --no “excuses” here, truly-- as I was rushing...going back and forth between many rushed Press Action comments on comments, studying his “Between Clock and Bed” (which WAS done around the time he was doing his “octogenarian” work), and trying to meet the “timely” deadline for posting. An explanation only of how I/accuracy got “lost in the shuffle.” Don’t know where you got the business about the sister’s death and its relationship to THE SCREAM, but I can assure you that that’s a very weak explanation of his primary inspiration; it’s way off...aside from being totally reductionist/simplistic.  What are you asking when you ask “is that yours?” The lack of antidote applies to there being no cure for the people he painted during that 90’S period in works such as EVENING ON THE KARL JOHAN and ANXIETY.  They, by the way, are good “proof” for there being way more going in --in terms of inspiration-- than the personal situation you cite with his sister; he’s obviously affected greatly by the zombies he’s encountering, the sick turn of civilization. The people are clearly unhinged, floating beyond the influence of gravity, too grave by any sane standards...and not knowing their own sickly condition.  Art Critic Ox P.S. Truly, thanks. And merci for staying open.

    Posted by Art Critic Ox from  on  08/22  at  08:09 PM

  3. Can’t point you to something definitive, i.e, a direct attribution of inspiration from Munch, but his work of 1890’s seems infused with the death of his sister and the impact it had on him and the family, e.g., Death in the Sickroom, By the Deathbed, The Death Mother and Child.
    Throw in that he lost his mother even earlier, and ultimately his sister, and that his father continually harangued him with the threat of being doomed to hell should he fail and sin in any manner and you have an armchair art critic’s explanation for the generally perceived bleakness of his work, rather than the notion of his having seen enough of what civilization had wrought.
    His comments about the inspiration for The Scream, Despair, and Anxiety include a journal entry that I expect you have seen:

    "I was walking along the road with two friends.
    The sun was setting.
    I felt a breath of melancholy -
    Suddenly the sky turned blood-red.
    I stopped, and leaned against the railing, deathly tired -
    looking out across the flaming clouds that hung like blood and a sword
    over the blue-black fjord and town.
    My friends walked on - I stood there, trembling with fear.
    And I sensed a great, infinite scream pass through nature

    Not sure I see an attack on the industrial age in there, but I do sense an acknowledgement of the power of Nature to capriciously threaten humanity.

    Posted by Jeff from  on  08/22  at  09:30 PM

  4. In Arne Eggum’s EDVARD MUNCH: PAINTINGS, SKETCHES, AND STUDIES translated by Ragnar Christophersen (which I’ve quoted from in my article) you’ll see that --in Munch’s own words-- what the effect Nature had on him vis-a-vis THE SCREAM.... Yes, it’s common knowledge. What you are discounting are the references I made in comment #2...and the attendant statements regarding Munch’s disgust with civilization/humanity.  The biographical approach to art of any kind is highly questionable, of course, as biography itself is always terribly suspect...regardless of who the biographer is.  However, the “evidence” presented in the artwork (I have cited) itself is impossible to refute.  One would have to come up with an explanation of how they artist could portray the masses of Christiania the way in which Munch delineates them BEFORE attributing motivation to a particular personal experience or two or three.  All else aside, there was a lot of what Munch went through being experienced by others at that time in Norway. Rather than begin to get nasty with me prematurely...respecting this armchair critic’s talk...I suggest you look at my credentials.  For starters, starting in my formative years...I studied (on a very personal basis over quite a long time) with George Weber of Rutgers University, one of history’s great...art historians. Regardless, as I’ve pointed out, one needs to confront the artwork I’ve cited...which you have not done.  Armchair critics are usually the ones who rely on biographical sources to prop up what pleases them.  And you don’t show any signs of being familiar with how “out of fashion” such talk is in “The Art World.” Respectfully for now, R.O.

    Posted by R.O. from  on  08/22  at  10:05 PM

  5. I’m an art moron but ‘The Scream’ is one of my favorites.  Regardless of the motivation or interpretation others may ascribe, I will always treasure it as a heroic expression of naked honesty.

    Posted by Scott Beckman from Santa Fe, NM  on  08/22  at  10:05 PM

  6. You are NOT an “art moron,” Scott. Your short comment is quite healthy...plus.  Nevertheless, since you obviously didn’t get a chance to read my latest comments attached to #4...I’d be interested in your response to what I had to tell J.  I ask because I address important issues there that are much more important than just the particular issues at hand; I’m interested in your feedback on the particulars too, however.  Best, Arty Ox

    Posted by Arty Ox from  on  08/22  at  10:25 PM

  7. I would still like Scott to respond to my request in #6, but for Jeff --who hasn’t responded to what I laid out in #5 yet-- I should add that my teaching of Henrik Ibsen (for over thirty years as a college prof in Dramatic Art), a part of Munch’s inner Oslo circle, also brought me in touch with what I’ve had to say about the Norweigan painter; Munch did some of Ibsen’s stage designs, of course, and the back and forth between them also substantiates what I’ve delineated for you from a direct observation of the art itself. The attitude toward civilization between them was clear at the end of the 90s.  I trust that Mark Hand will update the article so that it reads something to the effect that although Munch was only in his thirties when he devised “the icon”...he had seen “enough” of so-called civilization by the end of the nineteenth century to warrant his hugely negative interpretation of it in his paintings.  Best, Ox

    Posted by Prof Ox from  on  08/22  at  11:22 PM

  8. The comment about armchair critic was directed at myself, so don’t feel slighted, or compelled to defend your credentials.

    Nothing nasty intended.

    I was acknowledging my own lack of credentials.  As you say I do look to biographical sources to prop up what pleases me.  I look for simple explanations. If you will reread the armchair comment I think you will see that I was admitting that upfront.

    It is for others to assess a works social importance and attach elaborate theories about what hidden messages lurk.
    I am content to say that he was tormented by his bleak life including the loss of his mother and sister and found himself painting, wood cutting, and lithographing the subjects over and over again in an effort to release his pain. If there is social commentary there as well I don’t think Munch was aware of it.


    Let’s face it the guy was a little off-- he is said to have had a tragic upbringing, so one day he is walking along a bridge and he sees the sky suddenly turn fiery red [perhaps a result of ash from Krakatoa eruptions]--and he is reminded of the power of Nature, which he knows well already.  Then he uses this colorful powerful incident in his work.


    Why does it have to be more?  What was going on in his life during his time in France and Norway that makes you comment that he had enough of civilization and wanted to represent that in this work in 1893?

    Posted by Jeff from  on  08/22  at  11:40 PM

  9. As long as I am here causing trouble--it seems.

    Scott, what makes it heroic?

    Posted by Jeff from  on  08/22  at  11:54 PM

  10. I have no credentials.  I humbly submit a subjective opinion about the picture with the thoughts and feelings it reached into me and stirred.  The “motivation” that prompted the utter despair portrayed in this work is secondary to its accurate portrayal of the raw human emotional “reaction” to that cause.  As a statement about human nature, the cause could be anything, but the response is universal.

    Several indicators lead me to this conclusion. First, consider the painting’s title.  It is not trying to be cute, clever, subtle, oblique, pointing to some mysterious cause. It directs our attention to one thing and one unavoidable thing only, the effect, “The Scream.”

    Second, as I understand it, this setting is a representation of the actual place where Munch experienced the “sensation” that inspired the painting.  Portraying the actual location emphasizes the intensely personal nature of the “experience” itself.  Again, no confusing references or images get in the way of what he’s trying to say.  Just a reality front and center.

    Finally, there is his testimony that I have always felt to be describing “a touch of madness” since the despair eminates from and flows through nature.  Whether or not a specific circumstance or combinations of circumstances brought the episode on, he experienced as a momentary connection to the all-source of fear. 

    My description of the work as “heroic” is an intensely personal one, Jeff, which you may not relate to at all because we all see the world through such different sets of eyes. The picture also confronted me with the fact of my genuine sympathy with the screamer.  What was the source of that sympathy, I asked.  In reply, I found in my “nature,” the knowledge of weakness, imperfection, vulnerability, mortality, and a desperate and unrequited need to love and be loved fully and unconditionally, truly.  People do not readily think of, much less confess such things in private, much less in public.  We are shamed early and often (boys don’t cry) to avoid such uncomfortable topics and contemptible behaviors. This “nature” of society might, in fact, be enough to compound the depths of loneliness and despair to the brink of temporary madness.  I have never been there.  But it is well within the reasonable limits of reason to imagine it possible.  If my reflections bear any resemblance to Munch’s realities, he chose to confess his desperation to the world without guile or apology.  If that is the case, it was an enormous and deeply touching act of courage.

    Sorry to keep you waiting, Understanding Ox.  Unavoidable delays.

    Posted by Scott Beckman from Santa Fe, NM  on  08/23  at  03:27 AM

  11. No apologies necessary. This is absolutely terrific dialogue between Scott and Jeff. For now, re S...when I used to work in one of Wyland’s art galleries on Maui...a guy told me a story once about a kid who went into a museum and walked slowly around a sculpture of a naked woman.  After studying the artwork for awhile...the ten-year-old stepped up to it...and placed his hands on the two breasts.  At that point my customer took a photo. Later, when he returned to the mainland, he put the picture up at his desk...with the caption..."I don’t know much about art, but I know what I like!” No worries, readers...when it comes to the fine arts.  Re J...I will respond to your main concern shortly, but for now please consider what Mark Hand should be posting soon as a footnote...added to a “new version” of the article: What a scream, this civilization! (1)

    (1) Anyone who doubts that Munch was inspired to cry out against civilization in creating “The Scream” --as opposed to attributing it all to his personal trauma vis-a-vis sick family members-- need only study the artist’s “Evening on the Karl Johan” (1892) and “Anxiety” (1894).  The soulless zombies parading off their plank of barren earth or floating in defiance of gravity (totally out of touch with Nature), too grave to be aware of their own condition, make a statement that is unquestionably about what has become of Humanity.  What a scream, this civilization! (1)

    (1) Anyone who doubts that Munch was inspired to cry out against civilization in creating “The Scream” --as opposed to attributing it all to his personal trauma vis-a-vis sick family members-- need only study the artist’s “Evening on the Karl Johan” (1892) and “Anxiety” (1894).  The soulless zombies parading off their plank of barren earth or floating in defiance of gravity (totally out of touch with Nature), too grave to be aware of their own condition, make a statement that is unquestionably about what has become of Humanity.  It will be a pleasure to get back to you on more...but please know that a) I encourage you to delve into the artwork along the lines that Scott has (confronting it directly more than bringing preconceived notions to it) and b) Munch was not the only one in his intellectual circle who damned Norweigan society; it was common among “the tortured.” He wasn’t the only one with the angst and background of suffering.

    Posted by Ox in the Garret Along the Way from  on  08/23  at  10:08 AM

  12. Do go through my #11, if you will, not stopping when you see the “footnote” repeated at the end twice. Re Jeff’s angst over Edvard: Please note that although Munch admitted himself to Dr. Jacobson’s clinic years after painting THE SCREAM...and despite the fact that he did go through hell and back (the latter debateable) with personal torture...he was connected to groups that clearly indicate he was concerned with fin-de-siecle desperation.  The anxiety he felt (see ANXIETY, his painting...a good reproduction, if possible) was certainly not coming from personal experience alone. The imminent collapse of civilization expected/hoped for...was part and parcel of the daily talk and actions of his “colleagues.” The following is a quote for you to consider as per your wishes: “In
    1889 he painted a portrait of the leader of the Kristiania (as Christiania was now spelled) bohemians, Hans Jæger. Munch’s association with Jæger and his circle of radical anarchists became a crucial turning point in his life and a source of new inner unrest and conflict. At that time Munch commenced an extensive biographical literary production which he resumed at different periods in his life. These early writings serve as a reference for several of the central motifs of the ‘nineties. In keeping with Jæger’s ideas he wanted to present truthful close-ups of the modern individual’s longings and agonies - he wanted to paint his own life.” The fact that “the percussions of the motiff” that we’ve been discussing speaks to our day and age should tell you something.  It doesn’t just speak to us on the level of personal familial torture...but on the larger level of where humanity has gone.  You have to ask yourself why those boats are in the far background and why those two figures are so prominent in the rear of “the plank” that the main figure is figured on...for starters.  The image is NOT just restricted to the tortured figure that has appeared on all of our coffee mugs.  Many deep hugs, Oxmugs

    Posted by Oxmugs from  on  08/23  at  10:49 AM

  13. The real synchronicity, on a personal level occured for me as I heard this news immediately after looking at Martin Scorsese’s “After Hours”.... in which “The Scream” is pretty much the central synchronicity in a larger “symbolic order.” It is time to pick up a little Jung and Heidegger, just for the sake of cartography.

    Like Jessica Lynch’s hometown, Palestine, West Virginia and the “Two Towers” title of LOTR...I wonder how Ox feels about the broad concept of life imitating art as well as art’s prophecy...on a brod level...as I see it… sychronicity has become both individually and collectively, an unmistakable and almost comical element of life.  Anyone who has seen “After Hours” (perhaps my favorite Scorsese film) should see it immediately....For a somewhat rationalist explanation of synchronicities, I would turn to Lukacs..

    Posted by j cummings from  on  08/23  at  01:15 PM

  14. I had a postscript thought about all this myself before retiring very late last evening. 

    The two “friends” are portrayed as fuzzy, distant, black figures, i.e. Ox’s much better stated soulless zombies parading off their plank of barren earth or floating in defiance of gravity (totally out of touch with Nature).”

    Although they could well be interpreted as representing different or multiple meanings, I saw the other people in the picture as the actual so-called “friends” Munch was with when “The Scream” happened. So, when the man was at his worst, his most vulnerable, where were his “friends?” Rushing to aid him? Comfort him?  Share his burden?  No, he honestly portrays them walking on, right out of the picture, unaware, uninterested, avoiding the fact that he was in the midst of a titantic crisis.  His friends, and/or society, left him to face his deepest, darkest fears alone.

    For me, this is a non-judgmental straight-forward, maybe even subconscious, description of how life actually worked in that vivid moment, and for a lot of other people, in a lot of other moments.  Many people have talked of feeling most alone when they’re at a party.  I don’t suggest this automatically confirms an insurmountable absolute of “nature.” Some folks don’t relate to this experience at all and that’s fine. I envy them. But the picture conveys a terrifying objective truth for some of us that is only conquered with tremendous, desperate, unknown, unseen, acts of life-affirming willpower.

    Posted by Scott Beckman from Santa Fe, NM  on  08/23  at  01:24 PM

  15. Very thought provoking, Scott. Hope Jeff will chime in...w others on this.  I would only add that the turn-of-the-century fears which I alluded to above --shared by Ibsen and others, radical and mainstream in 90s Norway (and elsewhere)-- be blended into the almost exclusively “personal” soup that you’ve supplied here. Again --merely to underscore the importance of the protest against civilization that was affecting Munch and everyone, not to score personal points-- one cannot divorce the individual pain of the artist from the communal catastophe imbibed (with ALL the liquor) in 19th century Oslo...and beyond.  Munch’s Nature in THE SCREAM does not allow for a happy state...regardless of how one might come to terms with an alcoholic father, etc. any more than the figures promenading down the Karl Johan allow for harmonious relationships with Nature or other members of Humanity.  Remember, 1891 was the date of Rimbaud’s death...following a departure from traditional European society...a statement of disgust about civilization that did not arise in a vacuum.  By the way...Scott...what about those boats?  They are further “away” than the ones in ANXIETY, oui?

    Posted by Munching Ox from  on  08/23  at  02:20 PM

  16. Oh Ox, your perception of the Screamer’s howl as a helpless cry against an inevitable entropy of civilization is entirely plausible. I tend to focus on the “human” reaction more than the “inhuman” cause because it contains one of the deeper, more mysterious, and meaningful lessons I am seeking to learn from life.  I have not personally found that hopelessness is that answer for myself, even if it was Munch’s.

    j cummings comments about this piece is a marvelous new thread in this discussion.  That “The Scream” inspires such brilliant insights is a testament to the profound civic value of the very best “art.” Humanity is, indeed, much poorer because of the theft of this piece, and that crime itself may itself, as Ox earlier impiled, be a synchronous comment on how close we may actually be to the global “Scream.”

    Posted by Scott Beckman from Santa Fe, NM  on  08/23  at  03:35 PM

  17. I just had an amusing thought about a motive for the crime other than take the picture to the grave.

    What if this was the action of an activist taken to draw attention to the state of the world AND offer a slivver of hope that people can still do something about it?  What an inspired, if generally unheeded, work of art that would be.  One can only dream that such audacious genius still dwells among us.

    I have enjoyed this conversation immensely, and I hope you have enjoyed my company, but invisibility strongly calleth.  Thank you for your kind hospitality and encouragement, Press Action.  Later.

    Posted by Scott Beckman from Santa Fe, NM  on  08/23  at  04:17 PM

  18. Then the activist should say so. Seriously, Scott, the feeling’s mutual respecting you, Jeff and all others. You might also enjoy contemplating the fact of the overwhelmingly strong diagonal (that the main figure walks on) in the painting...in addition to “putting together” those boats in the background.  I remember someone saying that the space within the frame seems to explode by virtue of that diagonal...creating a dynamic that puts all spheres of reality into question.  I DO believe that that’s operating...and, for me, one of the realities that’s “put into question” is the SET of realities on which modern civilization rests...and on which the society of Christiania depended.  Go make invisible!  Oslo Ox

    Posted by Oslo Ox from  on  08/23  at  05:36 PM

  19. Interesting, without doubt, but what I would really like to see discussed in depth is the direction the second paragraph of Ox’s article leads, i.e. “putting ‘The End of Civilization’ on the table for discussion.” Speculation on Munch’s personal motivation for THE SCREAM is interesting, but ending civilization seems a larger matter.
    Reed T.

    Posted by Reed Thomas from  on  08/26  at  10:04 AM

  20. Thanks for the feedback, Reed, the encouragement. The beginning of “putting ‘The End of Civilization’ on the table for discussion” can begin with (in the U.S.A.) acknowledgement that the electoral process will, at the very least, get us nowhere...healthy.  Acknowledgement, perhaps, that, in fact, its intentional “delaying tactics” will contribute to bringing us all down...by virtue of the fact that The Powers do not acknowledge, for one, the environmental catastrophes that are taking place, the environmental direction we have committed to, etc.  Action can be taken to interfere with business as usual on these shores, “forcing” public discussion of such matters (with an edge to it)...without waiting for the media to voluntarily help in this vein.  And on that note...getting back to “mere discussion”...we can begin by also acknowledge a number of other things.  To wit, that if we are to continue to operate as if we work w/i a nation of laws...at the very least...treaties with Native Americans must be honored, there should be more of a level playing field respecting people of color vis-a-vis our system of justice, etc.  How do we actually go about dismantling this country, undermining this civilization?  Arundhati Roy touched upon that in her most recent speech in San Francisco...which I have reviewed on Press Action in an article; please see that.  The so-called “barbarians” made a dent in “civilization” a long time ago through violent means.  Perhaps nonviolence will work today.  It certainly doesn’t seem so. But...the way to find out...and the way to proceed...with the intention of actually “forcing” significant change...is to make certain that the above topics are addressed immediately. Instead of talking about not having recruiters on school campuses, for example, we should be talking (and doing something about) not having those flags waving all around, not saluting anymore.  Does this help?  Well-intentioned Ox

    Posted by Barbaric Ox from  on  08/26  at  10:24 AM

  21. Another route to take is to simply experiment with being Vegan; THAT might very well lead to undermining this civilization more than anything else you could do.  The stuff I’ve outlined above still “holds onto” a number of aspects of civilization. The thing to remember --on the practical level-- is that you do NOT need huge numbers to get something started; in fact, that’ll keep you from getting anywhere..as the vast majority of activists have no intention of undermining what’s comfy.  As you “acknowledge” some of the things I’ve noted above...as others do, I should say...WHAT TO DO for you will become much clearer.  Best, Oxie

    Posted by Barbaric Ox from  on  08/26  at  11:01 AM
    22. Commenting is not available in this weblog entry. {/if}

    Next entry: Write In Nader ... The W.I.N. Campaign

    Previous entry: Who Really Learned the Most Valuable Lessons from the 1960s?

    [ads]

    Support Press Action