The stark contrast of light and colour is, in my opinion, what produces the eerie mood that imbues most of Hopper’s paintings, Nighthawks inclusive. Hopper achieved this by using darker and paler tones of red and green colours as opposed to vibrant and bright yellow in the interior of the diner. The only vestige of light outside the diner is the one emanating from the diner itself, timidly suffusing the outside street. It’s night outside, there are no street lamps or any source of illumination whatsoever. It is this combination (perspective + lighting) that seems to invite passers-by to inevitably peer, in a sort of voyeuristic interest, into the diner.įinally, the lighting/colour contrast is particularly ingenious. It’s interesting there is no door, but a rather large window accentuated by the bright yellow lights. The perspective is from someone approaching the diner. There is also a certain harmony in how these lines run “along” the lines of the counter so that the whole painting just feels right. Note the clever use of long diagonals lines and how they seem to converge somewhere off-canvas, giving it a feeling of continuity outside the painting. The second important aspect of Nighthawks is the way Hopper made use of perspective. I greatly admire this in painters and Nighthawks epitomises Hopper’s tenacity for producing few but superb quality works. Hopper was an incredibly meticulous painter before embarking on any project, he would make innumerable sketches and studies of people, lighting, and perspective. Technically, I find the painting to be of an ineffable mastery. This fits Hopper’s intention not to provide viewers with an explicit narrative, but encourage them to make one up themselves. There is also a certain dynamism in Nighthawks it’s almost as if we can witness not just quietude, but also motion inside the diner, as if a story is unfolding. Facial expressions are not sad, not happy, just tense, and apprehensive. The waiter is the more active of the four characters and appears to be cleaning or preparing a drink. The other two customers are a man and a woman seating next to each other but clearly lost in their own thoughts. One of the customers appears to be a middle-aged man seating alone and with a glass in his hand. Inside the diner we see three customers and a waiter. Nighthawks’ central element is a well-illuminated diner located just around the corner of an otherwise deserted and unlit street. In this article, I set my mind to exploring why that is. However, I have little doubt that most people feel there is simply something enigmatic about this painting. Nighthawks in particular looks like a rather mundane scene with few extraordinary elements that necessitate any exhaustive analysis. His paintings are, in fact, quite realist – that’s his style, realism, which you may argue is quite the opposite of surrealism. This attraction was different from what I felt when appreciating a good surrealistic work, which is what I’m usually passionate about.īut clearly, Hopper isn’t a surrealist. After all, isn’t the whole point of this site to review and analyse bizarre works? Well, Hopper’s works aren’t bizarre, so why analysing them here?įor some reason I’ve still not fully comprehended, Hopper’s paintings have enchanted me from the moment I set eyes on them for the first time. If you have read my previous articles, you will realise that I like it weird. And I must say that I am myself surprised to say so. Edward Hopper is one of my favourite painters.
0 kommentar(er)
