Edward Hopper and the Unconscious

By Margaux Ancel

Isolation and silence are two terms that have been used consistently when describing Edward Hopper’s paintings of modern American life. Scholars have regularly focused on the quality of light, linear perspectives, and the melancholic atmosphere of the artist’s works in an attempt to unlock their meaning. The obvious connection between the depiction of oppressing quietness and the era of the Great Depression provides only one context in which Hopper’s artworks gain artistic and stylistic authority. On the other hand, too little has been said about the architectural symbolism behind the darkened doorframes, the hidden exits, and the numerous windows the artist represents in his paintings, particularly after the 1930s. More importantly, little attention has been brought to Edward Hopper’s interest in psychoanalysis and the concept of the unconscious, or how the theory may have influenced his paintings. Though Hopper’s works can be associated with the Symbolist movement due to the highly detailed recurring motifs, the artist was never affiliated with the style. Instead, he attached himself to the teachings of two prominent psychoanalysts, Sigmund Freud and Carl Jung, and their theories on the unconscious, symbolism, and dreams. The 1930s are particularly paradoxical in American culture, especially when one contrasts the term ‘American Dream,’ coined by James Truslow Adams, with the downfall of the market and the rise of the Great Depression. Due to the extensive number of paintings Hopper created over his career, this essay will focus on four paintings from this era and how they singularly represent the artist’s perception of the Great Depression era and the personal and societal unconscious feelings of isolation that emerged from the temporary death of the American Dream.

In 1931, Adams wrote in his aptly-named book The Epic of America, that the American Dream was “that dream of a land in which life should be better and richer and fuller for everyone, with opportunity for each according to ability or achievement” (Truslow Adams, 214). The term reflected society’s hopes for the future and turned into a form of advertisement for a romanticized modern industrialized culture. Concurrently, Hopper was interested in Freud’s theories on the ‘personal unconscious,’ or one’s concealed desires and emotions, as well as the analysis of dreams. Jung had similar theories on dreams and symbolism, calling them the ‘best expression of something that is unknown.’ His teachings of the ‘collective unconscious’ refer to a common archetype, or a set of human knowledge and innate behavior in reaction to certain contexts. Hopper’s careful use of rooms, doors, and windows reflect the influences of Jung’s and Freud’s theories on the personal and collective unconscious, dreams and symbolism. Art historian Linda Nochlin described Hopper’s works as lapsing “into a kind of formulaic reduction, resorting to a convention for depicting alienation in which mere isolation of the figure and simplified structure of composition, with an accompanying aridity of surface, ‘stands for’ the modern existential condition” (Nochlin, 140). The predicament the paintings embody can be understood from the psychoanalytic standpoints of the personal and collective unconscious reflecting the various perceptions of American culture in the Depression Era, and the sense of sadness and alienation in the face of the deterioration of the American Dream.

On the eve of a new decade, American society faced a detrimental change to its economy and culture. The market crash of October 1929 marked a turning point in the way Americans viewed their nation and the American Dream promised to them by the rise of industrialism. Economic turmoil, unemployment, and a decrease in opportunity brought about the dismal atmosphere found in the country in the 1930s. The somber tone of Hopper’s paintings is a reflection of the environment the artist lived in during the Depression Era and his impression of society’s feelings in such dark times. His interest in the collective emotions of society is correlated to his studies on Freud and Jung. His penchant for psychoanalysis was concretized in a caricature from 1934, appropriately titled “The Artist As a Boy Holding Books by Freud and Jung,” depicting the artist as a child with an oversized head, large glasses, and holding two books almost half his size (Levin, 274). The drawing expresses the tremendous influence the two scholars had on the artist, as reflected by the oversized books and intellectual look Hopper gave to his child persona. The isolated and dreamlike quality of his paintings demonstrate his application of psychoanalysis to society during the Great Depression, partly through the Freudian theory that “dreams give information about the secrets of the inner life, which otherwise remain hidden from consciousness” (Levin, 183). Freud’s psychoanalytic ideas on dreams and the unconscious aimed to explain human behavior in reaction to emotional environments. Hopper found in these concepts a source of inspiration, which is reflected in his detailed rendering of Americans in lonely settings.

The unconscious, to both Jung and Freud, held a significant place in the explanation of an individual’s actions and emotions. While Freud’s theory focused on the personal unconscious of individuals and its expression through dreams, Jung took the argument in a different direction and applied it to a collective mind and its unspoken feelings. The differing theories on the human mind provide two ways of understanding Hopper, first by analyzing the artist’s personal unconscious expressed through his works, and secondly the symbols representing the collective mind of the American society in distress during the 1930s. The artist was often quoted saying his paintings were a quest for himself; he was described as an asocial deep-thinker by his wife in her private diaries, which made her believe the isolation felt in his paintings was a reflection of his own feelings and personal unconscious (Levin, 274). Their lack of formal narrative leaves much to the audience’s imagination, allowing for contemplation of the society he was depicting, as well as an invitation for self-reflection by the viewer of their own place within said society. The artist, often compared to Norman Rockwell, had very different intentions with regards to hidden narratives. While Rockwell’s works were about a certain and specific narrative, Hopper’s paintings aimed at something very different: contemplation, free imagination, and self-reflection (Proulx, 2014). He described his works as “studies in mass and light expressed through the idiom of American landscape, architecture and figures” (Proulx, 2014). The scenes were not to be dissected for a specific meaning, but rather, to be experienced through the collective unconscious as a reflection of American society during the Depression, and a form of contemplation of the realities of the culture both the artist and the viewers took part in.

The artist is not only associated with the American Realist movement, but also with the ideals of French Impressionism from the century before. His depiction of American life in the 20^th century recalls the paintings of Parisian life by Manet and Renoir in their ability to represent everyday life and people with the essence of the flâneur. The flâneur, the epitome of the aura of the Impressionist painter, acted as an observer in Paris’ industrialized society often recording night scenes of people in the streets, cafés, or restaurants among others. Manet, Renoir and Hopper turn themselves into observers and commentators of modern society’s darkest qualities as a result of the industrial age. Their critiques are seen in the choice of subject and the rendering of colors and lines, expressing a personal yet realistic judgment on the new culture in all three cases. Hopper’s artistic style was described as “a self-invented realism” meant to depict “an extremely personal vision” of the world, while art historian John I. H. Baur labeled Hopper as a “romantic realist because of the emotions his subjects stirred in him” (Koob , 18). As a result, his representation of the United States was influenced both by his own impressions of the places he found himself in and the aura left by his subjects. He both observed and internalized the mixed emotions inspired by society before portraying them on a canvas with a dreamlike quality and symbols of unconscious emotions. Like the Impressionists decades before him, Hopper created “portraits of social conditions,” as if he held a mirror in front of his and society’s subconscious mind (Troyen , 2016).

Doors, windows, doorframes, and staircases, along with open floor plans and open views into the rooms, are recurring elements in Hopper’s paintings. These symbols are a representation of the artist’s unconscious decision to depict a certain vision of American life, similar to the Impressionist flâneur. In his paintings, Hopper positions himself as an observer of society, reflecting both his personal and the collective impressions of life in American society at the time. Although Hopper systematically simplified his forms – stressing the emptiness, and even harshness of many of his pictorial planes – he painted hardly a picture without some element of effective detail” (Coffin, 147). One of his most famous paintings, Nighthawks, 1942, singularly reflects the idea of the flâneur, as an Americanized version of the modern day observer.

Situating the viewer on a dark street corner looking into a diner through large continuous windows, Nighthawks, 1942 brings forth a new take on the flâneur, inviting the audience to become one along with Hopper. Three figures are seated at a bar, a woman with bright red hair and a dark pink dress, and two men in business suits and hats. The light of the diner illuminates the street, dimly reflecting against the front windows of the closed stores nearby. The nighttime darkness and the closed and empty shops create a dual meaning by indicating both the state of lonely insomnia of the figures and the desolate state of the economy. Inside, electric ceiling lights illuminate the diner, while a fourth figure, the waiter, is bent over behind the counter. There is only one door apparent in the painting, located along a yellow wall near the bar, and, as a result, the diner resembles a fish bowl, trapping the characters inside. Of the painting, Hopper said, “unconsciously, probably, I was painting the loneliness of a large city” (Chicago, 18). The scene exudes the sense of isolation and loneliness that has become characteristic of Hopper, however, his denial of his association with symbolism renders the understanding of the painting all the more captivating. The scene gives a sense of alienation both on an individual and a societal level. Hopper positions himself outside of the diner and of ‘society,’ by painting the scene from the view of the street. The large windows separate him from his subject and what they represent, while reflecting the isolation the artist felt as described in his wife’s diaries. On the other hand, his use of large windows, rendering a very open view of the street from both side of the glass, also works to highlight the sense of confinement of the figures inside the diner. These figures, purposefully dressed in professional clothing, are a reflection of the new working force in society, restrained within their own environment. Their sad and bored faces complement the windows and single door separating the diner from the outside world, thus transcribing both alienation and a need to escape. Hopper’s theme reflects his personal unconscious through“its evocation of melancholy. It describes scenes full of blanks and voids – an asphalt road, a concrete wall – and calls up moods of hopeless boredom and sad desolation indicating some ineffable, traumatic loss” (Iversen, 21). The loss, in this case, is the marring trace left by the Great Depression on culture and the American Dream. This cultural and societal setback inspires the artist’s feeling of isolation from society that has continued throughout his life, and fuels his representation of society’s own depression as life continues while the American Dream seems to die in lonely street cafes and New York apartments.

The artist never officially associated himself with the Symbolist movement, although the simplistic reality of his work inspires a search for further evidence of meaning (Troyen, 2006). The appeal of Symbolism to theorists and artists, however, lies in “a preference for imagination rather than observation of fact; the appeal of suggestion as opposed to explication; the importance of introspection and the psyche’s creative potential; and the aim of translating ideas into generally readable forms” (Koob, 18). Hopper’s indirect and unofficial association with the movement could thus be explained by his wish to limit the audience’s focus on symbols, instead bringing their attention to the art’s atmosphere as a whole as a means of understanding his intents. Yet, beyond the obvious thematic repetition of the isolated scenes of restaurants and home interiors lay several important motifs that have been overlooked in other analyses. Among the most important of these are the intentional locations and depictions of windows and doors, which amplify the impression of isolation emanating from the paintings. Introduce or analyze this quote somehow: “Developments in art within the last century demonstrate a search for new means of interpreting and expressing space, time, and the concept of reality” (Gillies, 404). Room in New York, 1932 and Room in Brooklyn, 1932, exemplify two sides of the self-examination Hopper intended to inspire. Both compositions are scenes frozen in time and space set as narrow views inside the homes of New Yorkers as they go on about their private lives.

In Room in New York, 1932, a dark window frames the scene of a young couple sitting in their brightly lit living room. The viewer is invited to look inside their apartment, almost intruding on their quiet privacy. The man, dressed in business attire, reads the paper intently, while the woman, in a bright red dress, sits at a piano with an air of boredom, an arm leaning over it and a finger brushing one of the keys. The walls surround them tightly with a single door with no doorknob, making the space feel even narrower. There is a silent tension within the atmosphere of the painting, combining the woman’s boredom and the man’s intensity as he reads the newspaper, most likely filled with gloomy news of the economy.

In Room in Brooklyn, 1932, a woman in a long, dark, blue dress sits in a rocking chair facing an alcove of windows while looking over the roofs of the city. In this painting, Hopper places himself and the audience inside the apartment, thus taking part in the scene. The figure, pushed to the side of the frame, has her back turned away from view, thus bringing little attention to herself, but inviting the observer to take part in her moment of solitude and reflection. In her analysis of Hopper’s paintings, art historian Margaret Iversen discusses the implied need for a witness in Hopper’s paintings, which she believes are “structurally dependent on the implicit presence of a spectator or an ‘actor’ of some kind in the spectator’s space. The outward gaze of a figure is one way of establishing the presence of an implied spectator in the blind field of the painting”(Iversen). As a result, the concept of ‘American self-examination’ joins Hopper’s own interest in the collective unconscious mind to create a powerful statement on American society at the time (Baigell, 387).

In both paintings, the figures’ faces are purposefully left blank or turned away from the viewer, thus developing a lack of clear identity and instead personifying several aspects of society all at once. In Room in New York, 1932, one figure embodies the hard working, stressed and worried feelings of the middle class, while the other exemplifies the simultaneously bored and tense other side. Her finger brushing the piano key adds an anxious note to the atmosphere, as if the sound would break through the frozen aspect of the scene. The figures are Hopper’s representation of the collective unconscious, seen from a personal and outsider perspective through the window frame. Once again, the window acts as an “isolation of self from community—from a shared present” (Nochlin, 136). The shared present is apparent inside the apartment, once again distinguished by the fish bowl like characteristic of the room, typical of Hopper’s style. On one hand, the artist’s personal unconscious is outlined by his position outside of the window frame, while he invites his viewer to take part in a self-examination of their collective unconscious, their shared experience of a crumbling society. By distancing the viewer from the scene, Hopper forces them to look at different aspects of society objectively. On the other hand, Room in Brooklyn, 1932, uses a similar imagery for the reverse purpose of self-examination, inviting the audience to tap into their personal unconscious by placing them within the apartment, thus forcing them to be part of the scene. In this painting, Hopper focuses on the emotions of the individual, considering their singular position within the world by looking out the windows at the changing society surrounding them. “Hopper portrayed the mind’s interaction with the world in terms of physical reality and expressive form, attaining the sense of a profound but provisional moment” (Koob). Through these paintings, the artist froze time to provide his audience with an opportunity for temporary exploration of the rampant and wide-ranging emotions symbolic of society in the Great Depression era.

Towards the end of the 1930s, the U.S. faced another major change with the beginning of World War II, only adding to the tension and fear in society, which gave Hopper a new source of inspiration for his works. Making thematic use of office spaces, the artist combines the economic stress of the Great Depression on white-collar workers with the impending tension of the war. Office at Night, 1940, portrays two figures in an office late at night, based on the ray of light coming through the window and mirroring against the white walls. The space feels small and imprisoning, the dark-toned furniture and door contrasting against the bright white walls. The open door on the right of the painting and the window on the left provide little relief from the claustrophobic room. A man in a gray suit sits at a desk, reading documents under a green lamp complementing his own sick and ghostly skin tone, while a woman in a tight blue dress stands by a file cabinet looking down at a piece of paper on the floor near his desk. Of this painting, Linda Nochlin wrote, “Hopper turns to the language of modern commerce to pin down its hollowness, so to speak” (Nochlin, 138). He depicts both a high stress tension through the focused stance of the sick-toned man reading paperwork and the implication of working late, and “hushed eroticism” through the curves of the secretary highlighted by her dress and the assumption that she may bend over near the desk to pick up the document on the floor (Nochlin, 138). The hyper-sexualized secretary acts as a commentary of society’s impression on the increasing presence of women in the workforce since World War I. There is a sense of discomfort in the scene beyond the sexual tension, however, highlighted by the plainness of the room. Once again, Hopper brings back a sense of timelessness to his painting; there is neither beginning nor end, but rather, a resemblance of purgatory emblematic of the repetitive and monotonous 9 to 5 workday. To some degree, Office at Night reflects the nightmare the American Dream has become, as individuals struggle to apply their opportunities for self-fulfillment. Setting himself and the audience within the office space, Hopper highlights the collective unconscious need for self-fulfillment and the shortcomings of society and culture in providing the means to reach the Dream.

Hopper’s paintings act as “portraits of social conditions” that promote both self and collective examination of American society in the 1930s. Through his interest in psychoanalysis, the artist differentiated himself from the other American realists of the time by creating scenes that blurred the lines between reality and dreams, inviting the audience to take part in a social commentary of the Great Depression era without being burdened by a fixed narrative. Without affiliating himself to the Symbolist movement, Hopper uses the unconscious to involve the viewer mentally and emotionally without using easily identifiable emblems from the era. Through his use of windows and doors to frame the settings of his paintings, Hopper purposefully taps into his audience’s collective unconscious and their innate response to atmospheres of sadness and alienation. Occasionally positioning himself inside the rooms he is painting, Hopper also concedes to his own sense of alienation from modern society. The paintings are not distinctively contextualized to the Great Depression Era due to their lack of distinguishable material signifiers of the period, making them continually appealing and relevant to contemporary audiences. There is one thing Hopper knew for certain; whether collective or personal, alienation in modernized society is timeless.

Bibliography

Anne Coffin, “Edward Hopper, American Meaning and French Craft,” Art Journal 41.2 (1981): 147, accessed October 29, 2015, doi: 10.2307/776463.

Annie Proulx, “Only the Lonely,” The Guardian (2004), accessed November 19, 2015, http://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2004/may/08/art.

Carol Troyen, “Edward Hopper and Ryder’s House,” American Art 20.2 (2006): 4,accessed October 29, 2015, doi: 10.1086/507491.

Chicago Institution of Art, “Entry,” Essential Guide (2013): 58, accessed October 29, 2015, http://www.artic.edu/aic/collections/artwork/111628.

Gail Levin and Edward Hopper. “Edward Hopper’s ‘Nighthawks,’ Surrealism, and the War,” Art Institute of Chicago Museum Studies 22.2 (1996): 183, accessed November 18, 2015, doi:10.2307/4104321.

Gail Levin. Edward Hopper: An Intimate Biography. (New York: Rizzoli International Publications, 1995), 274.

James Truslow Adams. The Epic of America. (Boston: Little, Brown, and Company, 1931), 214.

Jeans Gillies, “The Timeless Space of Edward Hopper,” Art Journal 31.4 (1972): 404, accessed November 2, 2015, doi: 10.2307/775544

Linda Nochlin, “Edward Hopper and the Imagery of Alienation,” Art Journal 41.2 (1981): 140, accessed November 18, 2015, ISSN: 0004-3249.

Margaret Iversen, “In The Blind Field: Hopper and the Uncanny,” Art History 21.2 (1998), accessed October 29, 2015, doi: 10.1111/1467-8365.00116.

Matthew Baigell, “The Beginnings of ‘The American Wave’ and the Depression,” Art Journal 27.4 (1968): 387, accessed November 4, 2015, doi: 10.2307/775138.

Pamela N. Koob, “States of Being: Edward Hopper and the Symbolist Aesthetics,” American Art 18.3 (2004), accessed October 29, 2015, doi: 10.1086/427532.