Edward Hopper, Nighthawks, 1942

Edward Hopper examines the difference between loneliness and isolation throughout his work, there's a commonality of viewpoints that the observer takes as a disjointed omnipresence invading the private fields of Hopper's creation. The state of isolation has a uniquely American aesthetic though what interests me is coming to a definition of Hopper's subjects as happy in their settings? You can be isolated without being lonely and Hopper's subjects don't easily register as comfortable in their settings, resigned to their thoughts by choice or out of longing. Nighthawks one of Hoppers more recognizable works is multifaceted. The urban landscape can be mistakenly defined as an atmosphere that lends itself to connecting people. Though the density of early American cities was often due to convenience of concentrating labor as opposed to providing a social space. Hoppers subjects take on the quality of wax figures or fixtures rather than people, they exist mutually opposed to each other refusing to acknowledge their mutual existence or that of the lack of purpose outside the confines of their glass entrapment. The wraparound window of this diner exemplifies the idea that Hopper's subjects are meant to be perceived, I'm always reminded of a fishbowl when viewing this work. Contrasting the interior of the diner to the dim and almost foreboding nature of the surrounding buildings showcases Hopper's mastery of lighting that is a dominant trait in all his work as a means of displaying emotion. I don't find Hopper's work overtly depressing; I think he has a unique interest in organizing the human consciousness through illustration. Nighthawks and many other works like it display a self-reliance and an appreciation for communal solitude. (Week 3)