On The Works Of Munch

"Christianity is not melancholy. It is glad tidings for the melancholy."
Kierkegaard

Perhaps the most enigmatic artist of the 19th century was Edvard Munch.

From the 17th century on, Europe began to host a number of intellectuals calling for the perfection of society through education, philosophy, and government. These intellectuals gave rise to the period known as the Enlightenment, followed by the utopian ideals of Napoleon, followed by continental revolution, followed by the totalitarian governments of Lenin and, later, Hitler and Stalin.

During the quest for societal perfection, a number of artists, poets, and writers became disillusioned with the magnificent plans of the future. Hegel, the philosopher who described the Absolute Idea in historical terms of dialectic became profoundly disappointed when Napoleon lost at Waterloo. One also recalls the industrious dreams of the first World War and its subsequent lost generation with writers like Hemmingway and Fitzgerald.

Perhaps the best expressions of disillusionment found itself in the paintings of a Norwegian artist, Edvard Munch. Munch's pieces often express the strange sorrow of existing as well as the anxiety associated with making choices in the modern world.

Hegel and the intellectuals before his time had much to say on the topic of societal progress. In their minds society was continually lending itself to newer and better methods of interaction. While happiness was generally very high or very poor in individuals, the intellectuals emphasized that the historical significance had more to do with the public in general and not with single individuals.

While Hegel and the new intellectuals emphasized the metric of societal progress they also portrayed society as the mechanism for progress. An educated society would be able to judge and recognize universal goods in ways single individuals could not -or so the intellectuals claimed.

Munch's pieces examine the so-called public. They go beneath the surface. Instead of finding noble intentions, sincerity, and confidence, Munch found self-deceit, restlessness, and anxiety.

His art is not photo realistic. It takes artistic license in broad strokes. You can't make out the details because they pull the audience into the mood and gloom of the subjects in the paintings.


A common theme in the paintings of Munch is sexual frustration.

The communists of the era, such as Karl Marx, were beginning to make great promises about liberating men and women from the capitalist institution of marriage. By removing this historical artifact passed by tradition, the communal enjoyment of free love and sexuality would benefit society in ways never before imagined. Or so Marx claimed.

Munch's paintings reflect the way one can fail to recognize oneself by means of sexual interaction. The sexual turmoil of his subjects express horror perhaps to the extent of suicide.


My take on Munch is that he was a wake up call to the people of his day. His works cried out, "Beware those who promise a perfect society here! Society will never be perfect because society is essentially imperfection!"

His most famous work is probably The Scream. If I may take some liberty in offering an interpretation, the subject seems to cry out in an expression of dred and trembling, though nothing seems to be chasing him.

This nothingness, as Kierkegaard noted in his On the concept of Anxiety is the origin of dred. The subject in the Munch piece may marry or remain alone. He may lie and cheat, or he may pursue the ethical life.

No one else can make this decision. When he looks to someone else (such as society and social opinion) he finds nothing. This fear of nothing in the subject is his dred.


Munch's contributions must not be overlooked. In a lifetime of painting he accomplished far more than the revolutionaries and intellectuals of his day ever promised, but to call Munch's perspective the truth in its disillusionment is to regard life with contempt.


Munch showed that sex, society, and an ambitious, revolutionary attitude will not give anyone meaning in life, and I say as solemnly as I can that in this single regard he was totally, totally correct.

This however, is so very far from suggesting life has meaning or that it can be meaningful to someone.

When a doctor writes a prescription he takes the symptoms of his patient into careful consideration. Munch sets out to make us aware of our own symptoms, but he leaves us with the task of accepting the prescription.

If we look for someone else to accept the prescription for us, we are left with the chilling glimpse of how alone we really are.

If Munch will allow for such a cure, it can only be a prescription if one can take it without hesitation, without another secret longing, without evasion, in short, without duplicity. In this regard I understand the call to devotion.

"The steadfast of mind You will keep in perfect peace, because he trusts in You."
Isaiah 26:3