Albrecht Dürer (1514). Melencolia I [engraving]. Victoria & Albert Museum, London.

I do not believe this masterful engraving qualifies for “naturalism”, nor do I believe that was the artist’s intention. There is some noticeable distortion and integration of elemental, simplified forms, but this work is overwhelmingly realistic. Its content is much more complicated (at least to me). Dürer is successful at communicating a somber mood, nothing cynical but more a sense of frustration. The emotions of the artist seem to be the primary motivation for this work’s creation; it releases his emotions by depicting the general emotions of the idea “artist”. Why she’s (the figure is a woman) winged, or angelic, I cannot guess.

Where specific shapes or edge definitions are not required, Dürer has done well to take advantage of the texture-building qualities of the medium to bind the foreground together. The specific grain-quality he uses fails in the background in favor of straight parallel and radiating lines. He models individual subjects substantially to define masses in space with more vitality than Battle of the Nudes, for example. The lightest values are reserved for the near-foreground and the full range is squeezed as the foreground recedes. This is contradicted by the far-background to upper-left, which too uses the highest keys available, somewhat flattening this otherwise plastic composition.

Possibly the greatest source of this work’s vitality is the unapologetic distribution, and near-merging, of differences. Curved and straight forms, solid and soft surfaces, the androgynous character of the subject (a possible reflection of the time I live in and my own biases), parallel, radiating and perpendicular lines, figurative and mechanic characters, and so forth. If one concentrates hard enough it’s not hard to imagine the portions of this achromatic work that would be formatted with pastel blues, lush greens and warm yellows, in addition to their value complements.

Symbolic shapes crowd the canvas and directional forces meander; when taken in whole, movement is confused. Subjects, both figurative and inanimate, and spatial grounds (fore/mid/back) are all rendered with the same focus. This work approaches a state of ambiguity, however the largest relative size, most pronounced mood and the greatest variation in value are reserved for the foremost angel-figure seated in the lower-right portion of the picture plane. The characteristics of the symbols generate attention for a variety of unique reasons: Text, pure geometric shapes, thinly veiled meanings, distortion and utility.

Because of this original intermingling of meanings and energy, defining the orientation of this works balance is, again, confusing. My attempt would be to call this static asymmetry, horizontal and vertical tipping axes favoring the right and lower halves respectively, taking advantage of the rule-of-thirds photographic axiom.

This is a work of equivalencies. Throughout the entire history of visual expression, placing formats, elements and compositional distinctions with identifiable differences (not necessarily opposites) in roughly balanced proportions generally results in building interest which can become a distraction if not brought back into harmony through the use of unbalanced measures.  In this work, Dürer has defeated the relative flatness of this piece by infusing it with multifaceted energy through conflict. There is elemental dominance present (value, plastic development, roughly-defined global texture). The result is obvious masterful organic unity.

The words of Marilyn Stockstad from my text states it best and concisely: (the subject is) “…A superhuman, listlessly brooding figure surrounded by tools and symbols of the arts and humanities but still unable to act.”