November 3, 2007...12:00 am
The Search for that Utopia
Romanticism is an artistic, intellectual and literary movement that was born in Europe around the middle of the 18th century. Adherents to the movement believed in the rejection of the political, social and most of all, aristocratic norms prevailing in those days. The romantic were against any form of rationalisation preached by the emerging scientific world. Indeed, nature wasn’t something to be logistically explained, but an entity to be enjoyed and admired, and even adored. Such was the way of thinking of romantics…
Acclaimed by many critics as one of the finest representives of this movement, Casper David Friedrich, a German painter of the 19th Century, showed his complete adherence to this perspective on Arts. His various paintings outline the guidelines of the romantic movements. But, I would restrict myself to give my critical appreciation of one of his most famous piece of work “Wonderer above the Sea of Fog”.

This painting depicts a man(Friedrich himself), dressed in typical 19th century gears, standing atop a high mountain, facing a sea of mist. The summits of other mountains can be seen in the middle ground while in the background, stand high mountain ranges. The painting is chiefly dominated by the vast expanse of sky, tinged a rosy blue.
You’d ask, how this painting is romantic? Well, looking at its composition itself, and even without knowing the painter’s background, we can clearly see the seal of Romanticism. The solitary man standing on a mountain’s summit suggests an idea of complete isolation, of being cut off entirely from civilisation. Well, such a state of mind was one of the center objectives of romantics. Indeed, romantics emphasised the need for man to be confronted with his inner self, alone without the usual surroundings. What better scenery than a mountain peak, completely remote, without any trace of human civilisation? Furthermore the mist the character is facing may represent the uncertainties of life. This is an example of the use of allegory to draw the attention of the viewer to certain aspects of life. Again, such a device is characteristic of Romanticism, the use of allegory to convey to the wide masses the philosophy the movement preached.
Further on, the setting of the painting- a mountainous and deserted place- suggests another important facet of the movement. The man is alone. But not alone among man-made surroundings, but alone in a purely natural setting. This shows the wish for the painter to attain a symbiosis with Mother Nature, the ultimate happiness for such an artist. In fact, Nature is a source of not only inspiration but also a refuge, a long-awaited haven, that provide to the artist a state of pure bliss, untainted by any outside influences, namely the ‘toxic fumes’ of urbanisation and industrialisation. In this light, Friedrich achieves here this communion with Nature.
Let’s not forget the mountain ranges in the distance; the feeling of emptiness, of vastness between the ranges on the fore and middle grounds. The use of perspective here to draw the viewer deeper and deeper in the scenery conveys another allegorical aspect of the painting: man is but a mere speck of dust in front of the wideness of nature. This shows the romantic’s aspirations to experience the purity of the world, to elevate his spirituality. It also depicts the existentialism of the painter. There, cut from everything, he may be questioning his existence, his importance. Again, the painting offers here a deep spiritual and philosophical insight into life. But, only an attentive and passionate viewer could grasp such meanings in the layers of colors.
Last, but indeed not the least of all, the representation of the sky… It takes the major part of the painting as an overall. The painter chose to paint the sky a rosy-blue, suggesting perhaps dawn. Why dawn? An analogy the awakening of the spirituality of the painter perhaps? It seems plausible. This shows a new beginning, as was the birth of the romantic movement. Do anyone need more proof than this to see the romantic streak?
What my objective was in writing such an ‘analysis’ was to make you all discover or rediscover the beauty, the tranquility, the Romantics offered. In such a world as ours, hectic and stress-ridden, taking our time to indulge in the works of such artists is really valuable…
~Sayuka



19 Comments
November 3, 2007 at 9:06 am
Great post to enlighten (excuse the pun) your readers in the area of romanticism. I know I learnt all this at one time, but it is great to have some renewal and to get a fresh perspective and an education in the area of the arts. Keep up the good work.
November 3, 2007 at 9:18 am
indeed a true reflection of the painting. Romantism is such an era which contributed so much to the modern world..
i love that post.. Having been an art student myself, i never described a picture as such.. congrats
its a vety lovely piece of work and it is so well written..
Very nice
November 3, 2007 at 9:19 am
art is so vast..
November 3, 2007 at 10:51 am
wow! that was a wonderful description of this painting.
“What my objective was in writing such an ‘analysis’ was to make you all discover or rediscover the beauty, the tranquility, the Romantics offered. In such a world as ours, hectic and stress-ridden, taking our time to indulge in the works of such artists is really valuable…”
it’s very valuable indeed! thank you for sharing!
November 3, 2007 at 11:41 am
Thanks all
November 3, 2007 at 2:24 pm
Captured so beautifully both in meaningful expression and a glowing portrait to enhance - that “utopia” moment.
For which we are all seeking in life - a delightful read - thank you
November 3, 2007 at 2:42 pm
As you guessed I read and leave and ‘think’ and come back again:
Thought provoking:
“The romantic were against any form of rationalisation preached by the emerging scientific world.”
Now I will leave again and ‘think’
November 3, 2007 at 3:43 pm
lol philosophyof life ! u must set ur comments in parts
:p lol
November 3, 2007 at 4:58 pm
LOL, Peter! But I really appreciate your comments
November 3, 2007 at 9:24 pm
I forgot to comment
I love the way you interpreted the painting… I know I wouldn’t have been able to do it like you did… Well you know me… Too logical
I would see a man, standing on rocks and watching the waves
I wouldn’t have noticed the mountains at all 
November 3, 2007 at 9:28 pm
LOL, it happens! And yeah, I know how logical you are! second thing, those are not waves in the paintings! But mist!!!
November 3, 2007 at 9:51 pm
Look like waves and you can’t have mist like THAT! Not possible, man!
November 3, 2007 at 10:07 pm
Eh to bane great artists and paintings are from 18/19 century. Present artists lack inspiration ou c’est moi qui pa cone zotte. Because a chaque fois qui someone talks about arts, especially paintings, zot refer to ‘old’ ones.
November 3, 2007 at 10:38 pm
Beg to differ of the “mist” - you can actually have mist like that - and from my country and the glens - which happen quite frequently - which perhaps is why I was drawn to this particular painting….
November 3, 2007 at 11:08 pm
@ Peter
I just wanted to show how logical people can be sometimes
Just don’t tell that to Sayuka ^.^ Oops! Did I just say that loud?!
I was kidding
I think what I like most about this painting is the colours chosen. The contrast of the foreground and the background… You cannot ignore the first one or the other… And I have to say, they fit with each other so well… And notice the details… The mist, mountains, sky… They were all made from the same colour, but different tones. I think he mastered that really well… Just my opinion ^.^
November 3, 2007 at 11:44 pm
Hei Sayuka
*Applause*
Excellent work!
It is also rather naive in that looking at the elements, as in the wind visible through the waves, the man’s hair and coat should be fluttering with it; and yet, they are totally still.
So in a way, it is idealistic, not realistic. Monet and Vermeer are my all-time favourites. Take care.
November 4, 2007 at 2:58 am
Very interesting post.. I didnt know the history of Romantism.
I cam see the Romantic signs in this painting.. Beautiful..
Are you artist?
November 4, 2007 at 8:26 am
@ Nus, I saw that! Wait till I meet you!
@ riihele, Thanks! And you’re right, it is idealistic! Monet is one of my favs too ^^
@ Shahrzad, Thank you
And no, I’m not an artist, just someone who really loves the arts 
November 4, 2007 at 9:05 am
I have never seen that painting, or a representation of it, before today. Thank you for the interpretation of it. I would have seen a man on a rocky shore, with surf crashing about him, looking out to sea in the general direction of several islands.
I would have seen his tranquility in the face of this violent exhibition by nature, and a sense that he stands among it, not apart from it.
I like your analysis better. You’ve obviously studied it, so I defer to your commentary. You explained it beautifully. Thank you.
Leave a Reply