Getty Research Institute, Paintings, Photographs, Film, and Video

Listening to Edward Hopper’s Silence

How do you make a movie about Edward Hopper? The artist—famous for his haunting and enigmatic paintings such as Nighthawks and New York Movie—was conspicuously taciturn, speaking little about his work, giving few interviews, and keeping to a small circle closely monitored by his protective wife, Jo. When the Academy of Arts and Letters awarded Hopper its gold medal for painting, he gave a one-word speech: “Thanks.” Upon Hopper’s death in 1967, eight people came to his funeral.


Edward Hopper, Arnold Newman, 1941. Gelatin silver print, 36.7 x 45.2 cm (14 7/16 x 17 13/16 in.). Gift of Nina and Leo Pircher. © Estate of Arnold Newman

Artist and author Brian O’Doherty, a longtime friend of Hopper’s, was one of those eight. So when he set out to make a documentary about the artist, he had no desire to transgress Hopper’s silence. Instead, he embraced it. The result was the 1981 film Hopper’s Silence, a meditative visual essay that explores the majestic quiet that characterizes the characters, rooms, and streets in Hopper’s paintings, as well as the artist himself.

A scholar-in-residence at the Getty Research Institute this past spring, O’Doherty recently screened and discussed Hopper’s Silence and revealed its improbable origins in 1961, when O’Doherty found the artist’s name in the phone book and called to arrange a half-hour TV interview.

If Hopper had secrets, though, he wasn’t giving them away in any interview.

O’Doherty: “Are your paintings reflective of the isolation of modern life?”
Hopper: “It may be true. It may not be true.”

O’Doherty: “What do you think of your teacher, Robert Henri?”
Hopper: “I think he was moderately good.”

O’Doherty: “What draws you to the dark landscapes you paint?”
Hopper: “I suppose it’s just me.”

Hopper’s characters are intensely private, too. Not a single one speaks. Gazes often point down or into a vague distance. Windows abound, highlighting this privacy by inviting us to violate it—try it yourself in Night Windows or Morning in a City.

So who was this man? An old-fashioned modern painter, as one friend called him? A representational Rothko? An everyman with an eye? Yes, but there was more. His goal was to paint things that could not exist at the same time: inside and outside, being there and not being there. “How do you know what an empty room looks like,” asked Hopper in reference to Sun in an Empty Room, “if no one’s there?”

And although Hopper was enveloped by silence, it was a rich silence. “His silence was half process, half paralysis,” said O’Doherty after the screening. “He was mysterious even to himself. And he plumbed the sense of mystery he found in himself.” This mystery is why an artist once dismissed as an “American scene painter” (he hated the term) continues to call to us—silently.

Brian O'Doherty at the podium in the Museum Lecture Hall

Brian O'Doherty at the podium in the Museum Lecture Hall

Tagged , , , , , , , Bookmark the permalink. Post a comment or leave a trackback: Trackback URL.


  1. Hank Bunker
    Posted July 9, 2010 at 3:39 pm | Permalink

    Thanks for the Hopper post. I love what you say about his depicting what is both present and absent at the same time. Reminds me of Mark Strand’s line about Hopper: “We feel the presence of what is hidden, of what surely exists but is not revealed.” Something about the solitude, and the quietude, in his work that clears the space needed for this absent presence to assert itself. What beauty.


    • Posted July 9, 2010 at 4:57 pm | Permalink

      Thanks, Hank, for your comment — the quote you shared is beautiful. Although I cannot take credit for O’Doherty’s brilliant descriptions of Hopper, I’m delighted to be able to share them.

Post a Comment

Your email is never published or shared. Required fields are marked *


You may use these HTML tags and attributes <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

  • Facebook

  • Twitter

  • Tumblr

    • photo from Tumblr

      It’s been 125 years since Van Gogh’s death, today we celebrate his life’s work.

      5 Ways to See Van Gogh’s Irises

      Through observations, visitor conversations, and some sneaky eavesdropping, we’ve compiled the top 5 ways people enjoy this painting.

      1. In a Crowd
        One of the most obvious ways that people see the painting is in a crowd. The gallery is almost always filled, and you might have to wait before you can get up close. The anticipation builds as you start in the back row, and slowly move until you are close enough to see the brushstrokes of Van Gogh’s thick paint.

      2. Online
        David from Colorado said that this was his first visit, but he had already seen the painting online. In addition to being available through the Getty’s Open Content program, the painting is often seen on social media. Just search #irises on Instagram for a taste of the painting’s popularity. 

      3. Alone
        If you arrive right at 10 a.m. when the museum opens, the quiet gallery provides a perfect backdrop to really examine the painting. Solitude and seclusion gives the gallery a sense of intimacy. 

      4. Multiple Times
        Repeat visits can give rise to multiple interpretations. Is it a melancholy or joyous painting? Expressive or depressive? 

      5. Internationally
        Visitors from all across the world viewed this famous Van Gogh. In just one hour you can hear multiple languages—French, Italian, Chinese, Korean, German, and more. Irises seems to rise above cultural boundaries—a Dutch painting inspired by Japanese ukiyo-e prints—to strike an emotional resonance amongst all viewers. 

      What is your favorite lens to view Van Gogh’s work through? 


  • Flickr