Talk:Automat (Hopper)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Visual arts, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of visual arts on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Visual artsWikipedia:WikiProject Visual artsTemplate:WikiProject Visual artsvisual arts articles

United States Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Thanks[edit]

Thank you to the person or persons who wrote this awesome article. 216.254.116.207 (talk) 04:37, 28 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A symbolic bowl of fruit?[edit]

Maybe I'm reading more into this than is appropriate, but doesn't it seem odd that the only decoration in the entire restaurant is a bowl of fruit on the windowsill, directly behind the woman? I don't normally think of Hopper as a user of symbols, but I wonder if the point of this is to hint at her being full of fruitful possibilities---a bit like a cornucopia? Fruit also ripens and goes bad rapidly, perhaps symbolizing the fleeting nature of the moment during with the viewer could walk over to her, introduce himself, and start a friendship (or more?).

Or perhaps the painting just needed a splash of colour, which the bowl of fruit provided.

Anybody have any thoughts on this? I'd love to see something like this make its way into the article, if there's any hard evidence at all that the bowl of fruit is not, like Freud's cigar, just a bowl of fruit.

Seaside rendezvous (talk) 12:47, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

One of the rules of Hopper's work, is that the more you stare at it, the less it makes sense. I think he did use symbols, but he talked very little about the meaning, leaving it up to the audience (and the critics) to make heads or tails of it. Viriditas (talk) 00:28, 28 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]