Juan Gutierrez

Art Essay
November 17, 2014
Melancholy as a Basis for Elevation of Self and Non-Self:
My Interpretation of Albrecht Drers Melencolia I
Background
Beginning in Italy in the 14th century and diffusing to the rest of Europe by the second
half of the 16th century, the cultural transformation known as the Renaissance arose among
social, political, and intellectual elites with the rebirth of classical learning, or humanism
(History of the Renaissance in Europe). As scholars in Renaissance Europe started to ponder
more and more about the way they interacted with their own lives following their rediscovery of
the life and thought found in ancient Greece and Rome, many quickly came to the conclusion
that life could be interpreted in many different ways. Accompanying this dissolution of the
dogmatic attitudes that had characterized the Middle Ages was a revival of new and interesting
works of art (Middle Ages). Among the many works of art that emerged during the
Renaissance, Albrecht Drers 1514 engraving entitled Melencolia I serves as a symbolic
precursor for a more skeptical strand of Renaissance humanism that underscored the limitations
of human understanding. Melencolia I not only captures the humanistic view of melancholy as
the basis for mans imagination, but also expresses its value to man in a framework compatible
with the elevation of a non-self, or god.

Discussion and Analysis of Melencolia I

One of the main subjects depicted in Melencolia I constitutes a winged female figure,
which, through its facial features, bodily position, and surrounding subjects and objects,

personifies the melancholy state (UMMA Collections). In particular, the figure sits on a stone
surface in a slouched manner, while it dejectedly rests its chin and cheek in its tightened hand.
The figures eyes suggest a plaintive expression, and a somber shadow casts darkness over its
face. In the hand not serving as a resting space for its face, the figure holds an inactive caliper.
Other unused tools surround the figure on the ground including a saw, a hammer, a ruler, nails,
and pincers. The figure, which is likely some sort of creator based on its environment, possesses
a book in its lap. The figure has a winged child companion who is perched on a taller surface and
is preoccupied with a tablet. At the foot of the creator, a dog sleeps on the ground. Behind the
sleeping dog stands a solid object with a geometric polyhedron structure. The surface of this
polyhedron-structured object suggests a face of someone or something, although its features
cannot be perceived. Behind the figures and sleeping dog hang an unbalanced scale, a bell, and
an hourglass that records the passage of time. Next to the hourglass and positioned on a wall is a
square grid with four rows and four columns of integers, each of which sums to 34. In addition,
the integers of the middle four squares of the grid sum to 34 as well as those in each of the four
corners of the grid. The trio of dog, cherub, and winged female sit before a sea, behind which a
small town is distantly visible. A bat-like creature behind the trio flies under a rainbow, and
holds, peculiarly, a banner that announces MELENCOLIA I.
Upon closer analysis, however, Melencolia I tells a story not just about melancholy but
also of its value to divinely inspired imagination. To be sure, the melancholy state was regarded
as fundamental for the basis of scholarly and imaginative achievements within the humanist
framework and was thus exalted during the time in which Melencolia I was created (Kekewich
45). Relevantly, the engravings title (Melencolia I) may allude to the first of three types of
melancholia postulated by Cornelius Agrippa of Nettensheim (Feld 2013). This melancholy

imaginative melancholyaffects man at the level of imagination, through which the

melancholic remains torn between an elevated ideal and a limited aptitude (Feld 2013). The
late theologian Rudolf Otto has argued that Agrippas imaginative melancholic can only be
rescued through intervention of a divine being (Feld 2013). Importantly, during the time in which
Melencolia I was created, humanists endeavored to redefine the place of man in Gods design
and the relation of man to the divine. God became viewed as the endower of options to man, who
was responsible for employing reasoning to consider his options in order to reach his full
potential (Kekewich 56). This ideology manifests in Melencolia I through a state of dejection
that is a necessary precursor craftsmanship, but can only be channeled fruitfully through the
intervention of a divine (non-self) being.
How does Melencolia I, through the winged female figure and its surroundings, portray a
creator in a state of dejection that requires the intervention of the divine? In a slouched position
with its head in its hand, the creator struggles to come up with a creation. Notably the creator
holds a caliper in one hand, but with no attendant object to measure. Furthermore, despite the
plethora of tools at its disposal, the creator remains unable to use its tools to create anything. A
scale to create balance hangs in the distance, but has nothing of equal weight to fill its empty
pans. A rainbow suggests that the aura of despondency can be lifted, but a setting sun behind this
rainbow foreshadows a moonbow instead, which will appear gray and not colorful. While the
creator has a book in its possession that could likely be a source of inspiration, this ultimately
remains unopened and confers use as an armrest more than as a conduit of knowledge.
Furthermore, although the creators companion could perhaps contribute positively to the work
of the creator through its occupation with the tablet, the companion is only a child, and therefore
can only be scribbling at most. The dog positioned before the cherub may have brought vitality

to the creator following its slumber, but is shown as being woefully underweight. The bell waits
for someone to ring it and the time that the creator experiences the phenomenon of no creating
passes in the hourglass. The pressure for the creator of coming up with a creation becomes even
more relevant with the witness of time. Although the integers in the square grid sum up, their
sum does not reveal anything useful. Finally, a nearby sphere- a geometric figure meant to roll
by the physical laws of nature- remains perfectly still.
Taken together with Ottos conceptualization of the necessity of divine intervention to
cure Agrippas imaginative melancholic (Feld 186), Melencolia I makes a unique contribution to
the Renaissance humanism tradition. That is to say, if imaginative melancholy furnishes the basis
of the geniusthat who possesses exceptional intellectual and creative powerbut if, at the
same time, it is in need of a treatment, whereby the imaginative melancholic must be
rescued (and only by the divine), then Melencolia I proposes a response to the paradoxical
question of the intervention of a deity who must accomplish the hard task of saving man from an
experience that is beneficial to him. In Melencolia I, the bell that awaits ringing, the sphere that
awaits a push, the dog that awaits feeding, the cherub that awaits growth, the book that awaits
opening, the rainbow that awaits light, and the creator that awaits inspiration, all are able to be
addressed through a deity (perhaps portrayed on the polyhedron structure) who will not save the
creator from the experience of melancholy per se (which presages the advent of imaginative and
intellectual thought), but will instead save the creator self from its failure to understand the
limitations of its faculties in the project of its own creations. This type of deity is implied in
Melencolia I through the requirements of the above objects (e.g. book, cherub, dog, etc.) to
assume functional roles, which cannot be achieved through the position of their selves alone.

Conclusion
Melencolia I makes a unique contribution to the Renaissance humanism tradition by
proposing a beauty of mans craftsmanship. This beauty makes a process of knowledge of self
and non-self (e.g. a god) an implicit reality to get workmanship to its final stage. Through its
depiction of valuable subjects and objects in need of inspiration to produce or to make
something, Melencolia I suggests that simply because man can ultimately create something does
not mean that the process to make it occurs without mans knowledge of his limitations of
understanding. In this way, Melencolia I advances a conceptualization of the self which, through
its acknowledgement of its limitations of understanding, becomes acutely aware of the utmost
utility of its own reasoning and faculties to its creation process the precise awareness that
allows it to make its creations.

Works Cited
Middle Ages. History.com. A&E Television Networks, 1 Jan. 2010. Web. 9 Nov. 2014
History of the Renaissance in Europe: A Rebirth, Renewal, Rediscovery. History of the
Renaissance in Europe: A Rebirth, Renewal, Rediscovery. R. A. Guisepi, University of
California. Web. 9 Nov. 2014.
UMMA Collections. Prints, Drawings, and Photographs. Web. 9 Nov. 2014.
"Melencolia I." Explore This Work. National Gallery of Art. Web. 9 Nov. 2014.
Feld, Alina. Melancholy and the Otherness of God: A Study in the Geneology, Hermeneutics,
and Therapeutics of Depression. Lexington Books: 2013. Pp. 186. Print.
Kekewich, Lucille. The Impact of Humanism. Yale University Press: 2000. Pp. 45. Print.

Revision Reflection Question

When originally writing my paper, I optimistically thought to myself of the implications a
complicated picture like the one I had chosen could have. What exactly could I write about when
there were so many things to analyze in Albrechts engraving? Despite this single fact, I wrote
my draft taking into consideration the most important objects that to me seem important.
Although after further review both from my own part and peers, I decided to include in my final
draft much more attention to detail/ to objects that I did not necessarily include in my originally
draft. Not only does this allow me to develop much more on the theme of the engraving, but it
also allowed me to develop my own argument of the engraving in the greater scheme of events.
Another detail which was not included in my original draft was the usage of my heading titles.
After including these titles I was successfully able to organize my thoughts into specific areas.
Not only did this allow me to categorize my thoughts, but it also allowed my essay to sound
more coherent. Ideally I would like to include the essay as a whole to state the significance in
the way I wrote compared to others. This time around, I tried to include other peoples
perspectives with peer review. My original draft did not have nearly as much detail, but as
people gave me feedback about my essay I slowly started talking beyond the engraving itself and
talked more about the implications with regards to the engraving. Overall, I talked more about
the reaching effect that this engraving had, but also the history and notions behind.