In his book (Van Gogh: The Suicide of Society), the French playwright Antonine Artaud asks: What if Van Gogh had not died at the age of thirty-seven? And he answers his question himself, “I cannot believe that Van Gogh could have painted another painting after the painting of the crows.” Another painting, that is, parallel to it in greatness or superior to it.

As a sad and solemn finale, in which Van Gogh stopped enduring the world and giving his “impressions” of it. Here are the amazed crows flying in the fading gleam of the evening over the yellow, murky wheat where they are being blown by the wind, and the blue of the sky is like a thunderous roar that began to come to him and pour down on the strokes of his brush and the delicacy of his feather and replace it with a revolver to shoot him in the chest, and open the water a new outlet for the exit.

The crows spilled his blood, and began to fly in the horizons, but they forgot how to manage their shame, so they left the scene as it was in order to expose it: Is this what Van Gogh wanted to deliver?

The funny thing is that he is the godfather of Impressionism, which made colors and brushes tongues that speak to the fears of their creators, unlike realism, for example, which glorifies objectivity in photography, so Van Gogh used to write his entire biography in the form of paintings that do not speak, but say everything.

#Maxim