CONCLUSIONS & CLOSING REMARKS
The artwork that we can align and identify with Hughes is unique and fascinating due to the strong correlations in elements and themes between the visual and written mediums. Additionally, we can identify numerous instances of ekphrasis across this visual canon. Ekphrasis has been defined by Jean Hagstrum as "giving voice and language to the otherwise mute object" (qtd. in Landwher 9). This practice is seen when writers put words to sunsets, paintings, sculptures, and more – personification and language awarded to the things without it. However, we also see this technique with Hughes, especially in his notes on the backs of postcards with his phrases of “To keep far-off canaries/In silver cages singing” and “Born to grow up wild.” However, and perhaps more significantly, there are numerous examples of reverse-ekphrasis evident with the artwork that accompanied Hughes’s poetry and written word. This is seen with work by artists such as Jacob Lawrence and Prentiss Taylor. Perhaps even, Basquiat’s Jim Crow could also be interpreted as reverse-ekphrasis; where voice and language inspire or evoke the crafting of the “mute object” that asks unspoken questions with power now coming from silence and stillness. In such instances as these, rhyme and meter are exchanged for color gradients and line contours, yet there is remarkable value in both due to their impacts on their audience as well as the audiences that they were able to reach. With language and devices found in poetry, I wonder if the audience Hughes aimed for only broadened due to his use of accompanying images – in that art can be digested and explored through any language and understanding.
Additionally, art proves itself to be more universal than written word due to the barriers that can arise with language. As mentioned above, art can be viewed and "read" by anyone - yet written word involves translations and contexts - and much is at risk to be lost over time. Thus, it is reasonable to hypothesize of a greater number of people able to reach Hughes's work due to the images that accompanied them due to the increased accessibility and the universality found with art. Past research conducted by Dennis Dutton has explored such universality of beauty with art as an essential and ancient component of ourselves:
“Is beauty in the eye of the beholder? No, it is deep in our minds. It’s a gift handed down from the intelligent skills and rich emotional lives of our most ancient ancestors. Our powerful reaction to images, to the expression of emotion in art, to the beauty of music, to the night sky, will be with us, and our descendants, for as long as the human race exists.” (Dutton A318)
If we think of beauty as something causing awe and adoration, we would not think of the subjects of Hughes’s work always as beautiful, yet the products themselves are: there is beauty in the language. Therefore, perhaps Hughes was like the rest of: attracted to the beauty found in the world. Through this, he spread such beauty not only in his writing, but also with the images found alongside his work. Why? Perhaps, as Dutton expresses, it is human nature to focus on and be drawn to beauty. Or perhaps it was because Hughes found a lack of beauty in the world, and wanted to create, produce, and disseminate such beauty for others.
Further research needs to be devoted to compiling additional visual materials belonging to and surrounding Hughes so we can continue to evaluate how this medium reveals much about himself and his work. Additionally, further focus should be directed towards other artistic mediums, especially photography. Knowing that Hughes was an avid photographer himself, and with so many pieces of him as the subject available in this medium, it would beneficial to explore how a snapshot of a moment reveals different meaning than the planned, styled, and crafted pieces found here.
Additionally, the simple and universal aesthetics of the visuals and written word cannot be neglected. As Dutton reminds us: “For us moderns, virtuoso technique is used to create imaginary worlds in fiction and in movies, to express intense emotions with music, painting, and dance” (A318). Thus, it would be worthy to consider Hughes’s written work as a piece of visual art. This is especially the case for his drafts and notes of his various writings. What do crosshatch-like scribbles over words reveal about a piece in process? With the ink and paper as the medium and Hughes as artist, how can the physicality of a poem be read as a painting? In exploring this avenue specifically, we may begin to bring together the genres of art and written word and more thoroughly explore their intersections and moments of deviance.
In closing, that which can be found throughout this project is only the beginning: the very tip of a much greater iceberg that we are only beginning to realize, let alone understand. Yet, we can utilize these materials to further reunite Hughes's written word with its original artwork, continue this artistic literary practice, and work towards understanding the impacts of such a union on readers and authors alike.