This passage presents difficulties. First because Van Gogh himself is writing in contradictions when he describes the works as conveying "sadness and extreme loneliness" on the one hand, but also "health and restorative forces" on the other. More significantly, one of the world's foremost experts on the letters of Van Gogh, Dr. Jan Hulsker, maintains that Wheat Field with Crows isn't even one of the three works mentioned by Van Gogh in this letter. Hulsker maintains that the former two works mentioned by Van Gogh in the quote above are The Fields and Wheat Fields at Auvers under Clouded Sky,¹ whereas a number of other sources instead believe that the two works are, in fact, likely to be Wheat Field with Crows and Wheat Field under Clouded Sky.². All four works fit in roughly with Van Gogh's own description of "troubled skies", but given that Van Gogh didn't provide specific details about the size of the works (calling them only "big") the speculation continues with no resolution in sight.

Regardless of the perplexities of which works are mentioned in Letter 649, Van Gogh scholar Ronald Pickvance in his book Van Gogh in Saint-Rémy and Auvers supports Dr. Hulsker's argument for an earlier dating of this painting with his own analysis of the letters. Pickvance explores the letters in depth and dates Wheat Field with Crows "contemporaneously from 7 to 10 July",³ more than two weeks before Van Gogh committed suicide. Finally, Hulsker puts the argument about Van Gogh's last works to rest by maintaining that they were ". . . Daubigny's Garden and Cottages with Thatched Roofs and Figures, both of which are far more likely to have been the last paintings [sic] he made."⁴

Thus, given that Wheat Field with Crows is almost certainly not Van Gogh's final work, the "suicide note" interpretation should be cast aside. Still, there are many arguments to support the idea that the painting represents Van Gogh's own inner torment and despair. And for each of these arguments there are equally compelling counter-arguments to suggest that an opposite interpretation is just as valid.

Symbolic Interpretations

From a symbolic perspective it's worthwhile to review the basic elements of the painting and then explore each from vastly different interpretive ends of the spectrum.

• The paths: It's not a difficult leap to symbolically equate the separate paths in Wheat Field with Crows with the paths, past and future, of Van Gogh's own life. The paths are basically comprised of three sets: two in each foreground corner and a third in the middle winding toward the horizon. The left and right foreground paths defy logic in that they seem to originate from nowhere and lead to nowhere. Some have interpreted this as Van Gogh's own ongoing confusion about the sporadic direction his own life had taken. The third, middle path has remained the most fertile for symbolic interpretation. Does the path lead anywhere? Does it successfully transverse the wheat field and seek new horizons? Or does it, in fact, terminate in an inescapable dead end? Van Gogh leaves it to the viewer to decide.

• The sky: From his earliest years as an artist Van Gogh was fond of scenes involving stormy skies (see Beach at Scheveningen in Stormy Weather, for example). Van Gogh held a great deal of respect for the forces of nature and includes turbulent skies in a number of his works because the subject is so powerful and so full of artistic potential in the face of an empty canvas. Furthermore, Van Gogh once wrote about the liberating possibilities of storms: "The pilot sometimes succeeds in using a storm to make headway, instead of being wrecked by it." (Letter 197). Of course, as the years passed and Van Gogh's own mental state of well being became more battered, his perceptions toward nature may have darkened. Nevertheless, it can be argued that Van Gogh perceived storms as a vital and positive part of nature (admittedly, at least as he suggests in his earlier letters).

• The crows: Perhaps the most powerful image within Wheat Field with Crows is that of the crows themselves. Again, much symbolic interpretation has sprung from the depiction of the flock of crows. Much of the speculation hinges on whether the crows are flying toward the painter (and, hence, the viewer) or away from him. If the viewer chooses to perceive the crows flying toward the foreground, then the work becomes more foreboding. If away, then a sense of relief is felt. The argument is flawed on two fronts.

  First of all, as spirited and entertaining as the "flying toward / flying away" discussion might be, it's a point that will never be resolved. The truth is, there's no certain answer as to which direction, if any at all, the crows are flying. Much like "the chicken and the egg" argument, this point remains unsolvable and, consequently, moot.

  Secondly, and more importantly, the interpretation of crows as harbingers of death is a completely artificial construct. And furthermore, one that Van Gogh, in his own writings, never appears to accept; on the contrary. Vincent van Gogh had a passion and a keen eye for all things in nature. As a result, his writings reflect an appreciation of, rather than a disdain for crows:

  ---

  Last week, I was at Hampton Court to see the beautiful gardens and long avenues of horse chestnuts and lime trees, in the tops of which a multitude of crows and rooks have built their nests, and also to see the palace and the paintings. Letter 70

  ---

  I did see a great many crows on the Great Church in the morning. Now it will soon be spring again and the larks, too, will be returning. "He reneweth the face of the earth," and it is written: "Behold, I make all things new," and much as He renews the face of the earth, so He can also renew and strengthen man's soul and heart and mind. Letter 85

  ---

  Furthermore, Van Gogh was well aware of the effective use of crows within the works of other painters he greatly admired. In addition to a "magnificent" work by Giacomelli that used a crow motif (Letter R29), Van Gogh also admired the crows depicted in the works of Daubigny as well as the one painter Van Gogh revered above all others, Jean-François Millet (see Letter 136).

  It would be foolish to dismiss the undeniably foreboding nature of the crows altogether, but the traditional interpretation of crows as symbols of death is too oversimplistic and conventional to apply to Van Gogh's approach toward Wheat Field with Crows.