2006-12-27 12:58:13 · 11 answers · asked by rusalka 3 in Arts & Humanities ➔ Visual Arts ➔ Other - Visual Arts
Certainly more interesting.
2006-12-27 13:57:08 · answer #1 · answered by iroc 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
1) It depends on what you mean by "crazy".
2) Yes, there is a high correlation between artists who make it to the top and some disorders. BUT the argument can go both ways, you cannot tell which one causes the other for sure (i.e., it is possible that making good art makes people gio crazy!!)
Many of the eminent artists had "mood disorders" (e.g., bipolar disorder and depression). Van Gough was definitely one, Michael Angelo is said to have been one too. An obvious explanation may be that people who experience intense emotion produce more remarkable works. Also in the mania phases of bipolar disorder, people get a flow of ideas and intense energy, a perfect atmosphere for creativity.
Some also argue that some artists are/were schizophrenic. By definition, schizophrenics experience a bizarre reality, they think of things that most of us cannot think of and feel it's the reality. Does bizarreness mean creativity? May be!
2006-12-28 08:30:45 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
First I want to ask you: 'how do you define 'crazy'? Then I want to recommend you read Michel Foucault's "Madness and Civilization" for a briefing on the social construction of mental illness and how 'crazy' stigmas came to be.
By my definition of 'crazy', my answer is: No, crazy people do not make better art. It is a myth-brilliant people make better art. Secondly, I want to recommend you read: 'The Artist's Way' by Julia Cameron.
2006-12-27 15:13:39 · answer #3 · answered by helo_skarlett 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
One could only muster an opinion in regards to this question as art is quite subjective. However, to make my opinion as objective as possible consider the fact that a majority of artist of the past whom adorn the pages of art history books were not mentally psychotic. It is true that some of the more noteable artist like Vinvent Van Gogh was mentally insane, but consider Adolf hitler(who in all respects was mentally ill) was an artist before he was a dictator, and his art was absolutely rigid and stale.
2006-12-27 14:03:14 · answer #4 · answered by wackywallwalker 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think art makes better crazy people.
2006-12-27 13:23:00 · answer #5 · answered by ASD 1 · 1⤊ 0⤋
People who can think outside of the box make great artist. But its not required. Many artist were considered crazy in the past because they were so passionate about what they did. Most of us in the everyday world, are not as passionate about our jobs. Read Vincent Vangogh's story, much of his insanity, or depression had nothing to do with him being an artist, but from his wanting to please God, and the church rejecting his ambitions. Another factor that played in to his mental issues is that he painted with alot of cadmium yellow, and cobalt blue oil paints, these are two of the most toxic paints out there, because he did not have a lot of money, he often cleaned his paint brushes by using his mouth.....Uh oh. And thus probably cause alot of brain damage in doing so.
2006-12-27 14:50:30 · answer #6 · answered by mccjannivanni 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Does Crazy = Focussed ?
2006-12-27 23:57:15 · answer #7 · answered by geoff a 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No. They are more outrageous. Which gives the effete, pseudo-intellectuals free rein to appear all knowing by declaring them as geniuses. Then proceeding to babble with all sorts of pseudo-artistic terminology to impress others.
2006-12-27 13:13:19 · answer #8 · answered by Sophist 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
No...they make politics fun by getting elected!
2006-12-27 13:06:49 · answer #9 · answered by marnefirstinfantry 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I'd say so. They have more stress or emotion, and they prolly paint alot, ergo, paint well..
2006-12-27 13:05:32 · answer #10 · answered by shoo-bop. 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋