English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

Many artists like Vincent Van Gogh or Edvard Munch were believed to be insane. Many others, like Gaugin or Picasso were merely believed to be eccentric or "mildly insane." Would it be better, to "cure" an artist and run the risk of destroying what makes his work great, or should he just be allowed to experience his insanity?

2007-07-16 12:46:10 · 15 answers · asked by Dominus 5 in Arts & Humanities Philosophy

15 answers

Munch, when suffering deep clinical depression, refused treatment even from a friend, saying he feared it would damage his creativity. There is a thread of "angst" in celebrated art, especially the visual arts (going back to the religious icons, Durer, Goya, etc) that seems to have become dominant in the 20thC - as though art was only "serious" when it embodied some kind of narcissistic psychosis. Perhaps this is because that kind of art reflects the psyche of the "consumers" through possibly the most murderous century of massive change. This, combined with the emerging focus on novelty (more readily achieved by people acceptably out of step with current fashion) may have massaged the 19thC idea that artists had to be somewhat "mad" to be creative. There has been also increasing stress on art as a "message" carrier, making it the vehicle for comment on socio/political issues and current anxieties - an extension of its past use as a vehicle for religion or shared emotions. The commercialization of art on a wide public market may have promoted the trend of this kind of valuation - art as investment, like stamp collecting. Now it seems the criteria is novelty above all - though it has to carry a stamp of legitimacy from the commercial art establishment to make it "collectible" and insanely expensive. Of course, it's true that new insight is always heresy initially - but walking on your hands nude down the street doesn't necessarily imply insight. However, it does allow observers to project their own significances into it, which can make it seem significant to them. That seems to be an observable aspect of much modern art - art as a vehicle for projection. So now it can seem a question whether it is the artist or the audience who is "mad" - although it may require a bit of shared insanity for the artist to tap into the zeitgeist! It's all a matter of choice, when there are no strict bases for judgement (even incompetent craft is applauded now, along with ethnic art whose significance cannot be understood by the viewer). And after all, as the poet says, "All the world is mad except thee and me, and even thee's a little queer". Personally I'm comfortable with my own madness, and rejoice in the peculiarities of others. They open unexpected doors and windows on the world and humanity - at best enriching my experience of both (for which I forgive them their worst) What fun!

2007-07-16 16:09:37 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 3 0

image has been created of an insane artist and has been turned into a cliche.all sane means is healthy this comes from the latin. all society is insane and artists just reflect this insanity. people think they are sane while not recognizing the insanity inherent in their constant wafare with other humans and the attitude that only the humans they fight are evil wheraeas they are good . the nazis labeled mentally ill people as inferior but did not see that evceryone has been sick for centuries as a result of programming for warfare and that this constant placing of people in the separate catagory of mentally ill , senile moron,or old ,asocial, they even make these comments in movies the artist should reveal these as the attitudes of people. they also should reveal the patronising attitude reflected in movies of let's investigate the imaginary fears of old people .this from statements the police have made in movies. plot device possible but still this would be good subject for art to reveal attitudes angry person in the background watching patronising going on. needs to reflect perhaps the cruelty of humanity bullying and general contempt humans have for eachother. actually art is what helps expose problems in society and help future people figure out what went on in socities thousands of years before them . the insanity is not theirs so need not be cured. it is all if humanity which needs to be deprogrammed. the problems are the artificial value placed on money.money is usefull but only to a point. people have forgotten money is only an agreed upon value that it has no reality out of this but people are real and as they are real are more important than money alone. the artist merely shows what has happened is a historian of paint. while people may not realise it or look at it that way scenes of war on tapestries or on ancient murals tell a story of placing money above that of human life. human life is more important than the amassing of great amounts of money.but think how could someone cure someone who thinks of themselves as a money artist. is there a way to convince them that money is only paper and that everyone while professing not to beleive in fairytales is living in one where humans alternate at various times between ogre and ogre repast. then others pl;ay the part of hero and then ogre. you know the saying ''those who slay a monster had best make sure they do not become that monster'' well humans have made eachother out to be all monsters become the monsters and been slain but in the process the slayers have become the monsters.for example the U.S after WW2. some would protest but this is not true the slayers heve not turned into monsters later. this is true humans are both an this did not take place all at once but was a slow steady process. the slayers became the monsters while the nonslayers remained the same while the slayers looked for imaginary monsters.so did other slayers earlier . point being all not just portions of humanity run this risk. this is why those who want to destroy what they did to humanity or a portion of it destroy the art and the artists which portray the truth. this is what they fear being known the full extent of their actions

2007-07-16 19:16:37 · answer #2 · answered by darren m 7 · 0 0

I am an artist and, although there are some things about me I will change as I mature....insanity is one I'd rather have people leave alone.

I have a different view than others....the world looks at me like I have three heads regularly

Mind set is where the art comes from...question all realities openly and sit back and enjoy the art.

I think your question is ridiculously 'normal'

I laughed, I cried, I'll never buy the shirt...(but I might make one!!!!!!!)

"Cure the artists!" (with no smoking circle/ line superimposed)

2007-07-16 15:14:14 · answer #3 · answered by someone 5 · 2 0

The line between sane and insane is very thin.
As an architect I believe all artist needs a little "crazy"moments to produce a good concept or idea.
Remember that definition of a strange or weird persons is related to the society and not the individuals.

2007-07-16 13:13:58 · answer #4 · answered by Lost. at. Sea. 7 · 2 0

i doubt that there is any 'cure' that would work on gifted minds like theirs. but for the sake of the question, you ask if someone's unique qualities should be taken away to make them conform to society's standard. i would argue no.

what allows genius to shine through is the way these eccentric people view the world around them. perhaps their senses permit them to grasp things we can't grasp, or their minds process inputs differently than you or i. but as long as nobody's putting anyone in physical danger, why not just allow everyone to do their own things, and see what different results will follow?

have you seen the film 'a clockwork orange'? in it, a violent criminal is 'rehabilitated' using techniques that take away his ability to freely choose between right and wrong. he is no longer violent, but he is also no longer 'eccentric'. he is effectively no longer a person, but instead a machine, a 'clockwork'. i'd highly recommend it if you're interested in questions about free will and 'cures' that are not cures.

let the mad artist paint, let the cowboy dance. makes the world a more interesting and beautiful place!

2007-07-16 15:31:05 · answer #5 · answered by patzky99 6 · 4 0

"I put my heart and my soul into my work, and have lost my mind in the process." - Van Gogh

Creativity is a process that requires one to use and extend his mental faculties outside the proverbial box. Many artists, poets, writers, musicians have very high levels of creativity within them, that would require them to consistently exist outside the box, thus giving the basis for others around them to attribute their disconnection from the “real” world to insanity.

However, studies have already been made to determine if there exist any correlation between creativity and mental disorder. Check out this article:-
http://www.neuropsychiatryreviews.com/may06/einstein.html

And then to some others, creativity represents a "quest for a radical autonomy apart from the constraints of social responsibility". In other words, by encouraging creativity we are encouraging a departure from society's existing norms and values. Creativity, in opposition with conformity.

But is conformity necessarily a good thing?

I am an architect, and creativity is a highly valued trait in my field. I had friends in architecture school who were half-loons, but they churn out the best proposals in our year….

2007-07-16 17:36:41 · answer #6 · answered by shahrizat 4 · 1 0

You assume too much.

1) that there is a cure for insanity...
and:

2) that all the un-imaginative norms adhering to convention are "right". Maybe Van Gogh and Munch are just exceptionally perceptive. Their work certainly seems to demonstrate it.

2007-07-16 15:53:20 · answer #7 · answered by Icy Gazpacho 6 · 3 0

Well I am an artist and I consider myself a little loopie and eccentric at times.
There are other people in other professions that totally lost it as well.
Just be who you want to be, don't feel stereotyped into fitting into someone Else's mold. That's part of being creative and coming up with new things and I don't think you have to be crazy to do that.

2007-07-16 12:50:47 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

I am so mad!

Where's my art? Without art, I cannot be a mad artist. I can only be mad.

If I find my art, I may not be mad anymore and I would just be an artist.

Dammit. How can I remain mad and be an artist?


I'll be a mildly irritated artist. Unless I find some Neosporin. Then I'll just be a regular artist again.

2007-07-17 04:52:12 · answer #9 · answered by Unknown_Usr 4 · 0 0

A side note, many artists of the past had Syphilis, which in the late stages of the disease destroyed the white matter of the brain.

2007-07-16 18:54:58 · answer #10 · answered by Louis T 3 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers