People have been fascinated with the insane,
and, consequently, with their art, really since the dawn
of psychology as a legitimate field of study. In the late
19th century, psychology distinguished itself from physiology
and other sciences, as Freud was making breakthroughs
in the inner-workings of the mind, particularly with the
development of the theory of the conscious and subconscious
as distinct pieces of the psyche. Coinciding with this were
the changes occurring in the evolution of modern art. Artists
were ever more leaving behind the academia-style art and
were beginning to favor a less realistic approach, (as they
had for at least a century by this time) and moving with
and even from what was already radical, impressionism, and
eventually delved into surrealism.
Their new taste in art stressed the free flow of spontaneous
thoughts, essentially making art that wasn’t planned.
Abstraction was more common since there was no reason to
paint accurate depictions as the photographs were doing
just fine with that. Also, with this abstraction, came an
interest in art that was unpolluted from the constraints
and ideals of society. A free, unique independent art came
about, that looked to the children and “primitives”
for direction, instead of the schools. With these inspirations
came the fascination with the insane, who were also considered
more natural and free in their art, like the children and
“primitives.” These people, who were shielded
from corruption by society as they were imprisoned in their
own minds, were unable to correspond with society in a manner
that the sane do. In addition, their being locked up in
mental “hospitals” in large numbers at this time
contributed to their physical isolation. Thus, definitely
not producing art for money’s sake, nor for fame, nor
for any reason previously known to artists, the insane art
was purer than ever. The insane “create solely to
externalize their internal visions and to satisfy their
own internal needs (Delamonthe 1301).” The insane
aren’t even aware they are making art many times. Beginning
in the 19th century, insane art was not only observed, it
was promoted. While Freudians swarmed them to learn about
the abnormal mind, artists watched as the therapists encouraged
art as a way to relinquish stressors and also as a materialistic
insight into the strange workings of their disturbed minds,
in hopes of finding a cure.
Despite Plato
seeing a connection between creativity and insanity, and
this same belief affirmed by the Renaissance artists, it
lay dormant for a couple hundred years before resurfacing
during the 19th century. By today, people now realize that
the line between genius and insane can be so incredibly
fine. Who is to say that Vincent Van Gogh was not
an “outsider” (as these social recluses are now
called by the art community)? Or what about the great prose
of Edgar Allan Poe? We now think he had a fight with
insanity too, specifically, with bipolar disorder, known
to strike many artists in all mediums: painters, writers,
musicians, etc. In this sense we might be able to posit
that insanity increases creativity by nature, that it aids
in the production of works of art that otherwise sane individuals
have to strain and toil long hours studying how to replicate
artificially, as we might see the surrealists doing. We
then are led to wonder though, is it the art that brings
on the insanity or are the insane drawn to art? It was said
by the late 19th century Italian psychiatrist Cesare
Lombroso, that all paintings by “lunatics”
exhibited the same basic characteristics. These included:
distortion, repetition, minute detail, arabesques, obscenity,
and rampant symbolism (Porter 49). The connection
psychiatrists were making at this time between artists and
insane art was so solid, that they later believed all art
that exhibited these qualities had to be done only by the
insane. According to Theophilus
Hyslop, the cubists were suffering from neurological
disorders that somehow were connected to their eyes.
|
|
But the most important characteristic of insane
art is its creativity. It seems if we were to measure art
simply by terms of creativity, we’d find that the top
quality pieces would be that of the insane. However, clearly
this is not the only aspect to art. Nevertheless, the impact
the insane had and have on art is remarkable.
The surrealists attempted to do, in a sense,
was copy this free conscious, insane art by using their dreams
as blueprints for their pieces. While not too abstract and
chock full of symbols to lose all obvious coherence (and thus
the comprehension of the onlooker), the surrealists painted
what was bizarre and strange while keeping it in a worldly
context we are all familiar with. It was in their unique,
or rather simply otherworldly juxtaposition of familiar objects
and places that made the art surreal. Dali’s famous melting
clocks are a perfect example. In addition, Paul Klee, Max
Ernst, Jean
Dubuffet, and Georg
Baselitz all claimed to be heavily influenced by outsider
art. However, insane artist Antonin
Artaud once wrote in response to what he might’ve
seen as the manipulation and bastardization of his art and
other insane artists’ by the liberal minded surrealists.
A strikingly sobering line, he said, “What divides
me from the Surrealists is that they love life as much as
I despise it (Kuspit 83).”
As for the madmen, and their more authentic surrealist paintings,
no one seems to be held in such esteem (if that is the proper
word for the appreciation of the insane) than the Swiss
psychotic Adolf
Wolfi. Born in 1864, he was put into a mental hospital
in his 30’s and died their about 30 years after his arrival.
A convicted child molester, he seemed to have been obsessed
with little girls since he was prevented from marrying a teenage
sweetheart of his at the age of 18 because her parents deemed
him too low-class. The obsessive detail of his 3000 illustrations
is uncanny. Also, his choice of medium is as varied and wild
as the characters he drew and painted. His “Waldorf
Astoria Hotel” of 1905, is done in pencil on four
sheets of newspaper about 10 feet long. In it, he has 4 hotels
depicted as lavish palaces, covered to the point of explosion
with detailed, ornately decorated facades. Amazingly, the
painting has been compared to cubism, another genre in the
modern art scene, in that the “tones subtly advance
and recede, knitting together a shallow visual space…(Schjeldahl)”
It has been said of “outsider art” that it is too
repetitive, which is naturally a solid complaint since most
of the insane are obsessive in nature. Obsession is an adjective
we commonly use to describe those we call mad. Even today
it riddles psychiatric terminology with all the various “diseases
of the mind” which have been only recently diagnosed
and given new appellations, like ADD and OCB…the latter
even stands for Obsessive Compulsive Behavior. However,
it is within this new framework of psychiatric treatment,
that we finally see the decline in the obsession or fascination
with outsider art, both within the artist community and in
the art-loving community, the patrons.
In the late 20th century, as medicine became ever more “effective”
in “treating” these “disorders,” the insane
artists found their minds ever dulled and quieted by the new-age
drugs. They could no longer produce such fantastic works because
their creativity, which was so prized by the modern artists,
was dissolved. Even too was the original fascination of the
psychologists, who now are more of medically oriented brain
doctors, resorting to chemicals for their treatments as oppose
to the old forms of therapy and counseling, which included
art.
The insane were, in the beginning of the 20th century, sadly
locked away in asylums and treated with electric shocks and
other horrible detrimental “treatments.” Ironically
though, they were also given loads of pencils, paints and
other materials to occupy them, in hopes that this would keep
them from violent behavior. With all the time on their hands,
being locked up 24-7, away from reality, the outside world,
they found refuge in their art, where a newly created world
of their own devices, had found a place to manifest itself.
With this society of the insane dispersed and obliterated
by drugs and more “humane” treatments, the art of
the insane may have ultimately found its demise, at the hand
of those who had once appreciated and cultivated it.
Works Cited
Delamothe, Tony. "Mad About the Art."
British Medical Journal, Nov 21,
1992 v305 , n6864 p1301(1)
Kuspit, Donald. "Antonin Artaud: works
on paper." Artforum International,
Jan 1997 , v35 n5 p80(2)
Porter, Roy. "But is it art? The Difference
between a Paul Klee and a painting by a psychiatric patient
is all in all the mind of the beholder." New Statesman,
Dec 6, 1996 v125 n4313 p46(3)
Schjeldahl, Peter. "The Far Side."
The New Yorker, May 5, 2003 v79 i10 p100
Back to 2004 Contents
- Next
|