NOTE: Free essay sample provided on this page should be used for references or sample purposes only. The sample essay is available to anyone, so any direct quoting without mentioning the source will be considered plagiarism by schools, colleges and universities that use plagiarism detection software. To get a completely brand-new, plagiarism-free essay, please use our essay writing service.
One click instant price quote
Art Created by the Insane and How its Used in Determining Illness There is no doubt that the art produced by the patients of mental institutions has a value. The problem is how we define the essence of this value. Can we attach cultorological properties to such art or should we only be interested in it from the medicinal point of view? In this essay I will briefly outline the history of this new concept and will also analyze it from the context of our understanding of madness in its development. The interest in the Art Brut (Raw Art) began to gain momentum in early twenties of twentieth century when Dr. Walter Morgenthaler, who was also known as Communist activist, published his book A Psychiatric Patient as Artist, where he suggested that the paintings produced by schizophrenics have a great cultural value, because people who draw these pictures are deprived of any sort of institutionalized influence, therefore they posses the freedom of expression like no one else.
It is no wonder that in time when promoters of degeneracy were enjoying an immense popularity, Morgenthalers book had drawn an immediate attention of unconventional philosophers, who praised it as another step towards universal liberation. It is not by the pure coincidence that around the same time other styles of alternative art began to attract cosmopolitan intellectuals. Cubism, avangardism, primitivism the paintings created by the artists who associated themselves with these trends are clearly corrupted by certain abnormality that cannot be confused with the touch of genius, as they are being described now. Van Gogh had cut of his own ear with an intention to eat it, than he produced an auto portrait of himself, where anthropological signs of retardation on his face can be clearly observed. This painting now is being sold for millions of dollars at auctions to the degenerates just like Van Gogh.
Kazimir Malevitch had simply drawn a black square, which is now praised to the sky as an extraordinary expression of ones unconventional spirit. This gives us the reason to conclude that the Art Brut is a much more widely spread concept of art than it is generally assumed. Before answering the question of whether Art Brut can be thought of in the terms of legitimacy, let us analyze the essence of madness as biological and social phenomenon. In his book Madness: a Brief History Roy Porter makes a big mistake when he suggests that ancient Greek and Romans used to think of crazies as being possessed by the spirit, it only begin to happen during the Hellenistic period.
As a mater of fact, before being corrupted by Christianity, ancients used to exercise a remarkably similar attitude towards people with mental disorders as present day scientists do. They knew that the root of every mental disorder is strictly biological and such illnesses are simply passed from generation to generation. They practiced eugenics, which allowed Sparta to remain the strongest polis-state on Peloponnesus Peninsula for 700 years. Children with mental deficiencies were simply thrown off the cliff. Even though that such practice might appear very cruel at first, it nevertheless insured the overall health of Spartan society. Without giving the definition of madness as illness, Roy Porter goes a great length, describing the social consequences of restrictive measures against loonies that various societies used to practice throughout the history.
In the end, author admits that he simply does not understand what causes people to go crazy, although the answer is simple an unhealthy genetic combination. We can only agree with Porter in the end when he says: 'Folly has never stopped jingling its bells, but we hear different tunes, depending on where we " re standing in history (Porter, p. 101). Another author who researched the problem of madness is Michael Foucault. He looked at the history of madness from the social prospective. According to him, the madness is the result of social application of unreason. This illusive unreason can find itself realized whether in works of art and literature and therefore be allowed, or it can try to invade the world of reason, which inevitably leads to confinement.
In my opinion, Foucault's theory can be thought of as ones longing towards irrationality, which is disguised in the form of philosophical doctrine. Author tries to convince us that the unreason can be reasonable, it just depends on the historical era, which alter peoples perception of reality: And now, if we try to assign a value, in and of itself, outside its relations to the dream and with error, to classical unreason, we must understand it not as reason diseased, or as reason lost or alienated, but quite simply as reason dazzled (Foucault, p. 75). Basically, Foucault simply added theoretical base to the well known saying that the difference between geniality and insanity is only measured by the degree of success. Yet, the person with bright but unreasonable ideas can only win public admiration if he knows how to make them sound reasonable, which implies an ability of rational thought on his part, thus making such person not completely insane. This is why our mental institutions are filled with Napoleons and Hitlers, who could never have a slightest chance of becoming what they think of themselves for real.
I think that insanity is a nothing but a disease and people that show signs of it need to be treated accordingly. It is not simply by chance that the rational societies try to isolate madmen. The reason for this is that the modern Western society is subconsciously aware of biological deficiency of great many of its members, which makes them susceptible to the crazy ideas on the verbal level. This wasnt the case in medieval era, when various madmen couldnt affect the well-being of majority, which had the genetic immunity against accepting mad ideas for real. Thats why back in olden times various loonies had never been separated from the rest of people.
They were being used for the entertainment. When there are no gladiator fights and no television one can be entertained by the crazy person, who usually represent itself as messenger of God. With the rise of political-correctness we entered the phase in European history, when the definitions of socio-political phenomenons are being shifted 180 degrees. Whatever used be considered by people throughout the ages as ugly and despicable is now special and misunderstood. In this respect let us mention the groundbreaking book of Sander Gilman Seeing Insane, where the self-proclaimed expert on human relations goes as far as applying term holocaust to how madmen were being treated throughout the history. According to him, mentally ill people do not differ from normal members of society; therefore they should be treated with respect.
If they feel like stabbing someone in the bus, let them do it, otherwise itd be inhuman. If they want to draw some obscenity and display it openly, so that kids can see this is their essential right. If they want to mate, let them do it so we can more special needs children in the future. Nevertheless, Im far from rejecting Art Brut out of hand, as drawings of mentally ill people can help in determining the character of illness. Yet, itd be wrong to apply the method of psychoanalysis to such drawing, since it views any mental disease as the result of past experiences rather than the result of genetic predetermination. The first collection of raw art was being compiled by Michel Thevoz in Lausanne, who described it as consisting of: works produced by people who for various reasons have not been culturally indoctrinated or socially conditioned.
They are all kinds of dwellers on the fringes of society. Working outside fine art "system" (schools, galleries, museums and so on), these people have produced, from the depths of their own personalities and for themselves and no one else, works of outstanding originality in concept, subject and techniques (Thevoz). Thevoz insists that all the works in his collection were created by people who never expected them to be exhibited. Yet, he mentions that some of the paintings are being sold for as much as 1000 dollars. Many of them show clear signs of artistic imitation; this tells us that the alleged purity of these works is not always the case. It is very symptomatic that Thevoz always uses the term outsider when referring to the artists.
This term, of course, doesnt necessarily imply the mental illness on the part of outsiders. Yet, it becomes clear after observing some of works. In my opinion, Thevoz collection can be divided on two categories: works, whose authors strive to imitate famous paintings of avangardist and primitivist artists and artistic expression of truly sick people, whose works only have a value because they are entertaining. For example, the paintings of Albert Louden are clearly influenced by the works of Picasso. The work Face bears clear reminiscence of the face found in Picasso's Gernika. Windsor does not suffer from any mental illness, yet he thinks hes an outsider.
This is nothing but his subconscious reaction to the fact that his art doesnt have much of an artistic value. Hed rather consider himself an outsider than being deprived of creative talent: Nowadays, I ask myself how I can be so famous and yet so broke. The answer is: only by being an outsider (Louden). Nowadays many artists strive to apply term outsider to themselves, because it gives them advantages of having a brand name. I think that the only artists that have the right to be referred as an outsiders are those that are locked up in the nut houses, like Aleksandr Lobanov, who spent 50 years in the mental institution.
His works really fit into category of art brute. But again, only two categories of people can be genuinely interested in his works: psychiatrists and those who get entertained by the black humor. The main characteristic of schizophrenics is their fixation on some obscure idea, which they place in the center of their existence. The works of Lobanov help like nothing else to determine the nature of his illness. He constantly portrays himself with rifles, surrounded by the animals that look at him with awe. Even while standing naked in the shower, he never lets his rifle go.
Some of his works show him shooting the personnel of the mental asylum. This points out to his latent desires, which dominate his rationale. It is no wonder that Russian psychiatrists never let him out of psychiatric clinic, after having looked at his paintings, because they had rightfully concluded that Lobanov might represent danger to the society. To conclude this we need to say that despite current trend of representing art brute as some kind of look beyond, it will always remain of what its really is the illness spilled on canvas. When society begins to seriously consider opinions of madmen, it is a sign that society itself is sick. Ancient Romans became so corrupted that they believed in self-proclaimed Son of God, which caused the downfall of their civilization a short time afterwards.
It was only a few years after the madman Rasputin became popular with Russian Czar that the whole Russian society had crumbled into the bloody Communist bacchanalia. The same processes begin to take place in present western societies. With 50 % children suffering from being overweight, with never stopping influx of illegal immigrants, with glorification of violence by the media, it is no wonder that our society degraded to the extent that it is willing to go as far as declaring mentally ill people being not crazy after all. The danger here lies in fact that art brute influences mass unconsciousness, which results in fact that even mainstream art adopts certain characteristics of madness. Thats why the number of religious totalitarian sects rises in this country. Thats why Jerry Springer and Club 700 shows become popular with more and more people.
We need to understand that the mental illnesses, although having a biological nature, nevertheless can be socially contagious. All it takes for society to contract such illness is to begin considering crazy art as normal. Therefore, in my opinion, art brut has the right to exist for the medicinal purposes only, but it should never be popularized. Those who advertise it have a hidden social agenda, even though they try to represent matter in purely cultorological forms. Yet, ugly can never be beautiful, obscenity can never be moral and sickness can never be health. Outline: Foreword, Pp. 1 - 2 Main part, Pp. 2 - 5 Concussion, p. 6 Bibliography: Foucault, Michel.
Madness and Civilization. NY: Pantheon, 1965. Gilman, Sander. Seeing the Insane, NY: John Wiley & Sons, 1982.
Hayward, Jeff. Madness the Focus of Harbour front Art Festival. 24 Mar. 2003. Toronto Observer. 21 Sep. 2005 web Porter, Roy. Madness: a Brief History. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002. Ingram, Jay.
New Insight into Madness and Great Art. 19 Oct. 2003. Toronto Star. 21 Sep. 2005 web Regan, Audrey. There are people in the city who would love this stuff. 2002. Art-is-Life. 21 Sep. 2005 web.
Free research essays on topics related to: madness, van gogh, mentally ill, ill people, mental illness
Research essay sample on Mentally Ill Mental Illness
