5 ms·

> In any case, it's obvious that the study was colored by the belief that there is legitimately an association between creativity and psychopathy, so it was fla

by Daub 3y ago

> In any case, it's obvious that the study was colored by the belief that there is legitimately an association between creativity and psychopathy, so it was flawed from the start... ------------- Granted, the author's use of the term psychopathy was a bit crass. However, the association between artists and self-destruction is an ancient one. Giorgio Vasari (1511-1574) was perhaps the first person to write seriously about artists. He states that most artists have inherited from nature... "...a certain element of savagery and madness, which, besides making them strange and eccentric, had brought it about that very often there was revealed in them more the obscure darkness of vice than the brightness and splendour of those virtues that make men immortal." > Piers D. G. Britton. “Raphael and the bad humours of painters in Vasari’s Lives of the Artists*”. In: Renaissance Studies 22.2 (2008), pp. 174–196 More recently, others have written about the significant impact that syphilis-related mania had on a number of notable artists of the late 19th and early 20th century, such as Edouard Manet (1832-1883), Charles Baudelaire (1821-1867) and Oscar Wilde (1854-1900). > Julien Bogousslavsky and Laurent Tatu. “ ́Edouard Manet’s Tabes Dorsalis: From Painful Ataxia to Phantom Limb”. In: European Neurology 76.1-2 (2016), pp. 75–84 > Haroun Jedidi et al. “A brief history of syphilis. The disease through the art and the artist”. In: Revue medicale de Liege 73 (July 2018), pp. 363–369. Should an artist be unfortunate enough to have lived a trauma-free life, there is a chance that he might invent one. The German artist Joseph Beuys (1921-1986) claimed to have experienced life-threatening injuries as a fighter pilot in the second world war which had influenced the form and content of his art. However, towards the end of his life it was found that these experiences were almost entirely untrue. > Benjamin HD Buchloh. “Beuys: the Twilight of the Idol; Preliminary Notes for a Critique”. In: Artforum 18.5 (1980), pp. 35–43. Significantly, this revelation did not particularly affected his reputation as an artist. What does this tell us about the audience/consumer's need for an artist to be accompanied (explained?) by a myth? Then of course, is the link between addiction and creativity. We all know of the positive and negative impact that drugs had on popular music. But did you know that the painter J. M. W. Turner (1775-1851) was a morphine addict? And Jean Cocteau (1889-1963)? I could go on.

lethologica 3y ago
Thanks for those resources, I’m going to have fun digging into those. But still, wouldn’t the link between artistry and self destruction be more a function of depression and not psychopathy? But even that is just surface level I think. What is it that makes depressed people artists? Or vice versa.
- Daub 3y ago
  > But still, wouldn’t the link between artistry and self destruction be more a function of depression and not psychopathy? I agree. But to be fair to the article (and to the research which it addresses) the term 'psychopathological traits'. I'm gonna guess that we all have a few of those. > But even that is just surface level I think. What is it that makes depressed people artists? Or vice versa. An excellent question, and likely very hard to answer definitely. I can make a simple observation: that it is hard to imagine a work of art that does not strive for excess: excessive beauty, excessive grandeur, excessive horror etc. Hence, an artist is sort of like an astronaut of the emotions, 'boldly going' to outlying states. This job description is not amicable with peace of mind and restfulness. This might be what attracts neurotic types to becoming artists... to exorcise whatever angels or demons keep them awake at night. Alternately, it might be a causal mechanism for turning perfectly stable artists into neurotic types.
  - geoffmanning 3y ago
    You lost me here. To reduce all art to excess is to reduce life to excess. Art is simply expression of the experience of life, and there is absolutely no correlation between art and excess. How is the Mona Lisa an expression of excess? How are countless pieces of art from the middle ages expressions of excess? Excess is somewhat of a modern concept enabled by first world problems. Excess wasn't a problem in the past nor was it something that artists commonly expressed.
    - Daub 3y ago
      I illustrate this point to my students, who are great fans of Korean drama. These are near-hysterical operas of great excess: love unrequited, betrayal, jealously etc. Perhaps this phenomenon can better be expressed as 'exaggeration', which is a form of excess. The fact that artists exaggerate upon nature is an observable fact. My own work on color contrast proves this fairly conclusively. The Mona Lisa is an exaggeration of foreground/background contrast, of the-pose-at-rest vs dynamic tension, of feminine beauty juxtaposed with the beauty of nature etc.
geoffmanning 3y ago
Much appreciate this response, definite upvote, i found it very helpful and clarifying, however, a couple things here that strike me: 1. while all this is compelling, it doesn't change that the author of the study started off by making a statement as if it were a fact, leaving no room for alternative views. i would be shocked to find that this study has been peer reviewed and accepted. 2. the scientific definition of psychopathy is so generic and encompassing that i've long ago ignored it, when i hear psychopathy, i think of trauma that causes extremely deviant and harmful (to others) behavior, and i find that most others find there is a negative connotation associated with it in line with psychopaths being harmful to others. simply being depressed or a "tortured soul" doesn't hit the bar for a psychopath in my book. when you're good at getting people to open up, you find that by the scientific definition, we're all psychopaths. and given the current state of society, it's little wonder just about all of us are a little bit sick in the head. From a dictionary that quickly goes from pretty much ANY mental illness to this for "psychopathy": "A personality disorder indicated by a pattern of lying, exploitation, heedlessness, arrogance, sexual promiscuity, low self-control, and lack of empathy and remorse. Violent and criminal offenses may be indicative of this disorder." Makes no sense that people that are simply traumatized or depressed would be thrown in with this lot, but the latter are what most people think of when they think of psychopaths. Just to add on, i live around the Boulder, Colorado area, and i can attest i've met a some creatives that show absolutely no signs of even the scientific definition of a psychopath. Totally well adjusted people that just have really cool ideas. Also, are you a parent? Kids are about as creative as they come, making things up as they go every day. I'm constantly surprised at the things my 4 year old daughter comes up with out of thin air. Maybe she was traumatized by birth? Just so bizarre that the fundamental element of innovation would be associated with psychopathy, no matter the definition.
- Daub 3y ago
  You make some good points. > Kids are about as creative as they come, making things up as they go every day. I believe that the creativity of children is an extension of their need to play. I remember my desire to draw seemed to fade away at about the same time that puberty struck.
  - 3y ago
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]

by Daub 3y ago

lethologica 3y ago

Thanks for those resources, I’m going to have fun digging into those. But still, wouldn’t the link between artistry and self destruction be more a function of depression and not psychopathy? But even that is just surface level I think. What is it that makes depressed people artists? Or vice versa.

Daub 3y ago
> But still, wouldn’t the link between artistry and self destruction be more a function of depression and not psychopathy? I agree. But to be fair to the article (and to the research which it addresses) the term 'psychopathological traits'. I'm gonna guess that we all have a few of those. > But even that is just surface level I think. What is it that makes depressed people artists? Or vice versa. An excellent question, and likely very hard to answer definitely. I can make a simple observation: that it is hard to imagine a work of art that does not strive for excess: excessive beauty, excessive grandeur, excessive horror etc. Hence, an artist is sort of like an astronaut of the emotions, 'boldly going' to outlying states. This job description is not amicable with peace of mind and restfulness. This might be what attracts neurotic types to becoming artists... to exorcise whatever angels or demons keep them awake at night. Alternately, it might be a causal mechanism for turning perfectly stable artists into neurotic types.
- geoffmanning 3y ago
  You lost me here. To reduce all art to excess is to reduce life to excess. Art is simply expression of the experience of life, and there is absolutely no correlation between art and excess. How is the Mona Lisa an expression of excess? How are countless pieces of art from the middle ages expressions of excess? Excess is somewhat of a modern concept enabled by first world problems. Excess wasn't a problem in the past nor was it something that artists commonly expressed.
  - Daub 3y ago
    I illustrate this point to my students, who are great fans of Korean drama. These are near-hysterical operas of great excess: love unrequited, betrayal, jealously etc. Perhaps this phenomenon can better be expressed as 'exaggeration', which is a form of excess. The fact that artists exaggerate upon nature is an observable fact. My own work on color contrast proves this fairly conclusively. The Mona Lisa is an exaggeration of foreground/background contrast, of the-pose-at-rest vs dynamic tension, of feminine beauty juxtaposed with the beauty of nature etc.

geoffmanning 3y ago

Much appreciate this response, definite upvote, i found it very helpful and clarifying, however, a couple things here that strike me: 1. while all this is compelling, it doesn't change that the author of the study started off by making a statement as if it were a fact, leaving no room for alternative views. i would be shocked to find that this study has been peer reviewed and accepted. 2. the scientific definition of psychopathy is so generic and encompassing that i've long ago ignored it, when i hear psychopathy, i think of trauma that causes extremely deviant and harmful (to others) behavior, and i find that most others find there is a negative connotation associated with it in line with psychopaths being harmful to others. simply being depressed or a "tortured soul" doesn't hit the bar for a psychopath in my book. when you're good at getting people to open up, you find that by the scientific definition, we're all psychopaths. and given the current state of society, it's little wonder just about all of us are a little bit sick in the head. From a dictionary that quickly goes from pretty much ANY mental illness to this for "psychopathy": "A personality disorder indicated by a pattern of lying, exploitation, heedlessness, arrogance, sexual promiscuity, low self-control, and lack of empathy and remorse. Violent and criminal offenses may be indicative of this disorder." Makes no sense that people that are simply traumatized or depressed would be thrown in with this lot, but the latter are what most people think of when they think of psychopaths. Just to add on, i live around the Boulder, Colorado area, and i can attest i've met a some creatives that show absolutely no signs of even the scientific definition of a psychopath. Totally well adjusted people that just have really cool ideas. Also, are you a parent? Kids are about as creative as they come, making things up as they go every day. I'm constantly surprised at the things my 4 year old daughter comes up with out of thin air. Maybe she was traumatized by birth? Just so bizarre that the fundamental element of innovation would be associated with psychopathy, no matter the definition.

Daub 3y ago
You make some good points. > Kids are about as creative as they come, making things up as they go every day. I believe that the creativity of children is an extension of their need to play. I remember my desire to draw seemed to fade away at about the same time that puberty struck.
- 3y ago

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]