by Izilda Jorge
Mental illness is a factor one can use in evaluating the works of van Gogh. As most with mental illness can vouch for, such illness is often a defining feature to their identity or life. However, we know from stigma surrounding mental health to this day, people still have a habit of associating the person with the illness. The illness serves an explanation for what runs as ‘deviant’ thoughts and behaviors to societal norms. With artists like van Gogh, the public settles on the consensus that their talent must arise from that mental illness. Many misconceptions of mental health form as a result of this thinking, and few are corrected in a public format (as we know systemic and cultural stigma around mental illness bars it from sufficient dialogue or exploration in educational or everyday settings). Such misconceptions lead to the prominent (and perpetual) romanticization encasing van Gogh’s personal life and works.
Self Portrait, Oil on Canvas, 1889, Vincent van Gogh.
Romanticizing is in its essence, idealizing. When we idealize we tend to simplify, minimizing the complexities and nuances of the subject we’re dissecting. Praise is found in statements like “his torture fuels the passion of his landscapes” or “if people medicated, we wouldn’t have pieces like Starry Night”. It’s a compelling stepping stone that glamorizes unhealthy lifestyles of the artist being revered, as we equate the apparent suffering of that artist as what unlocks the work’s aesthetic value. Yes, van Gogh did suffer in his personal life, and yes, his perceptions changed as a result of these sufferings and such these influences most definitely reflect in his artwork. However, his art is not “great” because he suffered; it is great because it transcended common standards of his time and inspired new thought and technique.
Contrary to the artworld’s belief, seeking treatment often helps the artist. During van Gogh’s voluntary time at Saint-Paul’s asylum, he created his most prominent works, including The Starry Night. One could argue that if van Gogh sought treatment sooner, he might have made even more masterpieces. Therefore, the romantic ideal that only through tragedy can an artist find creativity is, to be quite frank, bullshit. Not only are such mentalities utter bullshit, but they are equal parts devastating and pernicious to the artist overtime.
The Siesta (after Millet), Oil on Canvas, 1889-1890, Vincent van Gogh
When van Gogh laid in his bed suffering from a gunshot wound, holding his brother’s hand and exchanging some commonly quoted last words, he did not do so to be memorialized as the modern standard of the artist. When he wrote in a letter to his brother, “This sadness will last forever”, he did not intend for his struggles to be idolized. As much as van Gogh’s work is a narrative about the harsh realities of his mental illness, he was in favor of treatment and self-care; two topics that the vast majority of art communities often undermines, be it by satisfying the superficial level of commercialized ‘self care’, or sweep the matter beneath the rug entirely.
Self-Portrait with Bandaged Ear, Oil on Canvas, 1889, Vincent van Gogh
While the public has notions of what a true artist should be, they are by no means reflections of what you, the artist, need to be. Art is an invaluable tool that voices the artist, allowing them to articulate what burns within them. Art is intimate, it is vulnerable, above all, it is complex. You, the artist, are allowed to exist in complexities. You are not bound to a particular style or format. You create for yourself only. Artwork evolves as the artist goes about their experiences in life. The only obligation an artist has is to themselves, to be in a constant state of flux, a sentiment that van Gogh eloquently touches upon:
“Love many things, for therein lies the true strength, and whosoever loves much performs much, and can accomplish much, and what is done in love is done well.” – Vincent van Gogh, 1853-1890.