Three patron saints of sensitivity: Henry Darger
We’re now making 3rd or 4th generation mental illness art, it’s taught in college. Previously I floated the idea that intentionally producing “crazy” art is a way to slip the system, or at least be functionally irrational in a world that increasingly demands more rational productivity. Pretending to be crazy is one of the best strategies to let other people know you wish to continue acting on your impulses, even if you are completely sane.
Rational productivity is no fun, and not really a good reason for a society to exist either; it only makes sense if there is something we all agree on apriori, which we do not. Rational productivity should be the means, not the end, but we’re in a bad spot because for us its the ends, and the means is a sort of high pressure grind that feels like a nightmare version of Monopoly. No g’damned wonder we’re all feverishly fantasizing about the apocalypse in the form of allegorical xombies
Wolfli and Ramirez spent most of their adult lives in mental asylums. Bartering for colored pencils and scraps of paper, their compositions have a peculiar presence that borders on numinous as though they saw through reality right past the normal world and into some magical other place. After examining their work it’s obvious they had more powerful inner lives then outer lives. (Al Columbia
Henry Darger was institutionalized on several occasions in Illinois. As an adult he worked as a janitor and dishwasher in Catholic hospitals in Chicago. Darger matches Wolfli and Ramirez in weirdness, but being on the outside he had much more access to art supplies, and employed sophisticated artistic techniques by using carbon paper to trace newspaper photos, photo enlargements to create scale shifts, and wonderfully sensitive watercolor. He created complicated, fantastical masterpieces that recall the intricacy of a Poussin frieze.
The contemporary artists picking up on the spaces, formal choices, and themes of the Mentalists aren’t the bottom of the barrel either, many are at the top of the heap. Abject perversity is sometimes confused as more relevant than normalcy, real normalcy is intricate and hard to pin down, is it just easier to be stupid and disgusting? What would Abraham Maslow
How aware are we, that by using Darger, Ramirez and Wolfli as models, we’re picking up on the most articulate of the people who failed to adapt to a new world? How alienated are we? Without any believable myths what’s the point of anything? There’s no reason or context, there is only persistence.
Maybe we identify with Darger
Where’s the silver lining in this? More artists are making more work, and more interesting work then ever before in the history of humanity. More people are dealing with self-actualization, the highest set of values on Maslow’s hierarchy of needs. As the information age dawns maybe we just have to be ready to change rapidly. I hope Nietzsche was wrong about the abyss staring back, that is sort of a glass is half-empty sort of thing to say, he was probably a dick.
Filed under: Uncategorized
Hi Bill,another good train of thought here. I like contextualizing these guys as being some of the earlier documented cases of failure or refusal to adjust to swiftly changing times. As if they were our cultural smoke detectors picking up on a fire that many could not feel coming yet.I think another component to their popularity at this point is that they are percieved as relatively "pure" artists untainted by the art world or maybe even the world in general. They were misunderstood, alienated and basically unrecognized during the course of their lives, yet they made all this amazing work that has redeemed them from this obscurity. This type of unlikely redemption is a pillar of our artistic mythology and has some allure for sure. These examples offer us hope that if we stay disciplined, committed and engaged we may also find redemption in spite of being awkward, isolated weirdos who may make little discernible progress through life.It is funny to me how I can understand faith so much better in this context even though it really differs little from religious faith when unpacked.
wow gordon, great thoughts. thanks, I totally agree with you, and what you said enriches and clarifies what i was thinking about. thanks dude!
Nietzsche held alcohol and religion as the same thing, BAD. If not a dick, he was at least no fun
Are we at a point where sane people are jealous of the crazy? Ever since the art world has decided posthumously re-contextualize every single fringe artist and canonize them as visionary [ the van gogh effect ] , we have seen a rise in so called 'crazy' ART. OCD and other slight inter personal maladies are slowly becoming apart of the artist repertoire. Is that right? NO it is not.Good or Bad its apart of the myth of art perpetuated by the artist buying world. You just cant have a good confab about your newest acquisition unless the artist has some tragic story! Now, my anger and BS aside what can be made of this? In my opinion the art should speak for itself, but for the rest of the non art world, they really cant see the forest for the trees. Im not a big fan of this.Another big selling point about good art is that it must look impossible for the average person to make, or it becomes less great art and more of a design or de-constructive statement. Im glad that alot of new art is getting back to this. At the same time the general public is getting less aware of what it is to be an artist. Its a lot easier for the lay person to look at a work of art and say "that guy must be crazy" than "wow, he must have worked hard for years to be that good". And because of this art seller of the world have capitalized on this slight difference in the perception of fine art.i know, i know … so bitter 
D, great points! The market changes the way the work is perceived, and artists create personas, or emphasize problems as a way to make themselves more interesting to talk about. I think that really good artists do leave some vulnerability in the work, or something so open that its embarrassing, but what I think your point is, is that people are doing this in an artificial way to hype the work. That the shift in emphasis that the market places on the individual is for the individual to make themselves appear fucked up so they fit the model of the artists which exists for the buyers… really interesting. I had not thought of it like that. Thanks d!!!!
d, what would be a positive, or at least a better, way for artists to meet the needs of the audience. I think that could be an awesome article, "how art meets the needs of its audience." you got me thinking.
go bill !
"No, you call this porn? .. my god."
Slavoj Zizek is a funny dude. I went to my library to get his newest book, and had them buy it.
another similarity I didn't mention is that all these guys start a drawing and then EXPAND it, they never hem it in – they are adding paper by gluing in all directions in the case of Ramirez, adding additional adjacent sheets in the case of Darger and Wolfli. They also all worked with collage, which predicted the current way collage is used in a lot of artwork.
>Thanx for sharing the video. First I have heard this guy though I have heard some Christians (albeit, radically unorthodox) support him. Some Emergent Christians like him.It was fascinating — in an abstract way. But it affected me — ahhhh, that is art!
>Sabio, zizek wrote a book called "the puppet and the dwarf, the perverse core of christianity," and the book sort of comes down to the moment on the cross where jesus doubts god, and asks "why have you forsaken me," and zizek takes this to mean that god in the form of jesus, doubts god, so that god is himself an atheist. He's a really interesting writer. Thanks for checking out my blog, bill
>Thanx Bill.He sounds excellent is several ways.