Modern Art and Psychology - Essay Example

Modern Art and Psychology As art continues to flourish throughout the of time, the makers of these artefacts are key players. One cannot deny that the artists are the ones who determine what will be the appearance of the works of art placed in a gallery or a museum. It is something one cannot devalue afterwards. All throughout the course of the history of art, a lot of things have changed. This includes the style and skills of the artists in making artworks, which can now be considered developmental. In this paper, I shall investigate the possible relationship between schizophrenia and modern art. This shall focus on the manner of creating the artworks and the presentation of such. At the same time, there is an observation about the aesthetic responses elicited by the artworks. Modern Art, upon its emergence, has a totally different conventions compared to that of the Classical Art traditions. The Classical Art, in most cases, has adhered to the mimetic standard of beauty, which even extends up to the rise of Renaissance and Baroque (Rodowick 97). This has become the ideal notion that people have appreciated for a long period of time. As modern art emerged, conventions about art changed radically. The mimetic arts shifted to abstraction: the glorified standard of modern art. Thus, modern art has a totally different paradigm when placed side by side with the Classical (Wolfflin 120). Psychology, in terms of artistic creativity, has pivotal role in determining the appearance of the artwork; down from its details up to the generalist and holistic sense. Inevitably, the working of the human mind, which comes from the artist, influences the whole process of making the artwork. Thus, it has been called to as the psychology of artistic creation (Kris 286). Having presented the basic tenets of art and psychology, how will modern art and schizophrenia be aligned and related? There will be two assumptions that I shall be working on deliberately. The process of creation and of perception shall serve as the grounds for observing and asserting the relationships that I will find. Modern Art, having so reliant on abstraction, allows the mind to work freely and accordingly to what the mind is formulating. There is no certain standard what is beautiful and ugly about it. Applying a schizophrenic attitude towards painting, an artist might be able to make an art which has dualities: conditions that are not consistent with each other. However, both are existent in the person’s consciousness. Thus, there might be cases that artist might like the artwork or not since his or her attitude is also shifting. There seems to be no permanent convention on the part of the artist due to a schizophrenic behaviour. In terms of connoisseurship, the spectators of art might feel schizophrenic condition due to their tendency to like and not to like an artwork due to certain problems that they deem not fit for their aesthetic sensibilities (Preziosi 57). They might the artwork pleasing or irritating. However, one must understand that the appreciation of art is considered to empirical. It is dependent on personal observation. Given this, the spectator might feel the schizophrenic nature of the artworks. In the same manner, one must understand that schizophrenia cannot be standardized to a single standard of attitude. This would already serve as a justification about what one might clearly encounter the artwork of a schizophrenic artist. This would extend further to modern art’s nature of resistance with the confinements imposed by art history (Belting 20). This is already an assertion that modern art’s abstract nature is fluid in the same manner of how a schizophrenic artist changes attitudes. Analytically, the fluidity of the schizophrenic mind further amplifies the quick adaption of modern art to the artists’ manner of creation and presentation. Given this case, the abstraction that a schizophrenic artist can create can be considered great and comparable to that of the great modern arts that have emerged in the cannon of art history. In this case, it can be seen that must be no distinction when it comes to nature or condition of the artist in creating artworks but more of carefully scrutinizing the mastery and virtuosity of the artist in making the artwork stands out. After all, modern art has actually started out with insanity or madness that cannot be devalued because that it gave way for modern art to flourish (Sass 45). After seeing such madness, that is where the rational thinking about the nature of modern art followed. Hostility has been reduced and reception became a norm. What can be seen, to a certain extent, is that the artists who created modern artworks are supposedly branded to be schizophrenic due to destroying conventions but still adheres to aesthetic judgment that cannot be taken away from any work of art to be experienced by a viewer (Sass 70). Yes, schizophrenia can be felt. There will be abhorrence and disgust in the process of accepting the artwork but there will also be a great interest towards it as time progressed. That condition is already schizophrenic. Synthetically, schizophrenia and modern art are actually allied with each other. An artist is considered to be insane by not following conventions but later on, becomes renowned and respected because of the artist engagement to a state of trance. The very process of creating artworks is already a rigorous and tedious act. The need to do something creative that can create a spectacle is a must. Insanity follows suit due to it being treated as a spectacle and a debacle. Nevertheless, schizophrenic kinds of modern art cannot be disregarded just because it something that does not adhere to the mimetic conventions that people have been used to in most cases and in most societies. In the end, schizophrenia and modern art can be considered allies with each other because it is where the weirdness and dualities become pre – cursors of new stylistic conventions that can be studied, understood and appreciated. Also, both the nature of the artist and the modern art must be considered and integrated. What will be important is that these artworks and artists are able to contribute something to enrich the society in terms of critical thinking and cultural development. WORKS CITED Belting, H. Art History After Modernism. Chicago; University of the Chicago Press. 2003. Kris, E. A Psychotic Artist of the Middle Ages. Modern Perspectives in Art History. Toronto; University of Toronto Press. 1989. pp 285 – 292. Preziosi, D. Introduction to Aesthetics. Art of Art History. London; Oxford University Press. 2009. Rodowick, D. N. Impure Mimesis, or the Ends of Aesthetic. Art of Art History. London; Oxford University Press. 2009. Sass, L. Madness and Modernism: Insanity in the Light of Modern Art, Literature and Thought. Massachusetts; Harvard University Press. 1998. Wolfflin, H. Principles of Art History. Art of Art History. London; Oxford University Press. 2009. Read More