Mental Illness and Creativity : A Neurological View of the “ Tortured Artist ”

As advances in science bring us closer than ever to understanding ourselves, we are forced to reexamine the canon ancient folk wisdom regarding human nature. Our culture is full of assumptions and stereotypes about how the mind works, perhaps none so enduring as the legend of the “tortured artist”. The contradiction of the genius who creates great artwork despite (or because of) mental illness has been part of Western legend for thousands of years. The image is durable, but science has not yet been able to conclusively verify or disprove it. However, while the final verdict is still out on the issue, both the folk and the scientific evidence provide tantalizing clues that this legend may be fact. A large number of studies in the past few decades support a link between creativity and mental illnesses, particularly manic depressive disorder and schizophrenia. Although the support is tentative, it forces us to reexamine our attitudes towards the mental states that we call “diseased”, and when (and if) treatment is appropriate. If mental illness can produce powerful and important art, then perhaps, instead of trying to eliminate them by medication, we should embrace these mental states as valuable in their own right. A possible link between mental illness and creative output has been documented throughout history. As far back as the 4th century B.C., the connection between “divine” inspiration and altered mental state had already been made, prompting Plato to expound in the dialogue the Phaedrus: “Madness, provided it comes as the gift of heaven, is the channel by which we receive the greatest blessings... Madness comes from God, whereas sober sense is merely human.” The association gained strength in the popular imagination throughout time, as scores of famous “mad geniuses” provided fuel for the stereotype. The idea was especially powerful for the Romantic artists, who selfconsciously embraced the image. Lord Byron expressed this selfcreated cult of the “tortured artist”: “We of the craft are all crazy. Some are affected by gaiety, others by melancholy, but all are more or less touched”. As Byron’s declaration attests, at this point the association between diseases of the mind and artistic merit was so pervasive that it became almost a self-fulfilling prophecy. To be a serious artist, one needed to be “touched”, spurring some artists to actually mimic madness or eccentricity in order to be more respected for their creative work. Such tricks of self-presentation are anomalies, however, compared to the genuinely sick. The list of afflicted artists is staggering, and spans all areas of art. Many of the most iconic figures in the modern Western canon, including the poet T.S. Eliot, the composer Irving Berlin, and the painter Georgia O’Keefe were formally institutionalized at some point in their careers. Others, including the writer Virginia Woolf and the artist Vincent van Gogh, actually ended their own lives because of mental illness. It seems almost impossible that so many central figures in the arts could be connected in such a specific way serendipitously – merely listing the artists who have suffered from mental illness suggests that mere chance isn’t responsible, that a scientific explanation for the link must exist. Some of the first research in this area focused on simple correlation studies, looking for quantifiable evidence that mental illness is more common among creative people. In a 1987 study, Dr. Nancy Andreason of the University of Iowa found that a sample of creative writers had significantly higher levels of bipolar disorder than a control group Adrienne Sussman