Disturbing art a sign of mental instability?

[Mandalore_15]

snip

Well let's put it this way: zombie games are fucking HUGE right now, and the evidence that they turn people into either murderers or jobless hobos is practically nil. I honestly can't see much difference between enjoying the medium and enjoying designing the medium. Do you think half the guys in the Valve office are closet psychos?

 

[y1fella]

Ahhhh you got nothin to worry about. I've only killed two or three people and my arts as creepy as ever.
But on a serious note: Ahhhh you got nothin to worry about.

 

[Esotera]

Artistic people are more likely than others to have signs of mental illness, I think it's quite a noticeable difference. I'd say that's a price worth paying. But subject matter of your work doesn't really sound like it'd affect your long term prospects, or show signs that you're more unstable than any other artist.

 

[Doclector]

Personally, I love creating stuff that disturbs people. I'd love to create something capable of driving those who view it a little insane.

Does the fact that I create disturbing stuff make me insane? No. Plenty of perfectly stable people do such things, it's the people keeping it all bottled and hidden that you gotta watch out for.

Does the fact that I do it with the expressed purpose of terrorising and destabilising it's viewer's mental state make me insane?

...

Probably.

Time to go off on a tangent.

Spoiler

This does remind me of a series of photos shown in one of my media arts classes. It depicted the creator of the photos with, and role-playing as, a certain social group, skateboarders, rappers, business men, which the lecturer described as an extro-vertive piece of work. I was too busy thinking how I could drive my classmates to the brink of insanity with photographs to point it out, but I think it's BS. If it were extro-vertive, then why does the creator feature in the photos? Maybe she tells others it is, maybe she tells herself, but the truth I believe in these quite sunny and quirky photos is actually that of a rather lonely mind. Someone desperate to find a place in the world, and not quite finding it. I believe if you located the last in the series of photos, you would probably locate the group she settled with, or the point where she gave up. Point is, where you think you put out something else, you always leave a trace of yourself. Whether you like it or not.

 

[plugav]

What your friend told you is, of course, complete bull. Or maybe I'm wrong and George Romero is a penniless lunatic, I don't know.

Yes, your art reflects your psyche, but no, it's not possible to make a complete psychological profile out of it. The most basic reason being that a person's interpretation of your art is influenced by their psyche.

 

[Crazycat690]

Uhmm.... no, who's to say what disturbing art really is then? Zombies? Lol, people who say things like that are conservatives who's afriad of that which is different, saying that might aswell be a way of scaring you into becoming "normal"? You know, like religion have done the last thousands of years?

I laugh in the face of the scared doubters!

 

[Keepitclean]

"Disturbing" is a subjective quality. I wouldn't put too much weight to an unqualified person's opinion.

 

[imperialreign]

I've spent many a year back in high school drawing rather dark and disturbing images (at least by the commoner's perspective), not to mention my written works took a similar theme . . . and I've turned out just fine . . .

. . . and the countless other "professionals" who's work is known for that darker edge (i.e. Giger) have been fine, too.

Although artwork, poetry, or any other creative release can possibly be a reflection of an individual's emotional or mental state - it can't be taken as definitive without actually having the individual undergo a full psych evaluation. There are too many people who might express themselves differently from how they actually feel, and their creative release will take no similarity to what's actually going on inside their head. There might be some similarities with specific individuals, but the majority of the time there's not. It's a big reason why psychiatrists focus more on someone's interaction with other people and with social groups, instead of handing them some paper, a bunch of crayons and telling them to draw whatever pops into their head.

You're critic is, for lack of more appropriate terminology, full of horse-shit.

 

[IndianaJonny]

Recently, I had an acquaintance tell me that drawings with macabre or disturbing undertones (or as the outright theme) is a product of mental instability - she told me that, because of the themes of my drawings, I'm more likely to become a mass murderer or something. Apparently, I'll also never be able to get a steady job after college.

Does she extend this to reportage? There's somthing sick beyond ironic if she feels those who portray/photograph/depict devestation such as Dachau or Mai Lai are themselves reflecting a suppressed desire to enact such murder themselves.

 

[k-ossuburb]

Considering the kind of crap that I jot down from time-to-time people would be well within their rights to think I'm more twisted than a corkscrew.

Spoiler: Considering that this is the kind of thing I occasionally put out.

Does it mean I am? Well, probably, but really who the hell cares? I may not be "normal" but I'm definitely no axe murderer.

 

[Use_Imagination_here]

I draw. I'm horrible at it because I only started recently, but i like to draw weird figures. Like a man whose arms and legs and head and torso are all made of diffrent bombs. Or a giant robot made entirely out of macdonalds restaurants crushing dinosaurs. Or flowers, and guns that shoot flowers. Stuff like that.

I get the "you're a fucking weirdo" a lot, I usually reply with "you're a boring, sad, sad little man".