Does it matter to an art collector what the artist was experiencing in her mind at the moment a work was conceived? Or is the final product just that: A product. I have watched a Documentary about Francis Bacon’s desire to be recognized as a “real” artist, and it explained that he was very downcast after his first efforts were blown off by the art critics. He kept painting and finally produced those groundbreaking paintings of tortured, animalistic, humanoid creatures that blew the critics away! Suddenly he was a genius, although he really had always been.
Did it matter what was in his mind, what his “mental state” was at that time? Of course his lifestyle was picked apart, and pondered over, this way and that, ad infinitum. Perhaps this is only relevant to art that delves deep into the inner sanctum, the unseen and unclean, the new and outrageous. Does a tranquil landscape of pastoral peace spawn a probing into the creator’s psyche?
. I think the question I am really asking is , is my art relevant? Do people need to know my mental health status to somehow “explain” my work? Does it matter? Can my art be taken just at face value, or is it’s “worth” dependent on my diagnosis? If you are observing a work that stimulates you, isn’t what matters only what you feel?
I share my diagnosis in the hopes of encouraging others whose lives are turned upside down by this illness. Or am I just using that as a crutch? An excuse?
. Why do I have to think so much?