Is tragedy lucrative?

How lucrative is tragedy? When we look at art history, we often see the "Martyr" of the arts immortalized. Tragic deaths in this role are generally associated with a sense of worthlessness, drug addiction, and poverty. This week, I spent a substantial amount of time gazing at Bob Thompson's The Decension. As I became captivated by his vivid environment, I began to wonder how he felt in the presence of his work, unfinished or finished. 

Is it necessary for an artist to be in agony to create work worth looking at? My art historical background is solely historical; I adore looking at and analyzing work, and my interests have grown to the physical of the artist. Those who are skeptical of an artist's work and believe it is reproducible, yet those who belong to this thought process ignore the physical and emotional labor that goes into creating these pieces. I like to attempt to be present in front of art from different perspectives to see how my psychical comfortability affects what I see and how what I see begins to alter and transcend into art.  

Thompson overdosed on Heroin in Rome at the age of 28, so did Thompson live a fulfilling life? He is not the first artist to die so young and tragically but what does this narrative that plagues various artists indicate? How does his work represent his life completely? What elements are missing from this? Thompson describes his slow way of painting as a detoxification and this brings to this that color psychology in his figures is as important as facial features when recognizing someone. 

Is there a link between depression and creativity, and if so, what are the causes? What does the statement "you have to suffer for your art" mean? A study published in Creativity Research Journal a few years ago led by Dr. Roberto Goya-Maldonado, head of the systems neuroscience and imaging in psychiatry in Germany, discovered that artists had significantly lower activation in the ventral striatum, part of the brain's reward system when they chose the money-making green squares when compared to non-artists. Now while I am not diving into this study too deeply, the results seem that we can understand artists, unlike many 9-5 occupations have a constant motion of words that redefines workplace happiness, and their happiness is not solely connected to a monetary value but a social purpose. The catch-22 is that in our capitalist society, a social purpose can leave one down on luck due to the financial need to simply exist in America, especially with the current economic status.

So let me ask you, why do artists seem to suffer, and what does their work seem to correspond to the volatility of their suffering?

XOXO, 

The Curatorial Blonde