Good post from Serdar Yegulalp on the myth of the tortured artist.
I’ve long wrestled with, and rejected, the idea that damage or sickness is a prerequisite of good art — that the artist needs to be a screwed-up person in order for his art to be “genuine”. The most obvious problem with this formulation is how it leads us to believe the reverse: that in order to become an artist, you have to get screwed up.
I have to agree with every word of that.
One of the things that really gets my goat is the way the media, especially some sections of the rock press, glamourise self-destructive behaviour. It’s the mindset that encouraged Amy Winehouse to piss away her talent and eventually killed her. It’s why I’m still unapolagetic about ripping a Guardian music writer a new arsehole a few years back. I know too many singers and musicians of Amy Winehouse’ age, and I wouldn’t want it to happen to them.
It’s been suggested that the only reason the media gave Pete Doherty so much underserved hype was that they could see what a drug-addled trainwreck he was going to be, and wanted trot out the “tragic tale of lost genius” story yet again. But then he didn’t die, and instead went on make a string of mediocre records, leaving them with egg over their faces.
I’ve always believed self-destructive substance abuse in the music world wasn’t about “enhancing their art” but about their inability to cope with the pressures of fame. Far from enhancing their art, it’s more likely to diminish it.
What great music might Jimi Hendrix or Phil Lynott have produced if drug abuse hadn’t cut their careers short? And I can’t help feel that even those who didn’t actually die, such as Eric Clapton or Jimmy Page, might not have burned out early had it not been for drug addiction.
Great blog post Tim!
I don’t think the tortured artist is a myth, as such, but I do not think of the tortured artist as a drink or drug addled wreck. I tend to think of the tortured artist as the like of bipolar Picasso or schizophrenic Peter Green (before he self destructed on drugs). Green is rather dismissive of the song “Man of the World” now but there were some serious issues going on in his head when he wrote that song! Check out “Showbiz Blues” too; it contains the great line: “Do you really give a damn for me?”
I agree, rock ‘n’ roll excesses are not big and they are not clever. I remember reading about an interview Liam Gallagher gave when he commented about his behaviour: when charged that it had all been done before, he retorted, “Not by me!” almost as if it were essential part of the ritual of being a famous pop star! Pathetic.
I also recall a comedy sketch in which impressionists portray Winehouse and Doherty as clean; the drink, drugs and other excesses are an act put on for the benefit of the media camped outside. The sketch satirised the culture we have of watching them self-destruct for the entertainment of the tabloids’ audience. Tragic.
Of course not all who tread this path join the infamous 27 Club. Glenn Hughes, for example, survived and looks back with regret; as we all know, his close friend Tommy Bolin didn’t make it. His drink and drugs habit (in the same league as Ozzy’s) nearly killed him and damaged relations with many of his fellow musicians as well his career. Thankfully for him and his audience he turned the corner.
Instead of glorying in these people’s exploits and self-destruction we should be shocked and horrified and insisting that they get the help they so desperately need before another victim joins the ranks sacrificed on the altar of drink and drugs.