Title : "Everything about the act of writing seems to invite [substance] abuse — its solitary nature, its interiority, the misery of sharing yourself with an often indifferent audience."
link : "Everything about the act of writing seems to invite [substance] abuse — its solitary nature, its interiority, the misery of sharing yourself with an often indifferent audience."
"Everything about the act of writing seems to invite [substance] abuse — its solitary nature, its interiority, the misery of sharing yourself with an often indifferent audience."
Writes M.H. Miller, in "Where Have All the Artist-Addicts Gone? For much of the 20th century, before the dawn of our own wellness-focused era, madness and substance abuse were often considered prerequisites for great art" (NYT).
Artist-addicts continue to inspire curiosity and obsession, but as we move farther from the 20th century and toward a reinterpretation of substance abuse that places it in the context of wellness and mental health, this figure seems increasingly a relic of a different era, like beehive hairdos or fallout shelters....
By the ’90s, the question of whether artists abused their bodies more than the general public had gained additional layers: What came first, the art or the abuse? Could the art even exist without the abuse?...
Our culture now is one in which artists are less troubled geniuses than they are public figures, generally expected to respond uncontroversially on their various platforms to whatever the news cycle might bring. The compulsion for everything to be civil and inoffensive is now reflected in our curious relationship to drugs and alcohol.... [T]he act of becoming intoxicated... has largely become a question of self-optimization....
Everything and everybody — even while using heroin — must be bland and inoffensive... The junkie artist has become, if not entirely passé, then at least less visible.....
Lots of discussion of particular writers at the link. I've excerpted the high-level abstraction. The actual article is long — with many famous names and details about their substance abuse and how the culture used to relate to these tortured souls who were our artists. The thesis is: We don't do that any more.
We've got something else now, and maybe we miss those messed up artists as we live with writers who don't seem to have interesting, conspicuous problems. Are these people who expect us to read them cowed by the cancel culture? Has social media put them in a worthless dulled state where all they do is "respond uncontroversially"?
Where have all the geniuses gone? We — as a group, a stupid group — decided we preferred bland inoffensiveness.
Writes M.H. Miller, in "Where Have All the Artist-Addicts Gone? For much of the 20th century, before the dawn of our own wellness-focused era, madness and substance abuse were often considered prerequisites for great art" (NYT).
Artist-addicts continue to inspire curiosity and obsession, but as we move farther from the 20th century and toward a reinterpretation of substance abuse that places it in the context of wellness and mental health, this figure seems increasingly a relic of a different era, like beehive hairdos or fallout shelters....
By the ’90s, the question of whether artists abused their bodies more than the general public had gained additional layers: What came first, the art or the abuse? Could the art even exist without the abuse?...
Our culture now is one in which artists are less troubled geniuses than they are public figures, generally expected to respond uncontroversially on their various platforms to whatever the news cycle might bring. The compulsion for everything to be
Everything and everybody — even while using heroin — must be bland and inoffensive... The junkie artist has become, if not entirely passé, then at least less visible.....
Lots of discussion of particular writers at the link. I've excerpted the high-level abstraction. The actual article is long — with many famous names and details about their substance abuse and how the culture used to relate to these tortured souls who were our artists. The thesis is: We don't do that any more.
We've got something else now, and maybe we miss those messed up artists as we live with writers who don't seem to have interesting, conspicuous problems. Are these people who expect us to read them cowed by the cancel culture? Has social media put them in a worthless dulled state where all they do is "respond uncontroversially"?
Where have all the geniuses gone? We — as a group, a stupid group — decided we preferred bland inoffensiveness.
Thus articles "Everything about the act of writing seems to invite [substance] abuse — its solitary nature, its interiority, the misery of sharing yourself with an often indifferent audience."
You now read the article "Everything about the act of writing seems to invite [substance] abuse — its solitary nature, its interiority, the misery of sharing yourself with an often indifferent audience." with the link address https://welcometoamerican.blogspot.com/2022/03/everything-about-act-of-writing-seems.html
0 Response to ""Everything about the act of writing seems to invite [substance] abuse — its solitary nature, its interiority, the misery of sharing yourself with an often indifferent audience.""
Post a Comment