Showing posts with label psychology. Show all posts
Showing posts with label psychology. Show all posts

Sunday, 30 September 2012

Bosch and Freud - on Art and Madness


The rise of Renaissance started in the Low Countries – called Flanders.  Great artists appeared as the representatives of the late medieval new thinkers.  The status of artist rose from those considered as craftsman – “Mechanic artist” to a respectable free thinker, imaginative creator – “liberal Artist”.


The first of such representative was Hieronymus Bosch whose paintings of demonic figures in the guise of religious themes displayed his unbridled fantasies of the bestiality and humanity, the corruption of both human and animals, in the chaos of the world – reflecting the period in history where clashes between various continents and ideology seemed to have come to the central stage of civilization in the 15th century.  The Turkish Ottoman Empire took over the Byzantine in the 11th century and occupied S.E.Europe, the Black Death wiped out half of the European population

Bosch, artist of the 15th century, marked a point of departure from the Dark Ages to the Age of Enlightenment.  As a northerner, with his typical dark imagination, enhanced by witch’s oil (a type of drug) he found his unique style of Gothic art – grotesque but realistic figures fornicating, gorging, binge drinking, defecating at the same time… The symbolism mingled with realistic figures created an exotic background evoking nightmarish scenes, which exist neither in “Paradise” nor in “hell”.

Freud said that man who is unhappy with reality tends to go on the path of “Regression” – hoping to reverse back to the childhood dreams in order to escape the reality and such a man becomes a neurotic individual… If he possesses artistic flair, he can transform this negative force into an ability of a genius to create great art works… 


Many people in the “Dark Ages” unhappy with the way of life resorted to heresy or hermitage or in silent self-reflection to seek answers in religious meditation.  Driven by fear or guilt, or feeling of insecurity, those who would be misfits in normal social life went on pilgrimage or retreated to deep forest in remote mountains.  Those who took refuge in austere monasteries on the top of Montserrat (Franco-Spanish border), away from the rest of the world, found solace in a life of poverty, and self-punishment.  But did they find “Redemption”?

Related post:

Wednesday, 16 May 2012

Obscure films, experimental method...



Our friends Jaana and Nicola are the initiators of this new monthly event taking place in a West End Pub.  Jaana and Nicola take turns in choosing the film, so there is a personal recommendation, and a back ground story before the lights get dimmed. Discussion afterwards.

After two successful sessions, the next film will be: Capturing the Friedmans, "an instructive lesson about the elusiveness of facts," as one film critic put it.

All is well in a middle class family till the police knocks on the door, and father and son both are accused of a crime which they either committed, or didn't.  Difficult to tell.   The director had access to home videos shot by one of the sons. They display the family tensions during the trial, and seem to offer proof for both the guilty and the innocent.

Capturing the Friedmans was nominated for an Oscar in documentary category, and won a Grand Jury prize at Sundance.

To see a trailer http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0342172/

By invitation only.

Wednesday, 22 September 2010

Shyness and introversion

Good news for those who suffer from "shyness":
'hormone of love' cure for shyness

Palpitation, raised blood pressure, hot blushing face, sweaty skin, clammy hands, fidgety feet, uncontrollable tremors. We have all experienced such fears. But this is a particular brand of fear, namely the fear of being seen, fear of making a fool of oneself, fear of being ridiculed. It’s like a fever, a disease. One feels ill and helpless when such fear strikes.

But it is such a strange topic for Café-philo: Shyness. Does an awkward personal trait merit a serious philosophical debate?  To my surprise, our fellow café philosophers have proved fairly flexible about the range of topics that might be admitted into our discussion, as one can argue that “philosophy” is also about questioning anything under the sun. So be it, we can talk about “shyness” just as we can babble on about the foul British weather, no doubt which is largely responsible for the making of the British characters: moodiness, shyness, introversion, stiff-upper-lip, and so on. 
Shy Politicians


Normally we would attribute a person’s shyness to a deep inferiority complex about one’s appearance, hence such a word as self-consciousness. Some café philosophers, however, tried to use Reverse Psychology to analyse the situation. They think that “shyness” could be interpreted as a manifestation of Superiority Complex – it describes certain persons who rate themselves higher than others and their inhibition and reticence can therefore be seen as a way of showing their contempt for others. I am not sure if I would agree with this theory. To my mind, it is one thing to be shy and bashful and it is another to be inhibited and reticent. Some former “Spin Doctors” in the previous government had a reputation of being secretive and not forthcoming. Can we say that the “Prince of Darkness” of the previous Cabinet suffered from “shyness”? Or, shall we assume that they felt “self-conscious” of their secrecy so that they had to borrow some fig-leaves to cover up their shame, like our biblical ancestors did?

In Asiatic feudal society, women were required to behave in accordance with certain social protocols, in which shyness was regarded as a virtue, and modesty and humility the quality of a well-educated woman. Even in old Europe, this kind of social protocol was not uncommon. Before French Revolution, people from lower social strata had to show diffidence in front of nobles. Assertiveness in the old days was considered bad manners, equivalent to the behaviour of drunkenness.

As Jean-Christophe pointed out, those who like to speak out in the public are usually those who try to impress, to show off their eloquence. Of course, there is nothing wrong with show-offs. Neither is there anything wrong with introverts. Some like to be in the limelight, some like to be on the sidelines. Some are loud; some are quiet. Some like crowds, some like solitude. Chacun a son goût. This is the beauty of living in a multi-cultural society, if we allow diversity of cultures to co-exist, why can’t we allow diversity of personalities to co-exist?

Why then in this day and age are there so much negative connotations attached to the words vaguely connected with “shyness”, such as introversion, inhibition? I think there is a lot of misunderstanding about the trait of introversion in general perception. If you are interested in popular psychology, there is an article worth reading:
Introverts should be left by themselves