This happened within a few months before the death of the French writer and actor Antonin Artaud, and his body was found kneeling under his bed in the health home in which he was staying during the last stage of his life. During this period Artaud wrote and published in 1947 that text which he consciously titled “Van Gogh Suicide of Society” which will be one of his last great texts, and some will say: one of his last autobiographical texts even if the text is supposed to be a kind of biography of the painter The late Dutchman Vincent Van Gogh committed suicide half a century earlier, in the south of France.
The reason for this is certainly clear: Artaud always looked upon this Post-Impressionist painter as his consort. A consort is almost the same as his reincarnation in terms of the uniqueness of his creativity, his mental destiny, and his intertwining with a society that he failed to understand. Hence, when the opportunity arose during the second half of the 1940s for the owner of “Theater and Its Alternative” to write a text about Van Gogh on the occasion of an exhibition of the latter’s works in the Parisian “Lorangerie” Museum, he rushed to write it as if he realized that he would write a text he had always dreamed of writing, mixing in it Between his life and that of the painter, between the painter’s contradiction with his society and the fate he expected to have in common between them, with a difference of decades. In fact, Artaud was not far from correct in his estimates, even in some aspects of the similarities between him and the great artist.
In general, Artaud biographers and analysts of his works view this text as a literary testament, especially since Artaud initially specified that his text is “a text about a poor ignorant person who knows very well that he cannot do anything wrong.” Those close to Artaud know that he was himself describing himself in accordance with those very phrases. Hence they immediately concluded that Artaud is writing about Van Gogh as his consort, or in more psychological terms: as his ego/other. The case is that our resort to this expression is not a coincidence here. Rather, it is intended, and it tries to explain the synergistic relationship that the writer established with the painter in writing about him. Throughout the pages of this text, which is somewhat difficult to read anyway, Artaud did not stop “denouncing” psychology, which declared that he had invented madness from A to Z in order to “merely conceal his own delusion.” . In any case, Artaud did not fail to describe his writing as “the stern austerity of a Van Gogh painting”, “as sever as his severed ear” and “as burnt by his burning plot”; He also did not fail to declare, in an able and conscious language that contradicts what was considered the highest degree of his madness during that last stage of his life, that it is better for a person to “choose his own madness, simply to conform to his sense of honor and integrity, and to twist the neck of all those institutions which She tries her best to restrain him.”
It is clear here that Artaud, insofar as he justifies Van Gogh for everything he did, he certainly speaks for himself in the same context. But where is Van Gogh’s art in all of this? Do not miss at all. The French writer knows from the beginning that he has to talk about the painter’s art even more than he talks about his life, but rather to talk about the two in an extremely mixed context. Hence we see him as someone who writes from within the painter’s paintings, not as a diligent spectator on it, nor as a scholarly analyst, not even as a connoisseur who enjoys the dimensions that it bears of great fascination and fascination; All this was for Artaud as for the lovers of the painter’s art, who are many, and “if there are fools among them much more than the clever ones”, as he liked to say, it is a conclusion. Ultimately Artaud writes of Van Gogh as a painter, too, and this aspect adds, of course, to that identification which we have so abundantly referred to so far. As far as Artaud was a theatrical, as a writer and actor, and as much as he was a poet and art theorist, he was also a painter and a distinguished painter, even if he followed in painting a path that diverges entirely from that of Van Gogh at first sight. Here, it is clear that his “entry” to which we are referring to the depth of Van Gogh’s paintings seems to be entering his own artistic world, an entry that entails their being together, in Artaud’s opinion at least. A kind of psychological condition. In this context, it may be remarkable that “Dr. L.” The one who sees us as a character in the case of Van Gogh is actually Dr. Jacques Lacan himself, one of the great magnates of French Freudian, who was not born after the days of Van Gogh, but on the other hand was a doctor in the psychiatric shelter where Artaud was living when he wrote “Van Gogh committed suicide.” the society”. Certainly, we do not have to discuss Lacan’s subsequent affair in Artaud’s text, as he knew nothing of him other than that he was a doctor on duty… which frightens him.
This section contains related articles, placed in the Related Nodes field.
Magic Assassination Fee
Let us return here to Artaud the painter, as we know that he has been practicing drawing since his early youth and that he has filled his school notebooks with drawings that will interest his historians later, but also the interest of his psychiatrists, as the historian of psychoanalysis in France says Elizabeth Rodensco in some of her press interviews, stressing that it is necessary to read texts Antonin Artaud, including the story of his life, his theoretical choices in the field of theater, and his excessive interest in Alfred Jarry to the point of forming a theater group, which he gave the name “Alfred Jarry Theatre” in light of his drawings, which we know that publishers and researchers devoted volumes to, most notably the book “50 Drawings for the Assassination of Witchcraft” which was published In 2004, for the first time, it included a large group of drawings and reproductions, and even drawn texts, which have since become part of his creative world, but also part of his life. Certainly, this aspect of Artaud’s creativity explains many aspects of his relationship – the relationship of identification rather – between him and his predecessor, the painter Van Gogh, and perhaps more than it explains, on the other hand, an essential aspect of his relationship with Alfred Jarry; But without forgetting that this filial relationship, the relationship of the son with the father, with my neighbor who is considered one of the first innovators of the Surrealist theater decades before the birth of Surrealism, can explain Artaud’s haste to belong to the surrealist trend once André Breton announced his founding in the mid-twenties, and that the relationship between The identification between him and Van Gogh would, on the one hand, explain the expulsion of the Surrealists after a few years who would not have liked Van Gogh’s art for reasons that have never been clear.
I am a community suicide
It remains that we have to conclude these hypotheses, which must be raised by the writing of Antonin Artaud (1896-1948) in our Only Artaud himself, as if we are here with Gustave Flaubert, exclaims: “At last, I am Madame Bovary!” Let us also publish that Artaud is hiding here behind a mask he made for Van Gogh to speak of himself as a victim of this society as a creator who was slain by society, through the painter with the severed ear, his brother, his consort and even his ego / the other in the end.