Outsider Art, also known as Art Brut, or Visionary Art, is defined in varying ways depending on the source and the time period. Michel Thevoz, the current curator of the Collection de l’Art Brut in Lausanne, Switzerland, writes, “Art Brut, or ‘Outsider Art,’ consist of works produced by people who for various reasons have not been culturally indoctrinated or socially conditioned. They are all kind of dwellers on the fringes of society. Working outside the fine art “system” (schools, galleries, museums and so on), these people have produced, from the depths of their own personalities and for themselves and no one else, works of outstanding originality in concept, subject and techniques.” Outsider art brings up questions of what the definition of art is and where in the brain artists’ motivations stem from.
Outsider art was first introduced to the general public in the 1920’s, by Hans Prinzhorn, a doctor at the University Psychiatric Clinic in Heidelberg, Germany and by Walter Morgenthaler, a doctor at a psychiatric institution in Waldau, Switzerland. These two doctors became interested in works of art some of their patients made while in the institutions. Prinzhorn published The Artistry of the Mentally Ill, in which he analyzed over five thousand works by asylum patients. Prinzhorn believed these artists had a special ability to express in their work, “the depths of their interior life, their visions, their ideas, and the phantasmagoria of their secret intuitions.”(Prinzhorn, “A propos de l’art des alienes”, 1929) Dr. Morgenthaler published a book on the art of one of his patients, Madness and Art: The Life and Works of Adolf Wolfli. Morgenthaler analyzed Wolfli’s highly patterned, brightly colored pencil drawings in a formal aesthetic way, so that his book was a study of an artist and not a psychiatric study. These two books published in the early part of the 20th century influenced many other artists of the time, including Paul Klee, Max Ernst, members of the Surrealist and Dada movements, and most importantly, Jean Dubuffet. Dubuffet was an artist who believed that, “Conventional art that is pompously displayed in exhibition halls and galleries and that manages to get itself seen by the largest number of people as if it alone were worthy of the name of art, to the exclusion of any other kind, appears to us to have a very meagre content, reduced to sempiternal reworkings and imitations, in which individual creativity is almost entirely lacking.” (Dubuffet, “Notice sur la Compagnie de l’Art Brut”, 1948) With this very negative view of the art world, Dubuffet was interested in finding art that didn’t rely on what was popular in the art world at the time. Dubuffet traveled extensively, collecting works along the way from different mental institutions and other sources. The term “art brut” which means roughly “raw art”, was first used by Dubuffet in 1945, and the definition of the term given by him three years later consists of, “Artistic works such as paintings, drawings, statues, and statuettes, various objects of all sorts, owing nothing (or as little as possible) to the imitation of art that one can see in museums, salons, and galleries; but that on the contrary appeal to humanity’s first origins and the most spontaneous and personal invention; works which the artist has entirely derived (invention and manner of expression) from his own sources, from his own impulses and humors, without regard for the rules, without regard for current convention.” (Dubuffet, “Notice sur la Compagnie de l’Art Brut”, 1948) After moving the collection to various temporary galleries, Dubuffet finally found a permanent home for his art brut collection in Lausanne, Switzerland, where it still exists today. Outsider Art since then has become increasingly well known, and several other museums around the world are devoted to the work of outsider artists.
Adolf Wolfli, one of the best known outsider artists, became a patient at the Waldau Clinic in Switzerland in 1895 and stayed there until his death in 1930. While at the clinic, Wolfli was an extremely prolific artist who created very detailed drawings with many recurring themes such as building, fish and birds, and faces with dark rings around the eyes. The different elements in his drawings usually flow together and are contained by decorated borders. Wolfli also worked with collage and musical composition, and also wrote a 45 volume illustrated story of his world travels as “St. Adolf” which had 1600 drawings, 1500 collages, and more than 25,000 pages of writing. Wolfli’s art was first introduced to the world outside of the Waldau clinic with the publishing of a book on his works by his doctor, Walter Morgenthaler. Since then, Wolfli’s work has been exhibited in many museums worldwide.
Ferdinand Cheval was a postman in the French town Hauterives who lived from 1836 to 1924. In the span of 33 years, he created “Le Palais Ideal”, an architectural palace which he built out of stones found while on his postal route. The Palais is influenced by the architecture of many different cultures but is still entirely unique. It is composed of large human statues, highly decorated columns, and many turrets and staircases. Cheval’s poetry is also inscribed into the structure at times. Cheval’s Palais is still standing and is now open to the public, where it has become one of the most well known “visionary environments.”
There are many issues that arise when considering how outsider art is defined. First of all, if outsider art is defined, as Dubuffet wrote, as “…works which the artist has entirely derived (invention and manner of expression) from his own sources,” then it would be much harder today than in the past to create outsider art. This problem is addressed by Lucienne Peiry in her book, Art Brut: The Origins of Outsider Art, where she writes, “Various transformations in society-the spread of modern, instantaneous means of communication, the growth of the mass media, and the expansion of mandatory schooling…put an end to self-sufficient life.” New technology such as the internet and even new medications that allow more people to function in society make it very rare for anyone to be able to block out the culture around them. Even one-hundred years ago, it would probably be very hard to be for the most part oblivious to the society around oneself, so that even Dubuffet’s definition of the outsider artist becomes an impossible ideal. The term outsider art itself is quite problematic, because it immediately implies a dichotomy consisting of insiders and outsiders. Jean Baudrillard explains this problem of “others vs. us”, writing, “Over the last few centuries, all forms of violent otherness have, willingly or by force, been set within the discourse of difference, which implies simultaneously inclusion and exclusion. Childhood, madness, death, primitive societies, have all been integrated, assimilated, absorbed within the universal context.” (Baudrillard, “La Transparence du Mal,” 1990) In this interpretation, there is a sort of power play, in which the majority asserts its power by choosing to call that which is the other something that can be explained and controlled by the majority. Contemporary ideas of art also make outsider art a confusing term. To still have the category of outsider art seems to imply that outsider art should be thought of as separate from other forms of art, which can in these times take almost any form. There are so many gradations of social and personal influences that go into any piece of art that it seems such a distinction between outsider art and insider art is unrealistic. While outsider art as a concept is confusing and sometimes troubling, the art which has been called “outsider art” remains aesthetically interesting and emotionally resonant to many people. Perhaps it should be freed from such a loaded label as “outsider art” and allowed to simply be called art.
The link between the workings of the brain and the creation of art has been a subject of much recent study and debate. It is generally agreed that each person’s brain forms unique neurological maps, based on a combination of genetics and experiences accrued during someone’s life. These unique maps cause each person to have a unique perspective of the world, as Gerald Edelman explains in his article “The Wordless Metaphor: Visual Art and the Brain.” In this article, Edelman states, “One of the key discoveries of physiological and Gestalt psychology is that perception is a context-dependent and constructive process.” If every person translates the world around them in a different way based on their unique neurological mapping, it would seem that art could be an interesting way to express a person’s view of the world and the self, especially since the visual system is one of the most important areas for perception of the world. Edelman connects his selectional model of the brain to the possible meaning of art later on in his article, writing, “Art, in this view, connects value to excess repertoire: in a selectional brain there always must be myriad circuits that have not yet been selected. Such circuits can be selected, even as a result of chance inputs, to express value, feeling, and meaning in new combinations. Furthermore, certain of our values, even those that are inherited, can be altered or modulated by the metaphorical process involved in the artistic experience.” It seems that Edelman is saying that art allows people to use certain neurological circuits that otherwise would not have been used. This opening of new circuitry by art could be quite valuable to people as it causes them to translate their world in a new way, both the artist and the person viewing their art. Edelman explains, “First and foremost, memory as recategorization takes account of the individual nature of such experience and its expression by the artist. A similar but not identical dynamic process occurs in the viewing of a work of art-each viewing is a recategorization that depends on the beholder’s previous experience, position, and constantly roving eye.” Edelman believes that art serves to expand our knowledge of the world, both for the artist and the viewer of art, and this view of the purpose of art is similarly shared by another neurologist, Semir Zeki. In his book, Inner Vision, Zeki attempts to define the purpose of art, writing, “In approaching the problem of visual art and aesthetics neurobiologically, what we therefore need above all is a definition of the functions of art that is broad and encompasses all, or at least most, of the different functions that are attributed to art. I think that such an attempt would result in a definition of the function of art that is very similar to the function of the brain: to represent the constant, lasting, essential and enduring features of objects, surfaces, faces, situations, and so on, and thus allow us to acquire knowledge.” (Zeki 9) Zeki’s hypothesis that the brain uses the visual system to essentially acquire knowledge of the world, specifically the enduring features of things in the world, is interesting and makes sense for the most part. The constancy part of Zeki’s argument is harder to reconcile with much art though. It seems that he believes that art primarily exists as a means to represent what is in the world in the most constant, essential way, in order to most effectively gain knowledge from it. While it makes sense that it would be easier to learn about things by seeing them in terms of their most “essential” properties, the question is then how these essentials would be defined. Would they be universal essentials, or would there be many variations depending on someone’s unique neurological mapping? I don’t know if that could be answered by anyone yet, but it is an aspect of Zeki’s argument that isn’t clear to me. The purpose of art as a means of acquiring knowledge, be it essential or not, is more convincing. Art can allow the artist to clarify and share their unique translation of their world, and the viewer of art can take in the art’s information through his visual system and use that information to expand and alter his translation of his world. Outsider artists, defined as those on the fringes of society, can use art as a way to define their world and show their world to others, and the viewer of outsider art, or any other art, can gain information from his visual experience of the art.
Through the course of researching and writing on Outsider Art, I have questioned the validity of treating the works of art called by this name as separate from “Insider Art.” Whether or not Outsider Art will continue to be considered separate from other art, I’m sure that many of the works created by these artists will continue to interest people who want to learn more about the world and others’ perceptions of it.
Books and Articles used in the research of Outsider Art:
1. Zeki, Semir. Inner Vision. Oxford University Press. Oxford, 1999
2. Outsider Art: Contesting Boundaries in Contemporary Culture. Edited by
Vera L. Zolberg and Joni Maya Cherbo. Cambridge University Press,
Cambridge, 1997.
3. Peiry, Lucienne. Art Brut: The Origins of Outsider Art. Flammarion, Paris,
2001.
4. The Artist Outsider: Creativity and the Boundaries of Culture. Edited by
Michael D. Hall and Eugene W. Metcalf, Jr. Smithsonian Institution Press.
Washington and London, 1994.
5. Raw Vision Outsider Art Sourcebook. Edited by John Maizels. Raw Vision
Ltd. Radlett, 2002
Outsider Art Websites:
www.art.org - Intuit center for intuitive and outsider art
www.rawvision.com - website of a journal of outsider art
www.picklebird.com - online Los Angeles journal of alternative art
www.interestingideas.com - contains many links to Outsider Art websites
http://outsider.art.org/