Artists are defining new ways to cope and reorganize emotional traumas while strengthening the relationship between health and creative expressions. Can we assume that when it comes to art forms and artists, specific psychological and physical stresses can navigate through artists’ creative process which will work as an antidote for these states and as a gift to viewers? But if artists don’t have to commit to portraying realistic images or responses, can we say that, in this case, the creative process is a very sensible response?
“I cannot get rid of my illnesses, for there is a lot in my art that exists only because of them,” said Edvard Munch, famous for the painting, “The Scream.”
There has been significant interest in research on the power and capabilities of the arts as a healing method. Famous visual artists, including Frida Kahlo, Yayoi Kusama and Andy Warhol, have been known to use their talents to express anger, frustrations and hopes, and most of all, as an instrument to cope with their unique conditions. Some philosophers, artists and intellectuals that produced significant, influential works revolutionizing social, cultural and political structures were diagnosed with certain distresses. Again, is that another case of sensible responses generated from traumatic stresses?
Using art as a coping instrument to express emotions is not a novelty. Understanding the intersection of art, the creative process and the healing properties promoted by looking at or making art is gaining momentum. The topic is undoubtedly still mysterious, even among neuroscientists, and it has most recently been breaking new grounds in neuroaesthetics research. This relatively new scientific field can help us to understand the impact of arts on our brain through creation or contemplation. Why do we find specific artistic works so much more captivating than others? We might be able to find out soon!