An End to the Myth of the Tortured Soul??

Overall a well written and intelligent article. However there are several errors. "His best paintings were produced in the last 15 months of his life which he spent in Arles where he went to live in 1888...and at nearby St. Remy where he spent a year at a mental institution." He spent 15 months in Arles (2/88 to 5/89) where he did indeed produce most of his best paintings, but the last 15 months of his life was spent at St.Remy (12 months) and Auvers sur Oise, (2 1/2 months.) Vincent did some excellent work at St. Remy and nothing exceptional at Auvers, so he did not produce his best work in his final 15 months. "Italian art didn't get a look-in." Not true. He referred several times to Raphael and several others whom he didn't care for, primarily because he found their work rather cold and because they were totally unable to depict workers who really worked. However, he absolutely adored Michaelangelo, because his figures depicted, not reality, but hyper reality.

Regarding Theo's support of Vincent, I agree that Vincent would never have been able to achieve what he did without his support. However, Vincent and Theo came to an agreement in 1882 whereby Theo would send Vincent money and in return he would get to keep all of Vincent's work and and do with it what he pleased. Certainly this was not a handout but reasonable recompense. Finally, the title of this article is totally misleading since there is nothing in it that indicates that Van Gogh was not a tortured soul.

Getting Away with Torture

David Cole does a superb job documenting the horror the United States government perpetrated upon an entirely innocent civilian in the name of the "war of terror."

Robert Barnete Studio

If you are not already familiar with his artistry, then I am very proud and honored to introduce you to my late brother's work.











Robert Barnete was most of all a painter of passionate motion, which found its greatest expression in the equestrian arts and within the culture of Spain.
During his mid-career he fell under the enchantment of the Bedouin and the Blue People.



Although born in New York, his work took him from Mexico to Paris to Madrid to Tangiers and finally to London.

Van Gogh in Taiwan

I'm very pleased to note that my last film, The Eyes of Van Gogh, has been picked up for distribution in Taiwan by International Productions Association Asia. The film will also be seen at the Taipei exhibition "Van Gogh: the Flaming Soul" for its three-month run. This exhibition will display an overall of 98 pieces of artworks by Van Gogh, including 77 sketches and 21 oil paintings. Most of the exhibits are from the Kroller Muller Museum of Netherlands, famed for its collections of Van Gogh's paintings. In particular, "Flower Vase with Thistles," Van Gogh's later period creation, is borrowed from Pola Museum of Art in Japan this time.

An artist making art

As the author of both the stage play "Stranger on the Earth" as well as the writer/director of the film "The Eyes of Van Gogh" I made extensive use of these extraordinary documents. Vincent's letters are profound, brilliant and fascinating, offering keen insights into the world in which he lived as well as laying bare his soul. Although this new volume is beautiful, the original English translation issued many years ago serves the purpose just as well at a lesser cost, so there is no excuse not to explore them. Almost as remarkable is the story of how they came to be saved, translated and published through the efforts of his sister-in-law, a woman for the ages. For more information please visit www.theeyesofvangogh.com.

Polanski's Supporters

I am both independent and progressive in my thinking and I applaud your article in the Weekly standard on that sleaze bag, Roman Polanski. He and his fellow sleaze bags in Hollywood are one big reason why I've never wanted to be part of the culture [I use the word loosely] that these people represent. The garbage that these people produce is only matched by the quality of those who produce it. The tactic of making the victim the guilty party, [13 no less] is typical and beneath contempt. I keep thinking if the victim had been the daughter of one of Polanski's supporters they would feel quite differently, but frankly I have my doubts. Since the enslavement and brutalization of women is one of the greatest problems in the world today, the overt support in the celebrity community for this miserable creep, Polanski, is despicable and inexcusable. Thank you for a most excellent article. Cross Posted to The Weekly Standard

From Mad Painter to Mad King

I'm grateful to Joe Montague of Riveting Riffs for the interview.

Letters of Vincent van Gogh

In this article, the author Waldemar Januszczak is certainly correct when he refers to van Gogh's letters as "the greatest cache of writing about art left behind by any artist".
For more information go here.

Gauguin and van Gogh in Arles

Director’s Notes

In my film The Eyes of van Gogh, Paul Gauguin’s arrival at the Yellow House in Arles is the happiest day in Vincent van Gogh’s life. He will now be able to work with the man who, among living artists, he regards with the highest respect and esteem. He’ll have a friend and companion in art. From this will come his greatest dream: the realization of the School of the South. From this day forth, he believes, everything he’s dreamt of is possible.

To prepare for Gauguin’s arrival, Vincent has been working day and night with little sleep or food. He’s determined to show Gauguin as much good work as possible. All of Vincent’s hyperactivity and nervousness are focused completely on Gauguin. He and what he represents to Vincent are the emotional center of the scene. In his overwhelming excitement and eagerness he cuts off thoughts in mid-sentence and then jumps to a different thought entirely.

Aural Hallucinations in the film The Eyes of Van Gogh

In my film The Eyes of Van Gogh, the audience first becomes aware that Vincent van Gogh is hearing voices when Dr. Peyron, played by Roy Thinnes escorts him to his room in the insane asylum at St. Remy.

Vincent absorbs the atmosphere of the room like a sponge. He finds it desolate. He can feel it, taste it - almost hear it. When he hears the voices of his mother and father he reacts very much as he did at the time as a child. He is, in turn, startled, confused, and ultimately trembling in fear and anticipation.

Those voices began to torment van Gogh the night he threatened Paul Gauguin with a razor and continued after Gauguin left Arles. They are insidious and ugly yet, perversely, irresistible.

Throughout the film, he has no control over them. When they occur he feels transported to another world. Voices and sounds in the present are barely heard. He reacts to them, not retrospectively, but rather in relation to what they meant when they took place. He lives in the moment they occurred and takes the audience with him.

Character Analysis: Death of a Salesman

Director's Notes Part Three

It is a sad and frightening truth that Linda, Willy's wife, who is so totally devoted and loyal to him, who is his pillar of strength, who will let no one speak ill of him (no matter how justified it may be), who does everything possible to make his life peaceful and happy, who knows so well how to handle him, who can anticipate almost his every mood and who prides herself on understanding him so well, in actuality knows Willy very little.

She encourages him to stay at a job he is obviously unfit for; she is unaware of his self-esteem crisis and his pie-in-the-sky delusions; she discourages him from starting other pursuits (this because of her ultra-conservative nature); and is completely bewildered by his suicide, despite the clues that are dropped everywhere.

Her fundamental decency, integrity, loyalty and love are remarkable and unquestionable, but it must be realized that she unwittingly feeds Willy’s problem. The love and devotion she gives him, however, are truly a wonder. Tragically, Willy never understands the depth of her commitment.

Fundamentally, Biff is decent, gentle and sensitive. He is extremely stubborn, with a strong independent streak. Right to the very end it is love, not hatred, that drives the relationship between Biff and Willy. Biff hates Willy for betraying his mother, but still loves him deeply for the love and affection Willy lavished on him. He is furious with himself for being unable to remove what he considers this yoke of love, and this exacerbates his antagonism toward Willy.

It is said that Biff’s life is ruined after discovering that Willy is a philanderer. Certainly, it is a tremendous setback, but there are other factors at work here. His innate nature plus his prior experiences and conditioning are of major importance. It is not the discovery of the event itself that causes Biff to give up and leaves him unable to cope with the experience.

Memory and Flashback Scenes in Death of a Salesman

Part Two of Director's Notes

In all of the memory scenes Willy, unlike the other characters, never actually leaves the present, but re-experiences the past. In effect, he revisits the pivotal moments in his life and tries to make sense of them. Subconsciously, however, he already knows what has and what will happen.

Example: In Act ll when he is in the hotel room with the woman and hears the knocking, he knows that if he opens the door it will be disastrous, but is so lost in the memory he cannot comprehend why. The memory scenes are subjective and emotional; a pure visualization of Willy’s feelings and thoughts. Thus, they are fragmented, elliptical and epitomized. He will sometimes remember four or five separate events within one sequence.

The set must be light, minimal and portable. There should be as much free and open space as possible. The confines of the home should be created primarily by the lights, not by actual, permanent walls. We should be able to expand and retract easily and naturally. When his brother Ben enters, for example, we must go from the confines of the kitchen to the open space of Alaska, Africa and the prairies.

Rarely will there be a blackout. Lights will frequently overlap or cross-fade. The action must never stop. Willy’s mind is on a collision course and the lights must reflect this. The set and lights must serve Willy’s mind, which is constantly changing, striving, searching.

There can come a point in a man’s life when it is too late. After this point is reached the truth, and not delusion, becomes the killer. Contrary to most opinion, Willy does achieve self-awareness, and this very awareness is something he is unable to come to terms with. He cannot live with the reality and so hangs on to the delusion and dies with it.

Death of a Salesman is a tragedy of the first order. Consider: a theme of epic importance; the strength, immensity and uncompromising nature of Willy’s struggle; his fatal flaw; his intensity, passion, love, devotion and total single-mindedness; his ultimate destruction; Biff’s ultimate self-awareness. And finally, the fact that true tragedy must have the potential for creating self-awareness in the audience. From this will follow a purging of the soul. Death of a Salesman most definitely creates this self-awareness.

Death of a Salesman: Director’s Notes

Thematic Content and Structure

This is not the story of a salesman: It is the story of Willy Loman who just happened to be a salesman. This is not the story of Everyman. Willy’s passion, love and drive go way beyond the norm. Perhaps most people will relate to Willy, be moved by him and, most importantly, think, contemplate and learn from his life and his mistakes.

Willy, like Eddie Carbone in Arthur Miller’s A View from the Bridge, demands to be “totally known”. Like Eddie, he could never settle for half. He must attempt everything even if it means ending up with nothing. He will risk his very life to achieve his “due”, what he considers his rightful status. As Arthur Miller says, “The commonest of men may take on that [tragic stature] to the extent of his willingness to throw all he has into the contest, the battle to secure his rightful place in the world”. Of course, this willingness automatically removes him from being the commonest of men.

Self-esteem based upon the approval of others is evanescent and leads to self-delusion and self-destruction. This, to me, is the primary theme of Death of a Salesman. All of Willy’s other problems--his lack of self-knowledge, his refusal to follow his natural instincts, his constant self-doubt, confusion and lack of confidence (no sooner does he make a decision then he needs to be reassured that it’s the right one), his stubborn, pigheaded determination to do things his own way, positive that he’s right and yet in the next moment afraid that he’s wrong, begging for another opinion, the very bad influence he is on his sons--all of this stems from the primary theme.

Having achieved his self-esteem through the approval of others, Willy has watched these ‘approvers’ go to their graves and take his self-esteem with them. As the play progresses, it becomes more and more difficult for Willy to lie and delude himself. One after another, all the myths he has created in the past are exposed before his eyes. There is no self-pity, only frustration, bewilderment and epic struggle. The more he struggles the faster his decline. Subconsciously, Willy knows where he went wrong, but consciously is unable to come to terms with it. The constant and horrendous turmoil Willy endures is based upon his subconscious awareness and conscious refutation.

Both Biff and Happy, his sons, are confused, but Biff is desperately searching for answers; Happy is under the delusion that he is searching, but in many ways has found his niche. Like most womanizers, he’s mindless and self-gratifying. In no way is Hap a young Willy as has sometimes been stated. He lacks the love, passion and depth. Hap is puerile where Biff is undisciplined. Biff, being deeper and more sensitive than Happy, suffers more from Willy’s influence.

Art historians claim Van Gogh's ear 'cut off by Gauguin'

As one who has also spent many years researching the life of Vincent van Gogh, first as the author and director of the play Stranger on the Earth and later as the writer and director of the film The Eyes of Van Gogh, I empathize with the effort spent in producing the book, Van Gogh’s Ear: Paul Gauguin and the Pact of Silence, by Hans Kaufmann and Rita Wildegans.

I understand and appreciate their fascination with this extraordinary individual.

Nonetheless, it must be said that the entire basis of their book rests on a regrettable but enormous misunderstanding of what it was van Gogh wrote to his brother Theo and to Paul Gauguin. That, plus a very selective editing of the same letters and an apparent lack of awareness of certain key facts about Gauguin, led them to a very flawed premise. They then proceeded to shore up their thesis with assertions easily rebutted and with one ludicrous and fabricated incident.

Frankly, I am astonished and appalled by the unthinking reception and attention this book has received from the press.

The authors have concluded that Gauguin, not Vincent himself, is responsible for the mutilation of van Gogh’s ear. They state “We carefully re-examined witness accounts and letters written by both artists and we came to the conclusion that van Gogh was terribly upset over Gauguin’s plan to go back to Paris.” This in itself is no revelation. Anyone who has studied the letters van Gogh wrote to his brother Theo after he mutilated himself, as well as the references to the incident in Gauguin’s memoirs, would know this.

Again quoting the authors: “In the first letter that Vincent van Gogh wrote after the incident, he told Gauguin, ‘I will keep quiet about this and so will you.’ That apparently was the beginning of the ‘pact of silence.’”

The first letter that Vincent wrote after the maiming was to Theo on January 1, 1889, eight days after the event. On the lack of the letter he wrote a note to Gauguin questioned the necessity of having Theo come to Arles. “Look here – was my brother Theo’s journey really necessary, old man?” It pained Vincent terribly to live off of Theo; the last thing he wanted was to burden him with this.

Vincent never wrote “I will keep silent about this and so will you.” There is absolutely no reference to this so called “pact of silent” anywhere in the letter. The only reference to silence, per se, is in a letter to Theo written January 17, 1889 where he mentions that after the incident he had continually asked for Gauguin but he refused to come. He wrote, “How can Gauguin pretend that he was afraid of upsetting me by his present, when he can hardly deny that he knew I kept asking for him continually, and that he was told over and over again that I insisted on seeing him at once. Just to tell him that we should keep it between him and me, without upsetting you. He would not listen.” Meaning that Gauguin did tell Theo what had happened. There was no cover-up. No pact of silence. How could there have been since Vincent makes it clear in this letter that Gauguin refused to see him after the mutilation. Any silence Vincent wanted was in regard to Theo’s learning what he had done to himself – completely in keeping with his character, actions and statements throughout his life, up to and including his suicide, when he pleaded with Dr. Gachet not to let Theo know he shot himself.

Another point: The telegram Gauguin sent to Theo telling him what happened was sent the following morning – after the injury – when Gauguin, seeing a crowd at the Yellow House, discovered what Vincent had done. Obviously, if he had injured Vincent, he wouldn’t have retired to a hotel and let his friend bleed to death, but would have notified Theo immediately.

Kaufmann also cites correspondence between van Gogh and his brother in which the painter hints at what happened that night without directly breaking the “pact of silence’ writing that, “…it is lucky that Gauguin does not have a machine gun or other firearms.” This is very selective editing. What Vincent actually wrote in that letter of January 17, 1889 is, “Fortunately, Gauguin and I and other painters are not yet armed with machine guns and other very destructive elements of war.” He was expressing his disdain for violence disguised as sport.

Finally, again quoting the authors: ‘On the evening of December 23, 1888 van Gogh, seized by an attack of a metabolic disease, became very aggressive when Gauguin said he was leaving him for good. The men had a heated argument near the brothel and Vincent might have attacked his friend. Gauguin, wanting to defend himself and wanting to get rid of ‘the madman’ drew his weapon and made a move towards van Gogh and by that he cut off his left ear.”

Several points: 1. It was not Vincent’s entire ear that was cut off, but rather the lower third of the ear. 2. If in the course of a heated argument Vincent attacked him, Gauguin would have had no need for a sword since he was an expert boxer and would have made short work of a totally inept fighter like Vincent. (While in Brittany in 1893, Gauguin was attacked by a large group of sailors. He more than held his own until he tripped and severely injured his leg.) 3. Gauguin was also an expert swordsman. The swords he fenced with were, of course, foils. For those who don’t know, a foil is a thrusting, not a cutting, weapon and does not have a cutting edge. The idea of Gauguin striking downward with a foil and cutting off a third of Vincent’s lower ear is ludicrous; in fact, damn near impossible. If Gauguin did have a cutting sword (which, of course, he didn’t) and was able to cut of Vincent’s lower ear, rest assured he would have cut off part of his face and shoulder with it.

How sad this whole thing is. As I have written before, there are more myths and misinformation about Vincent van Gogh than any artist who ever lived. What should capture the attention of the world are the facts: The most significant and revelatory things about van Gogh are not that he cut off his earlobe or that he suffered attacks of madness or that he committed suicide, but rather that he lived life to the fullest, realized his artistic potential as much as humanly possible, fought magnificently against the attacks and all forms of adversity - never willingly giving in to them. Most important, he created a superb body of work that will live as long as the human race survives. The theme of his life is his quest to achieve immortality through his work.

Vincent van Gogh Myths: Myth #4

The myth: Vincent was forced into the asylum by the citizens of Arles and his brother.

The truth: Vincent van Gogh admitted himself to the insane asylum at St. Remy voluntarily because he wanted to be isolated from the outside world; because he considered himself a potential danger to others; and because he wanted to be in a protective environment.

His brother Theo was strongly against his going the St. Remy and wanted Vincent to come to Paris where Theo and Johanna, his wife, could look after him.

The Where did Vincent van Gogh shoot himself myth

Vincent van Gogh Myths: Myth #3

The myth: Vincent shot himself in the chest.

The truth: No. The reason Vincent van Gogh died slowly and lingered for two days was because he shot himself in the upper abdomen rather than the chest, which had been his intention. The wound he suffered was not necessarily fatal but he no longer had the will to live.

The Only One Painting Vincent van Gogh Myth

Vincent van Gogh Myths: Myth #2

The myth: Vincent van Gogh sold only one painting.

The truth: It made little difference in his life but van Gogh, in fact, sold two paintings ( and may have sold one or two others as well). On October 3, 1888 his brother, Theo, wrote to the London art dealers, Sulley & Lori. In this letter he said: "We have the honour to inform you that we have sent you the two pictures you have bought and duly paid for; a landscape by Camille Corot,...a self portrait by V. van Gogh." Another picture, therefore, was sold in England nearly fifteen months before Anna Boch bought The Red Vines.

Vincent van Gogh and Dr. Peyron Myth 1

Vincent van Gogh Myths: Myth #1

The myth: The institution of St. Remy and the man in charge, Dr. Peyron, strongly encouraged Vincent van Gogh to paint and cared for him using advanced modalities in the treatment of psychiatric illness.

The truth: The institution of St. Remy never encouraged Vincent to work; on the contrary, Dr. Peyron opposed the idea from the very beginning and with the greatest reluctance allowed him to paint. I am very glad to hear that they now offer workshops in art therapy, etc. but this was definitely not the case when Vincent was there. The sole treatment was hydrotherapy-hot baths, twice a week. The idea of any kind of work was anathema. There were no books in the asylum, no distractions except bowls and draughts. Vincent found it loathsome that they were given nothing to do. As he said, they were like vegetables, sitting around all day eating, digesting and waiting for their next meal.

If the authorities today claim otherwise they're lying. Vincent's letters prove it. Vincent suffered four attacks at St. Remy. After the final one Dr. Peyron forbid him to paint in spite of his pleading. It was then that he left St.Remy.

David Sweetman's The Love of Many Things - A Life of Vincent Van Gogh corroborates the official version. And what, pray tell, was Sweetman’s source? Probably the institution’s own account. Who do we believe, Vincent and Theo or Sweetman and the institution?

Vincent wrote to Theo at this time: “M. Salles has been to St. Remy – they are not willing to let me point outside the institution.” April1889. Theo, over the strong objections of the administrators, persuaded them to allow Vincent to paint and arranged that he should have two rooms, one to be used as a bedroom and the other as a studio. Both, mere dingy cells with bars like all the other cells. Sweetman's description makes it sound like a resort.Reiterating my earlier point, prior to Vincent, no patient at St. Remy was ever allowed to do any work of any kind. Their whole philosophy was to keep all the patients as quiet and inactive as possible. Vincent again, “Above all I must not waste my time, I am going to set to work again as soon as M. Peyron permits it; if he does not permit it, then I shall be through with this place. … The rather superstitious ideas they have here about painting sometimes depress me more than I can tell you.” January 1890. For them to claim that they pioneered the treatment of psychiatric illness (at least when Vincent was there) is belied directly by Vincent’s own account. Again: “The treatment of patients in the hospital is certainly easy for they do absolutely nothing; they leave them to vegetate in idleness and feed them with stale and slightly spoiled food.” Sept. 1889. “The food is so-so. Naturally it tastes rather moldy, like in a cockroach infested restaurant in Paris.” May 1889. As to the people, Peyron included, who ran the institution, “Perhaps they would like nothing better than for the thing to become chronic, and we should be culpably stupid to give into that. They inquire a great deal too much to my liking about what not only I but also what you earn, and so on.” August 1889.

Vincent’s stay at St. Remy was indeed a nightmare. For them now to try to rewrite history is very typical and very wrong. I made my film The Eyes of Van Gogh to set the record straight, to show what really happened there and also to reveal the truth behind his relationships to his brother, his father and Gauguin. All from his point of view.

DARFUR: THE PEOPLE THE WORLD HAS FORGOTTEN

The tragedy in Darfur has been going on for four years and all we've had from the world at large is fancy talk and much posturing. I ask these rabid non intervationists, what would you do if your wife was raped or your children were murdered or they were in danger of this happening? I'm not talking about invading Karthoum or supporting the rebels. I'm talking about protecting totally innocent people who have no way of protecting themselves, by creating a no-fly zone so that Bashir's butchers can't get near them. And please, don't tell me that we have more immediate problems to worry about. The economic problems that we and other countries currently face is child's play compared to what these people are going through. What they wouldn't give to exchange their problems for ours. Check the above link for a typically excellent article on Darfur by one of my biggest heroes, Nat Hentoff.

Bashir: Murderer

In my view, for the immiserated people of Darfur, this is far too little and far too late.