{"id":5685,"date":"2023-02-20T21:29:14","date_gmt":"2023-02-21T03:29:14","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/postgenre.org\/staging\/4567\/?p=5685"},"modified":"2023-02-20T21:31:43","modified_gmt":"2023-02-21T03:31:43","slug":"conversation-anonymous-artist","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/postgenre.org\/staging\/4567\/conversation-anonymous-artist\/","title":{"rendered":"Interview: A Conversation with an Anonymous Artist"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

If you are reading this, there is a substantial likelihood you arrived here under false pretenses. Apologies for the deception. This space was initially intended – as a means for this site to celebrate its third anniversary – to host a two-part interview with a significant artist. Since the beginning of our correspondences, this artist – who shall remain anonymous – sent erratic responses. After our interview, the artist requested a copy of the transcript. Out of respect, a copy was provided to permit this individual the opportunity to ensure they were accurately quoted. In response to their review of the transcript – an unedited, undoctored write-up of our conversation, the artist hurled several hurtful insults with no constructive commentary. Requests for clarification on which portions they found objectionable and reiteration that it directly reflected our conversation met with only further epithets and baseless accusations. Several friends and supporters of this site who were aware of the situation called the artist \u201ccrazy\u201d or \u201cinsane\u201d for their response. While the underlying sentiment is appreciated, the use of terminology is troubling. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Let this author – untrained in psychiatry – preface that he does not know, nor pretends to know, the artist in question\u2019s mental state. Their eccentric and unusual behavior may be manifestations of an underlying mental illness. But there are also several other equally likely explanations. Perhaps they were in a bad mood the day of the interview and thought the whole transcript did not reflect their views. Maybe they subjectively hoped for some adulatory \u201cpuff\u201d piece instead of a generally supportive interview but one adhering to journalistic principles. Or, possibly, they are just a jerk who enjoys wasting people\u2019s time. Regardless of the reasons, using terms like \u201ccrazy\u201d stigmatizes those suffering from mental illnesses and further perpetuates the prevailing culture, which disincentivizes those who could benefit by obtaining help from seeking it. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

While mental health issues are not relegated to a specific field or community, they are of particular concern to the improvised music community. A pre-pandemic survey determined that seventy-three percent of independent musicians have experienced “stress, anxiety and\/or depression” related to their music creation. Given the general lack of societal and financial support for improvised music compared to other forms, it is not unreasonable to believe creative musicians may have an even higher rate of mental illness. Anyone claiming that only a small number of today\u2019s musicians are somehow no longer struggling is either naive or willfully ignorant.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n

And those musicians with mental health issues are in good company. Psychiatrist Sean A. Spence, MD, of the University of Sheffield has suggested that Buddy Bolden – often held as the founder of \u201cjazz\u201d – was schizophrenic. Other greats with well-documented severe mental health issues include Bud Powell, Thelonious Monk, Jaco Pastorious, and Albert Ayler. Some have even suggested that higher levels of creativity correlate with increased incidence of mental illness. <\/p>\n\n\n

<\/div><\/div>
<\/div>
<\/div>
<\/div><\/div><\/div>