Creativity & Schizophrenia

Antonio Preti

SchizophreniaProject

 

FAITH OF OUR FATHERS

The Italian psychiatrist and anthropologist Cesare Lombroso was in Nineteenth century’s most fervent defender of the idea of an intrinsic link between genius and madness. Lombroso was among the first to apply a less anedoctal method to the study of the correlates of deviant behaviour (Preti, 1997a). Using methods derived from anthropometry and the newborn science of statistics, Lombroso investigated abnormal behaviour in its different manifestations: madness, criminality, eccentricity, genius. Lombroso’s main idea concerns the shared heredity of both somatic and psychic traits common to all individuals expressing behaviour deviant from the norm. For Lombroso genius also had to be considered an abnormal condition, alongside psychosis. The Italian researcher did not merely consider the biographies of eminent people or their works, but exposed artists and writers to experimental investigations, comparing their reactions to those of mentally ill patients. Even acknowledging differences and exceptions, he arrived at the conclusion that «between the physiology of the man of genius and the pathology of the insane there are many points of coincidence» (Lombroso, 1891). This opinion acquired such a value of absolute truth that Wilhelm Lange-Eichbaum could affirm in his monumental study “Genie, Irrsinn und Ruhm” that «the great majority of geniuses were abnormal psychopaths, and many were also neurotics» (Wittkower and Wittkower, 1963). The improper use of statistical methods occasionally led to grotesque results, like the attempt of the Pannenborg brothers, in the 1920’s, to establish a psychopathological typology of the artistic character. Even scrupulous researchers, like Ernst Kretschmer, tended towards exaggeration in his attempts to apply the biological laws of personality to interpretations of the works of artists and scientists (Wittkower and Wittkower, 1963).

Most studies performed in the positivistic era in order to either confirm or refute Lombroso’s  hypothesis rest on biographical evidence (Richards, 1981). This raises the suspicion that these studies claiming a higher prevalence of psychopathologies among creative or eminent people, were biased by overexposure. For individuals, such as artists in the public eye more information is available about their private lives: this could determine an apparently higher prevalence of disorders that normally tend, as a result of negative stigma,  to be hidden whenever possible. In addition, some temperamental traits widespread among creative people, like eccentricity, uneasiness, propensity to excess and experimentation, could be a reflection not of an underlying mental disorder, but above all of the tolerance by society of the behaviour of individuals who obtain achievement. In some way this behaviour is a secondary product of the achievement, rewarded since it permits the expression of dissenting demands which by the majority of people are not able to express and which are not directly linked to the creative utterance. But negative result were also reached contrary to the hypotheses of Lombroso and his followers: among others is a huge study by psychiatrist and sexuologist Havelock Ellis (1904), who demonstrated a clear link between good mental health and creativity among eminent British  people.

Despite these reservations, even later studies, performed using methods applying specific nosographic categories and direct confrontation with the candidate through interviews and inventories, yielded similar results, with a higher prevalence of mental disorders among gifted people than among the general population (Preti and Miotto, 1997b; Lauronen et al., 2004). The two principal studies performed in the era preceding the systematic ordering of the more recent classifications (DSM III, and now IV, and ICD 9, and now 10), show among both artists and scientists a prevalence of severe mental disorders significantly higher than among the general population, with a strong familial association between creativity, psychopathology, and higher suicide rates (Preti and Miotto, 1999) . In a study performed in Germany from 1927 to 1943 on 5000 individuals, Adele Juda (1949), at that time researcher at the Munich Institute of Psychiatry, evaluated frequency and distribution of psychiatric disorders in a well selected sample of eminent artists, scientists and their relatives. The study shows a significantly higher prevalence of mental illnesses among eminent people and their families compared to the general population. Among artists disorders of the schizophrenic spectrum and psychopaty were most common. Among scientists, instead, disorders of the cyclotimic type, in particular manic-depressive psychoses, were more frequent. In both groups there was a high suicide rate and a strong familial heredity in the transmission of the psychopathological trait and of creative talent.

Some decades later JL Karlsson (1978), in a study of Iceland , reported a clear familial association between the diagnosis of psychosis, taken from hospital registers, and eminence in artistic or scientific fields, based on citations in Who’s Who. A clearly recognizable creative talent was present in the relatives of schizophrenic patients twice as often as in the general population; and in the relatives of manic-depressive patients six times as often as in the general population. Karlsson, in his conclusion, suggests a familial link between creativity and psychoses, substained by a common genetic basis.

The introduction of drugs with a proved efficacy in the treatment of psychoses, like neuroleptics for schizophrenia and litium for manic-depression, together with the use of less empirically based criteria for diagnosis, in the mid 1970s allowed investigations with more reliable methods, less subject to the discretion of the researcher. In particular, better recognition of the less typical forms of manic-depression, now called bipolar disorder according to the nosographic changes introduced by the ICD and DSM, lead to the observation that most creative individuals suffer from a mood disorder, just as the author of the “Problemata XXX” stated (Andreasen and Glick, 1988; Jamison, 1993; Preti and Miotto, 1997b). The scientists Boltzmann and Babbage (the father of modern computer science); the composers Rossini and Tchaikovsky (who commited suicide drinking a cup of water contaminated with vibrio colerae); the statesmen Churchill and Lincoln; the painters van Gogh and Pollock; the philosophers Wittgenstein and Kierkegaard; the writers Pavese and Hemingway (both of whom committed suicide): all suffered from  bipolar disorders. Poets and writers seem to be particularly prone to developing mental problems, generally of a depressive type, leading to assertions that one cannot write with success without being “exposed to the Dark Sun of Melancholy”.

Nancy C. Andreasen performed an extensive study in the mid 1970s on the qualities which characterized the styles of thought of a group of writers who were participating in the annual Writer’s Workshop of Iowa University, and, using the criteria of the rising DSM-III, found a high prevalence among them of mood disorders, mostly of a bipolar type (Andreasen and Powers, 1975; Andreasen, 1987; Andreasen and Glick, 1988). A clear prevalence of psychopathologies from the affective spectrum among creatively talented people was later  reported by KJ Jamison (1989) in a study dedicated to 20th Century English poets; by JJ Schildkraut and coworkers (1994) among American Abstract Expressionist painters; and by AM Ludwig (1994) among 30 American female writers. Kay Jamison (1993), in a study covering three centuries, reported similar results limited to writers and poets, with high rates of mood disorders, in most cases of a bipolar type. In the Jamison study, suicide and alcoholism rates were also very high: as was the familial transmission of both psychopathological risk and creativity.

Several aspects characteristic of manic-depression may offer a basis for the higher prevalence of mood disorders among creative people. During euphoric phases, for example, cyclothymic individuals exhibit  greater energy which can favour their involvement in productive activities and their ability to put up with fatigue. In addition, increased fluency of mental associations, which in mania is expressed in the dramatic experience of “flight of ideas”, allows a greater processing of information and a greater articulation of ideas, favouring original or unusual associations. This is often accompanied by improvements in both memory and concentration, which render even more productive the hightened imaginative potential of these individuals. People with recurrent mood disorders also tend to be more emotionally reactive, which gives them greater sensitivity and sharpness. The lack of inhibitions permits them unrestrained  and unconventional expression, less limited by accepted norms and customs: this makes them more open to experimentation and risk-taking behaviour, and, as a consequence, more assertive and resourceful than the mean. Even the depressive phases can favour abilities contributing to achievement. Meditation, introspection and reasoning are favoured during depressive withdrawn phases. Depressive episodes, in addition, give access to “inner dimensions” of life,  allowing considerations of themes linked to guilt, sorrow and death. The elaboration of these feelings can offer subject matter for creative expression in many fields, but particularly in literature, as demonstrated by the high prevalence of depressive disorders among poets and writers.

A smaller group of studies, however, indicate that the style of thought which is typical of schizophrenics can also contribute to the expression of a creative talent (Arieti, 1976).  

 

MINORITY REPORT

 

Home

THE MAN IN THE HIGH CASTLE

A WORLD OF TALENT

FAITH OF OUR FATHERS

MINORITY REPORT

THE ALIEN MIND

SOME KINDS OF LIFE

TIME OUT OF JOINT

PSI-MAN

RETREAT SYNDROME

A SCANNER DARKLY

THE PENULTIMATE TRUTH

BIBLIOGRAPHY