Sunday, 15 April 2012

How A Stroke Changed Katherine Sherwood's Art

In 1997, American artist Katherine Sherwood was 44 when she suffered a major stroke. She writes about her experience and how it changed her work in a fascinating article just out, How a Cerebral Hemorrhage Altered My Art

All of the images below are examples of her work, taken from the paper.

Sherwood writes that she had long been interested in the brain. She incorporated neuroscience themes into her work even before the stroke. Here's a 1990 piece:
 

Then, out of the blue, her life was changed:
The next May I experienced a cerebral hemorrhage affecting the parietal lobe of the dominant hemisphere [i.e. the left side of the brain, which controls the right side of the body]. I lost my ability to walk, talk, read, and think as my right side became paralyzed within the course of 2 min. It happened during a graduate student’s critique... I do not recall saying this but one of my colleagues reported that the last thing I said was “Oh no, not again.” I was referring to the death of my father at age 33 from an aneurysm. This was when my life caught up to my art...
Six months later after my brain had absorbed my spilled blood I had a cerebral angiogram. Relieved that it was over and the possible second stroke had not occurred, I sat up on the gurney and looked at the computer screen in the corner of the room. The images of the arterial system of my brain both stunned and reminded me of the Southern Song Dynasty Chinese landscape paintings that I had deeply admired. I immediately said without thinking, “I need those images.” The room broke out in laughter which I still do not understand. I repeated, “No, I am an artist and I really need those images.”
Sherwood never regained the use of her right hand. She had previously relied on her right hand to paint with, and she was forced to learn to use her left, and this led to changes in her style.


To compensate for the loss of fine dexterity from using her off hand, she started to paint on larger canvasses, using different materials and a "freer" approach.

As a neuroscientist, the main question at the back of my mind reading this was, did damage to her left parietal lobe have a "direct" effect on her mind and personality which altered her artistic process, beyond making her use her left hand etc? Sherwood writes that she's just not sure:
[some writers] proposed that my new success came from changes in my brain, particularly in the disruption of “the interpreter.” My artist friends vehemently disagreed with this assessment, preferring to believe it had something to do with the 20-years of painting I had done before my cerebral hemorrhage and my ample time to paint while I was recovering. I leave it up to mystery, a category that drives my doctors crazy.


Link: On a slightly different note see the Neurocritic's Suffering For Art Is Still Suffering

ResearchBlogging.orgSherwood, K. (2012). How a Cerebral Hemorrhage Altered My Art Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 6 DOI: 10.3389/fnhum.2012.00055

7 comments:

Ivana Fulli MD said...

Is it visual art in the first place when you need "neuroscientific " explanations in order to "understand" this kind of conceptual art.

Anyway, you can take Matisse who took up collages when arthritis made painting impossible and those beautiful colorful work of art give joy to everybody looking at it.

Neurocritic thought and wrote a fascinating post. To my mind he should becvome a researcher like Michelle Dawson a Montreal autism researcher and an autistic person who never went to university.

omg said...

I just wouldn't hang that in my living room. It's like Saw (movie) before and after he saw the light.

I was taught in philosophy art is dead.. Danto, Adorno, Horkheimer, Hegel etc. I remember having to write essays about how art is DEAD.

Maybe Sherwood's art died and sucuumbed to philosophy and the englightenment. Forget neuroscientific explanations, art is in the domain of hermeneutics a.k.a art is DEAD.

Ivana Fulli MD said...

omg,


This is my favorite "art with a message"

And if you can go to London and visit David Ockney exibit and see what he does from Yorkshire and an Ipad among other instrument, you couldn't think art is dead!

And the matisse exhibit in Paris put light on how much work and artistic thoughts there is in real art... ( david Ockney says the same about work in documentary and he is so clever and sensitive).

Ivana Fulli MD said...

Sorry omg about forgeting the link about my favorite art "with a message" like Saw's : instead of conceptual art I prefer good old comics with a bubble to read when there is nothing to feel about a visual pice of art:

http://www.garfield.com/comics/vault.html?yr=2010&addr=101013

J. F. Aldridge said...

Typo: "She had previously relied on her right hand to pain with..."
I really enjoy the blog, by the way.

omg said...

Ivana, I don't want to go anywhere. I'm living my life as a shell of a person waiting to die like a pop plant.

Ockney ? don't like his style.

I liked Dali, Kandinsky, Takashi Murakami PhD, as a kid. Like I'd been to Matisse, Renoir, Gogh, French impressionists, post-modern, dada, art installationish exhibits like the biennale but didn't really feel it.

I prefer great works of modern architecture, something simple, elegant, powerful. Also motion pictures, like what Hollywood can produce these days. You can't beat technology + art.

Neuroskeptic said...

J. F. Aldridge - Ooops, fixed, thanks. And thanks, glad you like it.