I just find this confusing, since the descent is only evident if he were trying to reproduce the same portrait on each occassion. But the article only implies this, rather than saying it, and the artworks themselves don't suggest that to me at all.
It's not too much of a leap to infer from the diminishing definition in each portrait that they reflect his slow loss of identity, is it?
But an ability to purposefully and accurately represent a represent a diminishing sense of self would be really high-functioning, though the dimunition remains frightening.
Right, I see what you're saying. But his wife says she thinks that he wasn't painting what he wanted, only what he could manage, so I don't think you can call it purposeful.
And this was just too sad.
Mr. Utermohlen, 73, is now in a nursing home. He no longer paints.
Alzheimer's scares the hell out of me.
Me too. Though I gather that, especially in the later stages, it's a lot more unpleasant for the family than for the person themself.
Maybe. I'm not really sure I buy that; it looks pretty brutal to have to go through that.
Yeah, but eventually you stop being able to be aware that you're going through it. Or so they say.
Oh, I'm sure, particularly in the middle years when there are terrible symptoms yet you're still largely cognizant. It's just a counter-intuitive characteristic of the disease that the sufferers are shielded from the worst aspects of it by the very mental degradation that is the cause of the problem in the first place.
Alzheimer's is one of the things that keeps me up at night. Ogged, that same line was the one that hit me hardest.
On a different note, I find it fascinating that some of his later works (particularly the 1997 paintings) are so strongly reminiscent of Picasso.
But 1999 and 2000 just break my heart.
*hugs*,
Meowse.
P.S. It's important to remember, I think, that we're only seeing selections from his work of those years, and that the people doing the selection may have had some sort of agenda with respect to Alzheimer's and the statements about it that his work might have been selected to make. I have no reason to suspect them of bias, even well-meaning bias: I merely raise the possibility.
Timely, as I'm back in Tucson to visit my aunt with MS. From what I can observe, it's the awareness of the limitations that is really excruciating. She doesn't seem to suffer from, say, a lot of the short-term memory loss, because by definition she's not aware of it. But she's terribly terribly angry about the physical incapacity and being treated/talked to like an invalid. We're, her son and best friend and I, sort of agreed that we hope that her awareness fades before she becomes much further incapacitated, because this is just really hard on her.
I think that the self-portraits aren't really intended to show a loss of identity, but rather show only a kind of aphasia about recognizing/rendering features. Of course, that is a loss of identity, especially for an artist. It's a masterful little series, although, yes, very very sad.
I think that the self-portraits aren't really intended to show a loss of identity, but rather show only a kind of aphasia about recognizing/rendering features.
The self portraits have been curated by a medical organization to show a loss of identity, haven't they? I suspect well-meaning bias: It is a show about aphasia that registers so strongly with the viewer's fears about dementia that the show inevitably reads as Utermohlen's purposeful struggle against his loss of control. The show's statement suggests that, but I don't think dementia works this way, not exactly. We're missing the portraits from the late 60s through the mid 90s against which to consider his Munch-esque style, but yes, that in that 1999 image in particular it feels as if there is something in the way.
Yeah, but eventually you stop being able to be aware that you're going through it. Or so they say.
You may not be aware, but the people who know you are acutely aware.
It's only the last one that's really frightening.
I think I've read that in the later stages of Alzheimers one may not suffer from a sense of loss, but the world is terribly frightening because everyone and everything is unknown.
Alzheimer's is genuinely frightening. And particularly bad for carers; not just because the person ceases to be who they once were but because Alzheimer's sufferers can be really violent.
I agree with MCMC. Up till then there was no artistic decline.
We're getting into "genius and madness" territory now.
17- One interesting thing about Alzheimers is that some people become scared and violent and others quite peaceful. There is actually a big difference in the quality of life for people in the last stages of Alzheimers, even when they are no longer aware of their diminished functioning. Some react to not understanding the world with fear, others don't. IIRC, there is actually no predicting this outcome based on previous personality.
As I understand it, we know relatively little Alzheimer's. We can't even be sure someone has it until he dies and we can slice open his brain. My sense runs parallel to RHC's: the end stages can be really, really horrible for some sufferers, and less bad for others.
The series of portraits looked astonishingly like someone purposefully moving through a series of 20th century schools of art; like Armsmasher, I wonder about bias.
And anything involving loss of mental capacity is terrifying. My grandmother had a series of small strokes, that left her with very little memory, and it was so sad watching her try to hold up her end of the conversation as if she knew what was going on. She could fake it very well for a long time; she was still, in some ways, very intelligent, but after a while it got to be like talking to Eliza -- a coherent response based on no underlying understanding. And she was terribly angry and frightened about it.
Funny, I almost posted about this last night. What almost prompted me is Althouse's inane remark:
The artist, William Utermohlen, when he had his wits about him, steered clear of the modern styles of his contemporaries. ("Everybody was doing Abstract Expressionist, and there he was, solemnly drawing the figure.") Now, disease draws him into forms of expression he shunned.
But what do you think of the implication that modern art has something in common with the diseased mind? This resonates horribly with the Nazis' condemnation of "degenerate art." I don't know why the linked article -- in the NYT -- doesn't deal with this disturbing problem.
Jesus. Althouse. That doesn't even make sense. First, you can't necessarily say that he "shunned" Abstract Expressionism or whatever, by one damn drawing.
Also, the implication that modern art has something to do with the diseased mind is Althouse's, not the NYT's.
Also^2, yeah, 1967, yeah, that was the height of Abstract Expressionism alright.
Sheesh.
Althouse is just amazing to me. All attempts people have made to hold her responsible to a point have utterly, utterly failed.
Interestingly, the gallery that represents his work says that "[s]igns of his illness are retrospectively apparent in the work from the early 90s." I don't know that I've ever read a claim like that, though I suppose it makes sense: his dealer would know.
Okay, I'm an idiot. That "everybody was doing Abstract Expressionism" thing was from the article. I still think it's wrong, though.
She does realize that the Nazi ideal of art was muscular young men grasping each other purposefully, yes?
I suspect bias on the part of the art exhibition, but I don't think that's avoidable or bad. It's a collection arranged in a certain way; that's going to introduce decisions about what to include or discard. Once we know the artist suffered from Alzheimer's, we can't help but read the paintings as illustrating the decline of his mental and artistic powers. (In other words, both #2 and #4 get it exactly right.)
I don't know why the linked article -- in the NYT -- doesn't deal with this disturbing problem.
Because the New York times is not as stupid as Ann Althouse, that's why.
Gag.
Except where 4 wrote "accurately represent a represent."
Represent-à-represent, or depicting the frame within the frame.
The comment at ratemyprofessors that reminds why Althouse is so very Althouse is "Althouse is arrogant." That's totally true, and you just have to wonder where things went wrong, that this not-very-bright person seems to believe that she's a force of wit and intellect. I don't detect the underlying insecurity I'd expect. So strange.
I don't detect the underlying insecurity I'd expect.
It's there. Well-fortified, but there.
that this not-very-bright person seems to believe that she's a force of wit and intellect.
This is the basic description of most of the Red intelligentsia: Goldberg, Podhoretz, Medved, etc. There's a reason they're considered the moron party.
Kristol too (Bill). Kristol and Podhoretz are also sons of fairly sharp guys.
Stereotype-wise, Kristol does not look Jewish to me. He has a sort of Midwestern squarehead German look about him.
The last couple remind me of Francis Bacon.
Goldberg, Podhoretz, Medved
No, I definitely detect the insecurity with these guys. JM is probably right though.
Kristol too (Bill).
I don't think you can include Bill Kristol with the other people on the list; he strikes me as one of the smartest people in Washington.
he strikes me as one of the smartest people in Washington
This is a clever joke, right?
40, 41: No, I really think that. It's just that he's evil. But his accomplishments, though overstated, are still impressive.
In Washington, Kristol's smartness is exceeded only by the various inhabitants of the DC Journalism Tenement.
There are many funny things about Althouse. One is her combination of the pearl-clutching horror at the declining influence of Her Way of Doing Things with a love of podcasts. Another is her structural resemblance to Unfogged: moderately serious commentary woven with flights of whimsy.
You know, I made a special effort to stop that mixed metaphor once I hit submit, but, like the Bishop, I was too late.
19, yes. I am, in retrospect, amazed by my mother's lack of fear, as opposed to misery. But misery, all too often, it was.
Utermohlen, 1997or 8ff. I am reminded of the change in my mother's handwriting, a change of which she was unaware.
I don't think I knew what Kristol looked like before this thread led me to his image. In all his photos, but especially here, he bears a disarming resemblance to Ron Popeil. I may not care for his politics but I'll be damned if he couldn't talk me into buying a food dehydrator.
44 -- do I sense a guest-posting invitation in the offing?
Yay, the kitty's back! Overpowered the big mean dolphin!
To repeat a deleted comment, the return of the kitty is terrible news. The dolphin was much more thematically appropriate.
I'm kind of with Tim. The guy's as pure a Straussian as you can find; everything he says publicly is very likely bullshit. The man knows how to get himself into positions of power and influence, and to convince others that they're part of the chosen elite like he is.
Kristol's mother is smart, too. And just as evil. It must run in the family.
"Everything he says publicly is very likely bullshit."
Yes, his cunning plan requires him to seem like a meathead.
His cunning plan requires him to say whatever it takes to be influential with Republicans in power.
Yes, his cunning plan requires him to seem like a meathead.
The proof of the pudding is in the eating, Emerson. He doesn't so much carry water for the Republicans as make water for them by implying they're thinking about doing something that he wants them to think about (and then agree about) doing. You occasionally see Brooks try to do the same thing, but he can't manage it.
make water for them
Golden showers on K Street!
Heh. Eat it, Brock -- Kitty 1, Dolphin 0.
37:I saw a lot of Bacon too. I admire the courage in recording the decay. Rembrandt. I don't think Frida Kahlo's image changes in her paintings;she is portraying internal conditions. I love portraiture.
I did some searching, I would like to have seen some 70s and 80s work.
Does Kristol ever change anyone's mind, or say anything attributable personally to him rather than to the disseminated Elders of the Likudnik Borg? He's mostly telling Cheney and Rumsfeld to do what they were already planning to do, isn't he? And telling everyone else to listen to Cheney and Rumsfeld.
I don't watch TV and rarely see him in print. And I'm prejudiced against Midwestern meathead types.
hate to be on topic at this point, but I came in late --- these portraits make an interesting contrast to the acid trip ones: http://www.cowboybooks.com.au/html/acidtrip1.htm
A contrast, sure, but a decidedly uninteresting one.
oops. that link needs a final `l'
Ah. Well then, that makes it much more interesting, I suppose.
well, I don't know if I'd go so far as `much more'
I need to re-read Flowers for Algernon. The loss of capacity reminds me of the story, but fifth grade was a long time ago, and it might not hold up the way I remember.
Midwestern meathead types
I'm not sure a Jewish Manhattanite with multiple degrees from Harvard qualifies as Midwestern in any meaningful sense.
68: I get "Manhattanite" and "Harvard" buy why "Jewish"?
There aren't a lot of midwestern Jews. Especially not stereotypically so.
Oh, just that he's more metropolitan egghead than Midwestern meathead.
I bet there are more midwestern Jews than Brock thinks.
Apo: He's got the look. See #36.
I've never heard him talk, and his writings have been 100% forgettable. If he's smart that's news to me.
I bet there are more midwestern Jews than Brock thinks.
*waves hello*
Yeah & what about Weiner? Pittsburgh's pretty well midwestern, right?
73: Ah, I missed your 36. Especially at full size, that picture makes his forehead look gargantuan. He is indeed a smart guy, and seems fully aware that he's peddling bullshit. Every so often, you can see the mask slip a little.
I bet there are more midwestern Jews than Brock thinks.
They aren't real Jews.
Of course there are midwestern Jews. But the stereotypical "midwesterner" is certainly not Jewish. The stereotypical Manhattanite, or at least one of the stereotypical Manhattanites, is.
I Can't Believe It's Not Judaism!®
Today's quote on American Judaism: "Fresh fruit, hot sex, Big Ten basketball -- who could have imagined a happier fate for the Jews"
(from memory, so probably not entirely accurate)
Kristol strikes me as having the same kind of reptilian intelligence as the Bush family -- amoral and single-minded, but efficient at fulfilling its hindbrain-born hunger for power. But a really smart guy wouldn't agree to go on Colbert's show totally unprepared, then show himself to be an evil doofus.
Pittsburgh's pretty well midwestern, right?
The Midwest starts in western Illinois. That's what I would vote for, anyway--where the really big cornfields begin.
No way -- Ohio is totally midwest.
And Indiana? I submit to you that any definition of mdwest that excludes Indiana is fatally flawed.
I deny that the Great Lakes states are Northwestern, except maybe Michigan. Western PA and NY, Ohio, and Indiana, and probably even Illinois are non-East non-Midwest. Michigan is Midwestern only because of the Yoopers.
You have to keep your terminology up-to-date. Minnesota used to be the Northwest, but no more.
We Ohioans certainly think we are part of the Midwest -- although if knew how to read a map we might decide we are really part of the greater Northeast.
playing around with a map, it looks like if you start at Buffalo, draw a sort of gentle curve from there to the southern border of Ohio, then trace along to the southwestern corner of Kansas and straight up to the northwestern corner of North Dakota, you've got a pretty good midwest. Here's a pretty good map except it does not include southwestern NY and the western edge of PA as I think it should.
I'd call OH/IN, and maybe PA, Midwestern, but I wouldn't object if someone insisted those weren't Midwestern but rather "Rust Belt" or somesuch other identifer. Part of the grouping obviously depends on how many different slices of America you want to label. Difficult to argue about what goes where unless you know what all the categories are.
I'm not sure I'd count Minnesota, Wisconsin, and Michigan, and the Dakotas as part of the Midwest.
The Great L:akes area has been expelled. There's no way that W NY and W PA are midwestern, but they're more or less the same as Ohio, as is Indiana. Michigan and Illinois could go either way, I think, but I think that Illinois is Great Lakes.
The Great Lakes area seems to have the stodginess of the MW without the mellowness.
90: You want a flame war?
Great Lakes you are, sonny-boy (unless you're girl).
So it sounds like we're down to a definition of "midwest" that basically includes Kansas and Missouri, and nothing else?
Missouri and Kansas are borderline (too Southern and Western.)
The consensus seems to be that the Midwest does not exist.
Dude, Missouri is the canonical example of a midwestern state, and I will not hear otherwise.
95: Next you'll be claiming there are Jewish people in Missouri. Maybe more soda, less alcohol.
The West starts at the Missouri River in the Dakotas. Ohio is in the East.
The West starts at the Missouri River in the Dakotas. Ohio is in the East.
I do not know how that happened. I blame the tricksy dolphin.
You are all wrong. The Midwest is: Ohio, Indiana, Michigan, Illinois, Wisconsin, Missouri, Iowa, Minnesota, Kansas, Nebraska, South Dakota, North Dakota, and a small western border area of Pennsylvania.
With the Dakotas begins the Mountain West.
I realize there aren't many mountains in the Dakotas.
The Midwest, and I won't hear different.
Chopper is relatively reasonable, compared to the rest of you fools.
Also, "Northwestern" is a totally archaic designation for states that are east of the Mississippi river.
The Northwest is located in the North and West corner of the contiguous 48.
This series of paintings immediately made me think of this other series of paintings.
Becks says "you are all wrong" and then gives a midwest set exactly the same as the one I gave above except she won't include Buffalo.
The Northwest begins in Minnesota and extends to the Pacific, including BC.
Buffalo and the neighboring areas are Canadian.
100: Jeebus, Becks. Why not just say, "The Midwest is everywhere but CA, NY, and MA"?
Emerson has complicated and desperate jurisdictional reasons for wanting certain parts of the US to be in another country.
106 -- did you watch "Crumb"? R.'s brother's cartoons change in ways similar to Wain's paintings.
Emerson, which is it, you damn flip flopper? Are you Midwestern or Northwestern?
113: Why are jumping on Emerson? Ogged has Ontario as part of the Midwest. Learn our geography, foreigner.
115: You really don't speak 'Merkin, do you? I mean, "do you, boahy?"
110 - Are you from the Midwest? I've lived in 6 of those states I listed and the residents all considered themselves to be part of the Midwest.
QED, I win.
Wait, Emerson is claiming that Minnesota is part of the Northwest? Ok, that clears up some of his earlier comments. By proving definitively that he's ON CRACK, that is.
Well, to a Mexican, even Texas is a Northern state.
117: Cripes, now we're all about what people self-identify as? Fine, then Emerson's from Narnia (or whatever he's claiming) and Tiger is Calabasian.
That's who Emerson looks like! Trumpkin!
Cablanasian, maroon.
Wikipedia has a rather thorough consideration of the question. Don't bother reading it, since it only affirms that my 102 shows the canonical midwest.
I decided that the Midwest probably doesn't exist. It was the power of the arguments here that changed my mind.
The Northwest used to include even Ohio. Minnesota is NW of the Northwest Territory, so it's really, really Northwest.
122: Tiger misspelled it. He's only half Asian.
Double maroon, the "nasian" part is "na" for "native american" and "sian" for asian.
Ogged's version is not too bad, except I don't want Indiana and Ohio.
Emerson, you lunatic, the last person who understood Northwest as clustering around the Great Lakes and not, say, primarily designating Washington and Oregon was ol' Tippicanoe. Even Tyler probably knew better.
Minnesota is NW of the Northwest Territory
Certainly. Along the same lines, being from San Antonio, I identify as a Spaniard.
How are we going to know when Emerson isn't trolling us for fun, but from senility?
We need to look at some recent self-portraits.
129 -- His posts will start to change, losing their definition and clarity of form, gradually morphing into completely abstract shapes and patterns.
125: I meant that if he were a full-blooded Asian, he wouldn't have misspelled it. Do you actually know the etymology of the word? I thought it was derived from Caliban.
Or his cat will start glowing and morphing and eventually transform itself into a Jefferson Airplane concert.
My view is that "Midwest" is actually a superordinate category that contains multiple, partially overlapping regions: the Great Lakes region, the Rust Belt, the Great Plains, etc.
Do you actually know the etymology of the word?
Caucasian
black
native american
asian.
He would put Whitey first. Golfer.
Ah, all this time I thought you guys were talking about Calormen.
Jackmormon, when the US was founded Minnesota was the Northwest. You can't just go around changing the names of things according to whim. For example, new York and New Jersey are pretty old by now. Are you going to change their names too?
George Bush thinks he can rewrite the Constitution, but at least he respect the names of things when he remembers them.
The Dakotas, Montana, and Idaho are part of the Northwest, but they shall be designated "The Empty Quarter" and used as a dumping ground for wackos and (Montana and Idaho only) Hollywood celebrities.
119: There you go, bringing up the alamo again.
I'm not the one who worships Aztlan here, Narnian.
It would be awesome to drop the "new" from New York, New Jersey, and New England.
Jersey's kind of losing the New. The other two, it'd sound weird.
I've often wondered whether people from the Yukon, Newfoundland, Slovakia, etc., should really be granted entry permits, granted their refusal or inability to assimilate the American tradition.
142: Well, who could forget it?
Especially the basement.
Most people have forgotten the Maine. I'm more than willing to forget the Alamo. When the Confederacy is finally allowed to shelve off into the Third World, I think that Texas should be attached to Mexico rather than being part of the new CSA.
Sure, give it to Mexico ... not much here worth keeping anyway. Besides, the place needs redecorating. It isn't quite big enough to make a Canadian province... so I doubt they'd be interested.
You are all wrong, so wrong. The states formerly know as northwestern ar now North-Central. That's Michigan, Ohio, Indiana, aaaand Wisconsin (because the midwest does corn, not cheese). Also the half of Illinois containing Chicago. I learned this from nuns in Detroit. Anyone who thinks Pennsylvania is part of the midwest learned his geography from Saul Steinberg.
The Northwest will not give up Wisconsin.
Wisconsin has executed the fewest people of any state: a total of 1. The guy probably didn't appreciate the honor.
Or lady, in case it was a lady. Please forgive the sexist assumption.
Sexist assumptions are a hanging offense.
It's the long good night syndrome.
I find that one really, really good thing about the computer age is the ability to hide deteriorating handwriting. Does not stop the rage. though. What is really awful is loosing language skill for long periods and knowing it is coming back.
Late to this, as ever. Probably a good thing.
Long time no see, Austro!
And not to nitpick, but really, that third to last sentence could use some reworking. You know, just to prove you've still got your wits about you.
Touché.
There are reasons why people like me should lurk, no?
Austro (good to see you, man!), are you experiencing the problems you mention in 157? If so, my deepest sympathies.
160: Yeah, my deepest sympathies too, if that's the case.
Either way, I'd be happy to see you lurk less.
Thanks guys. I do have MS. And while that statement is about the most unfair thing one can spring on company, I'd prefer it if that fact were quickly ignored for all future commenting purposes. You were right, those word strings suck and have no business masquerading as sentences.
Sigh... note the confusion of the german "weil" into "while" instead of "because". grrr...
Off topic, but this case of wrongly diagnosed stomach cancer - http://www.ireland.com/newspaper/front/2006/1020/1160606804645.html - reminded me of our host's late adventures in medicine.
