|
|
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
|
Did Lead Paint Cause The "Masters" To Go Crazy?
I've read a number of art books and basically the claim a large part of the reason so many of the "great masters" of painting were crazy is because they used lead based paint. Or mixed other paints with lead. This lead them to go crazy and have symptoms of lead poisoning. For proof of this they say when the artists were in their "crazy" period they were put in assylums or such and they once again became normal once the lead wore out of their systems. Then they returned to painting and the cycle repeated itself.
Any truth to this or is it speculation? |
| Advertisements | |
|
|
|
|
#2
|
|||
|
|||
|
*knows nothing factual*
Sounds similar to "mad" hatters. Sounds plausible at least. |
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
|
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
|
I thought heavy metals accumulated in the body and never "wore out of the system". So I don't believe it. I suspect the truth is that the sort of mentality that leads to artistic genius is just a bit unstable.
|
|
#5
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
|
|
#6
|
|||
|
|||
|
I can think of a few painters who went bonky (aside from van Gogh, Hugo van der Goes, perhaps, for example, and Goya got very depressed and there are lots of merely eccentrics but I don't know about bonky) but I really don't think this has been claimed by many serious art historians. What books have you read this in?
|
|
#7
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
|
|
#8
|
|||
|
|||
|
Here is a site that includes historical information about artists' paints. And here, from the same site is some historical information about paint ingredients.
It appears to me that artists' paints were never, and are not now, lead based to any great extent. |
|
#9
|
|||
|
|||
|
In the early days (Medieval, Renaissance until I do not know when) much white paint was based on lead, which is why it show up so "well" in x-rays (sorry, I don't have a citation-- that book's in storage).
|
|
#10
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
|
|
#11
|
|||
|
|||
|
speaking of which, does anyone know what the signs of mercury posioning were?
|
|
#12
|
|||
|
|||
|
Don't you have to ingest the stuff for it to be harmful? I think the turpentine fumes would get to you a lot quicker than any lead in the paint.
Lead poisoning from paint is generally caused by children chewing on old painted woodwork or by inhaling dust from sanding the stuff. Having lead in a mixture on the end of your paintbrush isn't going to do a lot of harm. |
|
#13
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
|
|
#14
|
|||
|
|||
|
Woo hoo.......finally absinthe gets off the hook!!!!
|
|
#15
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
__________________
Quid quid latine dictum sit, altum videtur. |
|
#16
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
|
|
#17
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
|
|
#18
|
|||
|
|||
|
My husband's an artist. His favorite white is a lead-based paint and he's been using it for years. He doesn't eat it, nor does he inhale it or even get (much) of it on his skin--so no problem.
Although come to think of it he is a bit odd. |
|
#19
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
we might need a poll here
|
|
#20
|
|||
|
|||
|
I've read a few books the one I got now is focusing on Francisco Goya. Though it mentions Van Gough. It tells how the old masters would mix paints of lead, cadmium and mercury and absorb them thru touching, breathing and ingesting them via the tips of their tongues.
It shows Goya had 5 years periods where his work suddently went form sweet and sentimental to weird and eerie and often grotesque. Then he'd be put away and gradually get better. Of course all this is probably speculation in books, that's why I wanted to know if it was actual or an urban myth. |
|
#21
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
Bravo, 9 points on the Pun-o-Meter. |
|
#22
|
|||
|
|||
|
ChiMagnet-- Sounds like the kind of urban myth that gets put out in a certain type of art book; you know, Bosch was a heretical alchemist, Da Vinci was a hermaphrodite, and all that. Sells well.
Now, if that paint mixture was common practice, why only Goya, and not also Josh Reynolds and Hogarth and David Caspar Friedrich and Mengs and David and Ingres all those other majority of artists who were imminently sane in that period? A statistical sampling of one isn't a good argument for a trend. |
|
#23
|
|||
|
|||
|
Also, lead poisoning has many other symptoms besides neurological problems. If it was widespread among painters, one would expect them to be characterized as a sickly bunch in general, not just crazy. (And like others have said, I am having trouble coming up with a list of more than a few painters that could have been charactized as having severe mental problems.)
From here Quote:
|
![]() |
| Bookmarks |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|