1. 1
CLINICAL NOTES SERIES
ON ART AND NEUROSIS
Lionel Trilling (1945). ‘Art and Neurosis,’ Art and Psychoanalysis, edited by W.
Phillips (Cleveland and New York: Meridian Books, 1963), pp. 502-520.
INTRODUCTION
An important question in clinical psychoanalysis is whether creative artists should
be encouraged to seek analysis. Will psychoanalysis prove beneficial to artists or will it
reduce their creativity by curing them of an underlying neurosis? This question
presupposes that artists draw upon neuroses as the main source of their creativity. Is
this presupposition justified? After all, the world is full of neurotics who are not able
to produce anything creative – let alone art. These clinical notes summarize the main
points raised in the context of this question by Lionel Trilling in an essay that he
wrote as early as 1945. Trilling was a literary critic based at Columbia University in
New York; he belonged to a generation of scholars who tried to bring psychoanalysis
into the mainstream of literary studies.1 Trilling’s main concern in this essay was to
critique the reductive approach to literary criticism that had been adopted by some
Freudians. Trilling is therefore keen to point out that if artists are neurotic, then, so
are scientists and those who belong to other professions. In other words, a degree of
neuroticism is present in all human beings; reducing art and artists to neuroses does
not really explain anything. But, nonetheless, art gives those artists who happen to
be neurotic a chance to sublimate their neuroses. Furthermore, neuroticism up to a
point makes it possible for artists to look at their subject matter differently; it can
help to de-familiarise art in a bourgeois society. In other words, even if neuroses are
worth invoking in the context of art or literary criticism it is important to relate a
work of art to not just the underlying neurosis, but the aesthetic forms with which it
must interact to produce a work of art or literature. A work of art, like a symptom, is
1 For a Freudian approach to literary criticism, see Sigmund Freud (1990). Art and Literature,
Vol. 14, translated by James Strachey, edited by Albert Dickson (London: Penguin Books),
Penguin Freud Library.

2. 2
best understood as a form of psychic over-determination. There are many layers of
the creative psyche involved in precipitating a poem or a painting in a poet or an
artist. Trilling’s intention in writing this essay then is to gently remind critics of the
importance of avoiding a reductive approach to art and literary criticism. This is all
the more important because Freud was fond of reminding his readers that ‘before
the creative artist psychoanalysis must lay down its arms.’ So even if neurosis can
serve as a ‘source’ of art, it does not explain the work of art since the aesthetic
dimensions take over once the process of creative sublimation begins. Or, to put it
simply, aesthetic theory remains relevant even if the art critic invokes
psychoanalysis to interpret a work of art.
ART AND JOUISSANCE
Trilling’s point of entry in this essay on the relationship between art and neurosis is
the problem of human suffering. It is commonly believed that great works of art are
produced after the creative artist has been through bouts of suffering. Why should
this be the case? It is this suffering, or what in contemporary parlance is known as
jouissance, that interests Trilling. I use the term jouissance as an amalgam of pain and
pleasure. It can also be described as the pain in pleasure and the pleasure in pain.
The artist is willing to put up with this form of suffering because it promises him a
reward in the form of a work of art.2 Furthermore, Trilling notes that suffering is
related to or usually accompanied by a form of sacrifice. The throes of artistic
creation bear a resemblance to the forms of suffering and sacrifice that neurotics
impose upon themselves in the production of symptoms. The main difference is that
unlike neurotic productions, society accords a higher monetary value to artistic
production. There is also a relationship between suffering and power. There is
reason to believe that sacrificing a number of everyday pursuits and concentrating
the libido is more likely to increase the power of the creative artist. The artist may
also be willing to suffer pain in the attempt to accentuate his creative sensibilities.
These existential forms of suffering are mediated by identification with the crucified
Jesus on the Cross. The artist, by subjecting himself to suffering, gains access to
knowledge; this form of suffering is known as ‘didactic suffering.’ There is no other
way of acquiring this form of knowledge other than through suffering. Art, then,
gives meaning and form to human suffering. The artist who suffers from a neurosis
or a psychosis is able to experience at first hand mental phenomena that the rest of
us can only speculate about. That is why an underlying neurosis can be a source of
competitive advantage for the creative artist. What is an existential disadvantage in
everyday life becomes a competitive advantage in creative life. The reason that
2 My interpretation of this essay been influenced by the Lacanian approach to art. See, for
instance, Dylan Evans (1997). ‘Art,’ and ‘Jouissance,’ An Introductory Dictionary of Lacanian
Psychoanalysis (London: Routledge), pp. 12-14 and pp. 91-92.

3. 3
artists are more likely to be associated with neuroses than scientists (even though
neuroses are equally distributed in the professions) is that artists are more open in
talking about their symptoms and fantasies; they do not hide them like scientists do.
Artists can put the irrational to work in their art in a way that eludes scientists and
other professionals who take pride in being scientific or rational in their thought
patterns. Furthermore, artists and writers are more likely to reveal their innermost
thoughts, feelings, and emotions than men of science in their autobiographies. This
leads to the misleading impression that only artists are neurotic.
CONCLUSION
Psychoanalytic interpretations or explanations of the life of the mind should
therefore be careful to not mislead the reader about the incidence and prevalence of
the neuroses across the professions. All professions including the technical
professions can be subject to psychoanalytic description. The failure to do this in a
timely fashion is the main reason for the excessive attribution of neuroses to creative
artists. It is therefore incorrect to describe the artist as suffering from a wound. A
neurosis is better understood as an ongoing psychic activity that is characterised by
an existential conflict. This conflict in turn is characterised by a wasteful expenditure
of energy. Sublimation of neurotic conflicts then is a way of re-directing this energy
to higher artistic purposes. And, needless to say, sublimation is not reducible to
artistic activity but is implicated in all forms of human striving to make the world a
better place. What makes the artist unique for Lionel Trilling is that his
understanding of aesthetic form makes it possible for him to activate ‘his faculties of
perception, representation, and realization.’
Art is therefore related to but not reducible to a neurosis; instead the essence of art
must be understood as a ‘gift.’ If artists want to embark on a clinical analysis they
should be allowed to do so; but clinicians must remember to help them hold on to
their unique gift to mediate the relationship between representation and reality. That
is what differentiates the creative artist from the rest of us.
SHIVA KUMAR SRINIVASAN