The Wandering Art Historian book club tackled Irving Stone’s Lust for Life last week and I am having big feelings. I can’t remember if this was my third or fourth time reading this book, but I do know that it was my first since researching, writing and producing my four-week class, The Legacy of Vincent van Gogh.

Art historical research practices have come a long way since Lust for Life was published in 1934 – that’s 87 years ago! And yes, I am aware that Lust for Life is historical fiction regardless of how much accurate information is included by the author. I am really waking up to the realization that this novel was the sort of “gold standard” of biographies regarding Vincent van Gogh for decades and that it helped contribute to a wildly romantic depiction of an actual human being that can be somewhat misleading.

In producing my class on Van Gogh, I did my very best to separate fact from fiction, even when the facts did not support many long-held beliefs about Vincent. That includes the ear incident and the circumstances surrounding his death. While it may feel more romantic and quixotic to imagine someone dying for their art, I do not necessarily believe that is what Vincent did. When discussing Van Gogh, scholars and the public at large have thrown around the word “martyr” as if it is some glorious badge of honor for a creative person to be tortured (whether by themselves or by others) by the creative process and that their death is some sort of holy feat.

Personally, I believe this thinking creates an actual barrier between us (those learning about art and artists) and the artists themselves. Humans love to worship at the alter of genius and greatness, but elevating an artist to those precarious heights negates their complex humanity and keeps us, the art lovers, at bay.

For me, the genius of Vincent van Gogh is that he created compelling works of art amidst a mind that often betrayed him in a world that had no thought for him. It is that he created works that we now call “masterpieces” while coping with mental health issues and a public that would rather dismiss than assist him. We do not get Vincent’s “Starry Night” painting if he does not commit himself to the asylum at St. Remy and that paradox is the unadulterated beauty and genius of Vincent van Gogh.

To celebrate dear Vincent, please enjoy this #CovidClassic inspired by his symbolism-filled depiction of a simple piece of furniture.

Left = “Van Gogh’s Chair,” Vincent van Gogh, 1888

Middle = “Gauguin’s Char,” Vincent van Gogh, 1888

Right = “Adrienne’s Chair,” Adrienne H. Lee, 2021