Many artists could be called obsessive about their work. New Mexico artist Charles Benefiel really is obsessive. So much so that his condition, OCD, requires frequent psychiatric intervention. Benefiel does not mind the world knowing this as it is such a critical component of his artistic expression. His perception of the world certainly informs his art – is his art – but there is no question that his work stands on its own merits regardless.
Is Charles Benefiel an artist with a mental health problem, or is he an occasional psychiatric patient who just happens to make good art? And does it matter anyway?
The pieces that Benefiel is willing to share are now highly sought after and he is represented in a New York gallery as well as by the Henry Boxer Gallery in London. This is not what Benefiel craves, however. He makes his art for himself. It just so happens that others see in his work a unique and beautiful creativity. In a world that loves labels, Benefiel is a leading light in a genre that is attracting increasing interest.
Outsider Art has really taken off in Europe and North America in recent years – far less so in Britain – but the concept has clear historical roots.
There is no one agreed definition. Sometimes called visionary art, intuitive art, self-taught art or Art Brut, what characterises Outsider Art is a free expression that is unsullied by any artistic influence. It differs profoundly from naïve art, which is often self-conscious with an audience in mind and dependent on traditional artistic subject matter and technique. Naïve art is placed firmly within a mainstream art movement.
Outsider artists care nothing for recognition or conventional techniques and often choose obscure subject matter. Their work is for them – take it or leave it – and is often kept secret. The artists are free of cultural indoctrination and social conditioning. They are, like Benefiel, social ‘outsiders’ – be it by virtue of a mental illness, lifestyle, social exclusion or by having breached the rules of conventional society.
The key to Outsider Art is the purity of the expression – direct from brain to created object – be it painting, drawing, embroidery, building or sculpture – and the freedom from preconceived cultural influences. All ‘outsiders’ are, by definition, self-taught.
There is no doubt that Outsider Art has existed as long as humanity, but few examples survive that are dated earlier than the 20th century. Work of this kind was unnoticed, unvalued and impermanent until the development of psychiatry.
It was Jean Dubuffet in 1945 who coined the term ‘Art Brut’ – directly translated as ‘raw art’. He was conveying a concept of art that was ‘uncooked’ by culture, hence ‘raw’.
Much earlier last century, however, psychiatrists had begun observing the artistic expression of their patients, notably a Dr Morganthaler. His schizophrenic patient, Adolf Wolfli, produced thousands of works bordering on genius from his confinement in an institution in Switzerland.
In 1922, Dr Hans Prinzhorn published Bildernerei der Geisteskranken (Artistry of the Mentally Ill) – a work that influenced many Surrealists working at the time.
Dubuffet’s fascination with the Prinzhorn Collection, 5000 pieces collected between 1880 and 1933 (but intensively so in the three years between 1919 and 1922) led to his own collection of such work.
Others became interested, including Andre Breton, and in 1948 Dubuffet and colleagues formed Le Compagnie de l‘Art Brut. The collection is now housed in Collection de l’Art Brut in Lausanne.
Dubuffet is universally credited with bringing the attention of the conventional art world to this art form and over the past 30 years interest has been growing, particularly in Europe and America.
Ironically, although this country gave rise to the term ‘Outsider Art’ and is home to Raw Vision, a highly influential quarterly journal devoted to the genre, Outsider Art still appears to be undervalued, even scorned, here.
Roger Cardinal’s 1972 book, Outsider Art was the first usage of the term. Cardinal himself acknowledges that it was coined somewhat in desperation when his publisher demanded a more Anglo-friendly term that ‘Art Brut’.
In an interview with Willem Volkersz published on the Raw Vision site he says:
‘People have used [the term] since then, and have misused it, and have stretched it, and applied it in all sorts of ways. Obviously, you can’t prevent people from doing this, and you can’t cut short the life of a word, give your own final, monumental definition of it for evermore. Language is like that, and language will always shift around, and words will pop up in different ways. Also there’s no copyright on it. But to apply it just to anything obviously will eventually make it meaningless. And if everything becomes outsider art, then we’d have to find another term to start all over again. So to some extent I’ve tried to hold back the dissemination of this concept all over the place. And I’ve reminded people what it means, and ought to be taken to mean, and so on.’
So ‘Outsider Art’ it has become, and interest is growing, albeit slowly.
Opportunities to view works of Outsider artists in this country are limited. The Henry Boxer Gallery in Richmond Hill represents a number of artists including Charles Benefiel and exhibits at the New York Outsider Art Fair each January, an event that has been running for eleven years.
The virtual Other Side Gallery is currently seeking a permanent physical exhibition space in North London and there is a small museum and archive at the Bethlam Royal Hospital in Kent.
Norwich became the first city to break the Outsider Art barrier when the RoaR Gallery opened in June of this year. Curator Sarah Ballard’s enthusiasm was rewarded when a private donor made it possible to create a space in the city for the exclusive exhibition of Outsider Art.
In May, Raw Vision curated the first comprehensive international exhibition here in 25 years at the Mexico Gallery. Equal Rights to Creativity was part of the EU Culture 2000 initiative showing classic Art Brut artists as well introducing a new generation.
Although well attended, the exhibition has made only a small inroad into appreciation of this art form in Britain. As Raw Vision commented, ‘[this country] still lacks even the most basic amenity where Outsider Art can be seriously exhibited and appreciated on a permanent basis. Let us hope things will change in the future and that Outsider Art in Britain will genuinely be granted Equal Rights to Creativity.’ Happily, RoaR has taken the first steps.
Raw Vision also recently arranged a conference, Inside Outsider Art at the Tate Modern, bringing together interested parties from Europe and America to speak about their involvement in the genre. With 47 issues of a superbly produced magazine under their belt, Raw Vision deserves an award for tenacity and tireless pursuit of the Outsider Art cause.
Without Charles Benefiel’s ‘disorder’, would his art exist? He has turned to drawing as a means of working through his obsessive difficulties. His work consists wholly of dots, without any preliminary design in mind, and is put out of sight once the therapeutic purpose is achieved. If he does re-examine his drawings, he often sees flaws rather than beauty and has destroyed more than one piece as a result.
It is a gift to us that some of his work has now come in from the ‘outside’ and that he is willing to accept some of the recognition that his talent brings. He has recently turned to film, as a back injury makes work on his large scale drawings difficult. Watch out for some Benefiel props in the Ben Kingsley vehicle Suspect Zero for starters.
Despite the longstanding efforts of people such as John Maizels of Raw Vision, Henry Boxer and Sarah Ballard, the debate about ‘Outsider Art’ in Britain has barely begun. Certainly, social, artistic and ethical issues need to be thrashed out, as they have been elsewhere, but with conversation comes progress.
Is it indifference or snobbery that has failed to give this country a ‘Collection de l’Art Brut’ or an Intuit – the Center for Intuitive and Outsider Art – in Chicago or an equivalent of the American Visionary Art Museum in Baltimore? Or is it just plain ignorance?
True acknowledgement of Outsider Artists enriches them and it enriches us – how can we say that we are not more human for having had a glimpse of Charles Benefiel’s work? There are many more like him. Let’s acknowledge and respect the difference, but appreciate the gift. Let’s bring the Outside in.
My thanks go to Charles Benefiel for generously sharing his thoughts and his images for this article.
