Self Portrait with Bandaged Ear 1889

Curator: We're standing before Vincent van Gogh's "Self-Portrait with Bandaged Ear," created in 1889. The work resides here at the Courtauld Institute of Art in London, rendered in oil paint. Editor: It’s unsettling. The first thing I notice is the stark white bandage juxtaposed against the swirling blues and greens. There's a definite rawness and vulnerability in his gaze. Curator: Absolutely. The bandaged ear itself becomes a powerful symbol, an emblem of trauma. But let's also consider the cultural context. This portrait was painted shortly after the infamous incident in Arles, amidst Van Gogh's struggles with mental health and institutionalization. Editor: And the Japanese print in the background? What does that tell us? Curator: The presence of the Japanese print connects Van Gogh with the Japonisme movement that was popular in Europe. The inclusion of such items from Ukiyo-e art references reflect both commercial taste, and artistic interest. Editor: But, going back to the bandage – the symbolism is just inescapable. He’s presenting an image of suffering, of a self quite literally in pieces. It almost feels performative, though that word feels crude. It really captures Van Gogh as a martyr of modern art. Curator: The bandage, yes, it undeniably signifies suffering, and serves as a potent signifier within a developing mythology surrounding the artist. The brushstrokes create textures that seem to vibrate. But Van Gogh's time in asylums was also part of a larger institutional framework that determined who was considered sane or insane and which practices might have led him to this situation in the first place. It allows us to contemplate who gets labeled mad by a society and what is at stake in making those classifications. Editor: Interesting point. Regardless, the work endures. It speaks volumes about the link between art, identity, and perhaps the most universal theme: pain. Curator: Indeed. It forces us to look not only at the artist, but at the system that surrounds and perhaps consumes him. The picture becomes an uncomfortable commentary on an artist made more and more mythical over the passage of time.