Genius and madness summary. Genius and madness

Cesare LOMBROSO

Genius and madness

When, many years ago, being, as it were, under the influence of ecstasy (raptus), during which the relationship between genius and insanity was clearly presented to me as if in a mirror, I wrote the first chapters of this book in 12 days. I confess that even I myself was not clear to what serious practical conclusions the theory I created could lead to. I did not expect that it would provide the key to understanding the mysterious essence of genius and to explain those strange religious manias that were sometimes the core of great historical events, that it would help establish a new point of view for assessing the artistic creativity of geniuses by comparing their works in the field of art and literature with the same works of madmen and, finally, that it will provide enormous services to forensic medicine.

Little by little, I was convinced of such an important practical significance of the new theory by both the documentary works of Adriani, Paoli, Frigerio, Maxime Ducamp, Rive and Verga regarding the development of artistic talents among the insane, as well as the high-profile trials of recent times - Mangione, Passanante, Lazaretti, Guiteau, which proved everyone that the mania for writing is not just a kind of psychiatric curiosity, but directly a special form of mental illness and that the subjects obsessed with it, apparently completely normal, are all the more dangerous members of society because it is difficult to immediately notice a mental disorder in them, and between Thus, they are capable of extreme fanaticism and, like religious maniacs, can even cause historical upheavals in the lives of peoples. That is why it seemed to me extremely useful to re-examine the previous topic on the basis of the latest data and on a broader scale. I will not hide that I even consider him brave, in view of the bitterness with which the rhetoricians of science and politics, with the ease of newspaper writers and in the interests of one or another party, try to ridicule people who prove, contrary to the nonsense of metaphysicians, but with scientific data in their hands complete the insanity, due to mental illness, of some of the so-called "criminals" and the mental disorder of many persons hitherto considered, according to generally accepted opinion, to be completely sane.

To the caustic ridicule and petty quibbles of our opponents, we, following the example of the original who moved in their presence to convince people who denied the movement, will only respond by collecting new facts and new evidence in favor of our theory. What could be more convincing than facts and who would deny them? Perhaps only the ignorant, but their triumph will soon come to an end.

1. 
   Introduction to Historical Review

The recognition of the close connection and multiple correlations between genius and insanity is now deeply rooted among scientists. This happened thanks, firstly, to the scientific works of Verga, Moreau, Schilling and Maudsley, and secondly, to the studies of the skulls of great people carried out by Broca, Canestrini, Turner, Vogt, Kupfner, Quatrefage and Mantegazza. To some extent, this may have been facilitated by my book, which is now in its third edition, but a particularly large role in this case was played by the proliferation of many diary magazines, which several years ago began to be published in Italy by almost all the best hospitals for the insane.

Almost every issue of these curious entries contained new factual data in support of the correctness of the thesis, which for so long was considered an absurd paradox, namely, that the mentally ill only rarely display that complete disorder of mental faculties that the crowd attributes to them, and that, on the contrary, the illness itself often causes them to have extraordinary mental alertness. However, although this theory is no longer considered absurd or false, many still call it sterile, cruel and practically inapplicable. I don’t argue that it should seem sad, but there is a lot of sadness in natural phenomena, from our point of view - for example, the fact that nettles and roses, violets and wormwood grow simultaneously.

However, is a botanist indignant at such a phenomenon and denies it? No, he takes it into account, studies it, describes it, and, of course, no one will blame him for this.

The benefits and important practical significance of the latest research in the field of psychiatry can only be contested by those who do not know their results, who do not know that it was thanks to such research that it was possible not only to determine, at least in part, the essence and origin of genius, but also to dispel forever that fatal delusion , on the basis of which only subjects who had completely lost their minds were considered insane, and therefore insane, as a result of which thousands of innocent victims of mental disorder were handed over as criminals into the hands of executioners.

When many years ago, as if under the influence of an influx from above (raptus), the relationship between genius and insanity appeared to me as clearly as in a mirror, and I wrote the first chapters of this book in 12 days, I confess that even I myself was not clear about what serious practical conclusions can the theory I created lead to? I did not expect that it would provide the key to understanding the mysterious essence of genius and explaining those strange religious manias that were sometimes the core of great historical events, that it will help to establish a new point of view for evaluating the artistic creativity of geniuses by comparing their works in the field of art and literature with similar works of madmen and, finally, that it will provide enormous services to forensic medicine.

Over time, I was convinced of such an important practical significance of the new theory by both the documentary works of Adriani, Paoli, Frigerio, Maxime Ducamp, Rive and Verga regarding the development of creative talents in the insane, as well as the high-profile trials of recent times - Mangione, Passanante, Lazaretti, Guiteau, which proved to everyone that the mania for writing is not only a kind of psychiatric curiosity, but in the literal sense a special form of mental illness, and that the subjects obsessed with it, outwardly completely normal, are all the more dangerous members of society because it is difficult to immediately notice a mental disorder in them, and yet they They are capable of extreme fanaticism and, like religious maniacs, can even cause historical upheavals in the lives of peoples. That is why it seemed to me extremely useful to re-examine the previous topic on the basis of the latest data and on a broader scale. I will not hide that I even consider him brave, in view of the bitterness with which the rhetoricians of science and politics, with the ease of newspaper writers and in the interests of one party or another, try to ridicule people who, contrary to the ravings of metaphysicians, but with scientific data in their hands, are completely insane due to the mental illness of some of the so-called criminals and the mental disorder of many persons hitherto considered, by popular opinion, to be completely sane. To the caustic ridicule and petty quibbles of our opponents, we, following the example of the original who moved in their presence to convince people who denied the movement, will only respond by collecting new facts and new evidence in favor of our theory. What could be more convincing than facts and who would deny them? Perhaps only the ignorant, but their triumph will soon come to an end.

Lombroso's work “Genius and Madness” is already partly known to the Russian public from magazine reviews and reports. The reviews that appeared about this book so distinguished it from a number of others similar to it that the attempt to translate the psychiatric study of the Italian scientist into Russian requires neither justification nor explanation.

We only consider it necessary to make a reservation that, due to inevitable circumstances, some minor cuts have been made in places in the book and those details that are interesting only to specialists and which usually frighten laymen very much have been released. There are, however, not many such details in Lombroso’s work, which is purely journalistic in nature and intended as much for scientists as for the general public. The reductions affected mainly small forensic details and quotes from literary works of madmen, almost untranslatable into a foreign language, as well as partly that factual material that is significant only for the author’s compatriots and often even obscures the meaning of the points he is proving. In addition, the article on the “Geographical distribution of artists in Italy and scientific researchers in France” included in the appendix was excluded as it was too cluttered with the names of secondary and tertiary “celebrities”, dry in presentation and of exclusively local interest.

It would be desirable to fill out these abbreviations with data from Russian life, but they are not in the hands of private individuals, and those psychiatrists whom the publisher asked to provide the translation with appropriate notes could not do this successfully: some due to lack of free time, others – due to ignorance of the Italian language or disagreement with the main provisions of the author.

Lombroso revealed the purpose and practical significance of his research with sufficient completeness in two prefaces to various editions of the book and in the text itself. No matter how extensive the task he set for himself, it has recently been further expanded by the German psychiatrist Radstock, who considered it possible to apply a similar theory to a branch of knowledge that has been little studied by psychiatrists, but is especially important for society - pedagogy.

Lombroso Cesare

Genius and madness

Cesare Lombroso

Genius and madness

Parallel between great men and madmen

I. Introduction to Historical Review.

II. The similarity between genius people and crazy people in physiological terms.

III. The influence of atmospheric phenomena on people of genius and on the insane.

IV. The influence of meteorological phenomena on the birth of brilliant people.

V. The influence of race and heredity on genius and insanity.

VI. Brilliant people who suffered from insanity: Garrington, Bolian, Codazzi, Ampere, Kent, Schumann, Tasso, Cardano, Swift, Newton, Rousseau, Lenau, Szcheni, Schopenhauer.

VII. Examples of geniuses, poets, comedians and other crazy people.

VIII. Crazy artists and artists.

IX. Mattoid graphomaniacs, or psychopaths.

X. "Prophets" and revolutionaries. Savonarola. Lazaretti.

XI. Special characteristics of brilliant people who at the same time suffered from insanity.

XII. Exceptional characteristics of brilliant people.

Conclusion

When, many years ago, being, as it were, under the influence of ecstasy (raptus), during which the relationship between genius and insanity was clearly presented to me as if in a mirror, I wrote the first chapters of this book in 12 days*. I confess that even I myself was not clear to what serious practical conclusions the theory I created could lead to. I did not expect that it would provide the key to understanding the mysterious essence of genius and to explain those strange religious manias that were sometimes the core of great historical events, that it would help establish a new point of view for assessing the artistic creativity of geniuses by comparing their works in the field of art and literature with the same works of madmen and, finally, that it will provide enormous services to forensic medicine.

[Genius and madness. Introduction to a psychiatric clinic course given at the University of Pavia. Milan, 1863.]

Little by little, I was convinced of such an important practical significance of the new theory by both the documentary works of Adriani, Paoli, Frigerio, Maxime Ducamp, Rive and Verga regarding the development of artistic talents among the insane, as well as the high-profile trials of recent times - Mangione, Passanante, Lazaretti, Guiteau, who proved to everyone that the mania for writing is not just a kind of psychiatric curiosity, but directly a special form of mental illness and that the subjects obsessed with it, apparently completely normal, are all the more dangerous members of society because it is difficult to immediately notice a mental disorder in them, and Meanwhile, they are capable of extreme fanaticism and, like religious maniacs, can even cause historical upheavals in the lives of peoples. That is why it seemed to me extremely useful to re-examine the previous topic on the basis of the latest data and on a broader scale. I will not hide that I even consider him brave, in view of the bitterness with which the rhetoricians of science and politics, with the ease of newspaper writers and in the interests of one or another party, try to ridicule people who prove, contrary to the nonsense of metaphysicians, but with scientific data in their hands complete insanity, due to mental illness, of some of the so-called “criminals” and mental disorder of many persons hitherto considered, according to generally accepted opinion, to be completely sane.

To the caustic ridicule and petty quibbles of our opponents, we, following the example of the original who moved in their presence to convince people who denied the movement, will only respond by collecting new facts and new evidence in favor of our theory. What could be more convincing than facts and who would deny them? Perhaps only the ignorant, but their triumph will soon come to an end.

I. INTRODUCTION TO HISTORICAL REVIEW

Our duty is extremely sad - with the help of inexorable analysis, to destroy and destroy, one after another, those bright, rosy illusions with which man deceives and exalts himself in his arrogant insignificance; it is all the more sad that in return for these pleasant delusions, these idols, which have served as objects of adoration for so long, we can offer him nothing but a cold smile of compassion. But the servant of truth must inevitably submit to its laws. Thus, due to fatal necessity, he comes to the conviction that love is, in essence, nothing more than the mutual attraction of stamens and pistils... and thoughts are the simple movement of molecules. Even genius - this is the only sovereign power that belongs to a person, before which one can bend the knee without blushing - even many psychiatrists have put it on the same level with the tendency to crime, even in it they see only one of the teratological (ugly) forms of the human mind, one of the varieties of madness. And note that such profanation, such blasphemy is not only allowed by doctors, and not exclusively in our skeptical times.

Even Aristotle, this great ancestor and teacher of all philosophers, noted that under the influence of a rush of blood to the head, “many individuals become poets, prophets or soothsayers and that Mark of Syracuse wrote quite good poetry while he was a maniac, but, having recovered, completely lost this ability ".

He says in another place: “It has been noticed that famous poets, politicians and artists were partly melancholic and insane, partly misanthropes, like Bellerophon. Even today we see the same thing in Socrates, Empedocles, Plato and others, and most powerfully in poets. People with cold, abundant blood (lit. bile) are timid and limited, and people with hot blood are active, witty and talkative."

Plato argues that “delirium is not a disease at all, but, on the contrary, the greatest of the blessings given to us by the gods; under the influence of delirium, the Delphic and Dodonian soothsayers provided thousands of services to the citizens of Greece, whereas in their ordinary state they brought little benefit or were completely useless It happened many times that when the gods sent epidemics to the people, one of the mortals fell into a sacred delirium and, under its influence, became a prophet, indicated a cure for these diseases. A special kind of delirium, excited by the muses, evokes in the simple and immaculate soul of a person the ability to express in beautiful poetic form the exploits of heroes, which contributes to the education of future generations."

Democritus even directly said that he does not consider a person of sound mind to be a true poet. Excludit sanos, Helicone poetas.

AUTHOR'S FOREWORD TO THE FOURTH EDITION

When, many years ago, being, as it were, under the influence of ecstasy (raptus), during which the relationship between genius and insanity was clearly presented to me as if in a mirror, I wrote the first chapters of this book in 12 days. I confess that even I myself was not clear to what serious practical conclusions the theory I created could lead to. I did not expect that it would provide the key to understanding the mysterious essence of genius and to explain those strange religious manias that were sometimes the core of great historical events, that it would help establish a new point of view for assessing the artistic creativity of geniuses by comparing their works in the field of art and literature with the same works of madmen and, finally, that it will provide enormous services to forensic medicine.

Little by little, I was convinced of such an important practical significance of the new theory by both the documentary works of Adriani, Paoli, Frigerio, Maxime Ducamp, Rive and Verga regarding the development of artistic talents among the insane, as well as the high-profile trials of recent times - Mangione, Passanante, Lazaretti, Guiteau, which proved everyone that the mania for writing is not just a kind of psychiatric curiosity, but directly a special form of mental illness and that the subjects obsessed with it, apparently completely normal, are all the more dangerous members of society because it is difficult to immediately notice a mental disorder in them, and between Thus, they are capable of extreme fanaticism and, like religious maniacs, can even cause historical upheavals in the lives of peoples. That is why it seemed to me extremely useful to re-examine the previous topic on the basis of the latest data and on a broader scale. I will not hide that I even consider him brave, in view of the bitterness with which the rhetoricians of science and politics, with the ease of newspaper writers and in the interests of one or another party, try to ridicule people who prove, contrary to the nonsense of metaphysicians, but with scientific data in their hands complete insanity, due to mental illness, of some of the so-called “criminals” and mental disorder of many persons hitherto considered, according to generally accepted opinion, to be completely sane.

To the caustic ridicule and petty quibbles of our opponents, we, following the example of the original who moved in their presence to convince people who denied the movement, will only respond by collecting new facts and new evidence in favor of our theory. What could be more convincing than facts and who would deny them? Perhaps only the ignorant, but their triumph will soon come to an end.

Prof. C. Lombroso

I. SIMILARITY OF GENIUS PEOPLE AND PHYSIOLOGICALLY INSANE PEOPLE

No matter how cruel and sad this kind of paradox may be, if we consider it from a scientific point of view, we will find that in some respects it is quite reasonable, although at first glance it seems absurd.

Many of the great thinkers are subject, like madmen, to convulsive muscle contractions and are distinguished by sharp, so-called “trochaic” body movements. Thus, it is said about Lenau and Montesquieu that on the floor near the tables where they studied, one could notice indentations from the constant twitching of their legs. Buffon, immersed in his thoughts, once climbed the bell tower and descended from there by rope completely unconsciously, as if in a fit of somnambulism. Santeil, Crebillon, Lombardini had strange facial expressions, similar to grimaces. Napoleon suffered from constant twitching of his right shoulder and lips, and during fits of anger, also in his calves. “I was probably very angry,” he himself once admitted after a heated argument with Lowe, “because I felt my calves trembling, which had not happened to me for a long time.” Peter the Great was subject to twitching of the facial muscles, which horribly distorted his face.

“Carducci’s face,” says Mantegazza, “at times resembles a hurricane: lightning rains from his eyes, and the trembling of his muscles resembles an earthquake.”

Ampere could not speak otherwise than by walking and moving all his limbs. It is known that the normal composition of urine, and especially the urea content in it, changes markedly after manic attacks. The same thing is noticed after intense mental exercise. Already many years ago, Golding Bird made the observation that one English preacher, who spent the entire week in idleness and only preached sermons with great fervor on Sundays, precisely on that day the content of phosphate salts in the urine increased significantly, while on other days it was extremely insignificant. Subsequently, Smith confirmed with many observations the fact that with any mental stress the amount of urea in the urine increases, and in this respect the analogy between genius and madness seems undeniable.

From this abnormal abundance of urea, or rather from this new confirmation of the law of balance between force and matter, which governs the entire world of living beings, other, more amazing analogies can be deduced: for example, gray hair and baldness, thinness of the body, and also poor muscular and sexual activity, characteristic of all madmen, is very often found in great thinkers. Caesar was afraid of the pale and thin Cassiev. D'Alembert, Fenelon, Napoleon were as thin as skeletons in their youth. About Voltaire, Segur writes: “Thinness proves how hard he works; his emaciated and bent body serves only as a light, almost transparent shell, through which you seem to see the soul and genius of this person."

Paleness has always been considered an accessory and even an adornment of great people. In addition, thinkers, along with crazy people, are characterized by: constant overflow of the brain with blood (hyperemia), intense heat in the head and cooling of the extremities, a tendency to acute diseases of the brain and poor sensitivity to hunger and cold.

It can be said about brilliant people, just like about crazy people, that they remain lonely, cold, and indifferent to the responsibilities of a family man and a member of society all their lives. Michelangelo constantly insisted that his art replaced his wife. Goethe, Heine, Byron, Cellini, Napoleon, Newton, although they did not say this, by their actions they proved something even worse.

There are often cases when, due to the same reasons that so often cause madness, that is, due to illnesses and head injuries, the most ordinary people turn into geniuses. As a child, Vico fell from a tall staircase and crushed his right parietal bone. Gratri, at first a bad singer, became a famous artist after severely bruising his head with a log. Mabille-on, completely weak-minded from a young age, achieved fame for his talents, which developed in him as a result of a wound to his head. Gall, who reported this fact, knew a half-idiot Dane whose mental abilities became brilliant after he, at the age of 13, fell headfirst down the stairs 3). Several years ago, a cretin from Savoy, bitten by a mad dog, became a completely reasonable man in the last days of his life. Dr. Galle knew limited people whose mental abilities were unusually developed as a result of brain diseases (mi-dollo).

“It may very well be that my illness (spinal cord disease) gave my latest works some kind of abnormal shade,” Heine says with amazing insight in one of his letters. It must be added, however, that the illness affected in this way not only his last works, and he himself was aware of this. A few months before the intensification of his illness, Heine wrote about himself (Correspondace inedite. Paris, 1877): “My mental excitement is more likely the result of illness than genius - in order to at least a little calm my suffering, I composed poetry. On these terrible nights, mad with pain, my poor head rushes from side to side and makes the bells of my worn out stupid cap ring with cruel gaiety.”

Bisha and von der Kolk noticed that people with crooked necks have a more alert mind than ordinary people. Conolly had one patient whose mental faculties were stimulated during operations on him, and several such patients who showed special talent in the first periods of consumption and gout. Everyone knows how witty and cunning humpbacks are; Rokitansky even tried to explain this by the fact that their aorta, giving vessels going to the head, bends, resulting in an expansion of the volume of the heart and an increase in blood pressure in the skull.

This dependence of genius on pathological changes can partly explain the curious feature of genius compared to talent, in that it is something unconscious and manifests itself completely unexpectedly.

Jürgen Meyer says that a talented person acts strictly deliberately; he knows how and why he came to a certain theory, while this is completely unknown to a genius: all creative activity is unconscious.

Haydn attributed the creation of his famous oratorio “The Creation” to a mysterious gift sent from above. “When my work was not moving forward well,” he said, “I, with a rosary in my hands, retired to the chapel, read the Virgin Mary - and inspiration returned to me again.”

The Italian poetess Milli, while creating, almost involuntarily, her wonderful poems, worries, screams, sings, runs back and forth and seems to be in an epileptic fit.

Those people of genius who have observed themselves say that under the influence of inspiration they experience some inexpressibly pleasant feverish state, during which thoughts involuntarily arise in their minds and splash out of their own accord, like sparks from a burning brand.

Dante expressed this beautifully in the following three lines:

… I mi son un che, guando
Amore spira, noto ed in quel modo
Che detta dento vo significando.

Napoleon said that the outcome of battles depended on one moment, on one thought that temporarily remained inactive; when a favorable moment arrives, it flares up like a spark, and the result is victory (Moreau).

Bauer says that Koo's best poems were dictated to him in a state close to insanity. In those moments when these wonderful verses flowed from his lips, he was unable to reason even about the simplest things.

Foscolo admits in his Epistolario, the best work of this great mind, that the creative ability of a writer is determined by a special kind of mental excitement (fever), which cannot be caused at will.

“I write my letters,” he says, “not for the fatherland and not for the sake of glory, but for that inner pleasure that the exercise of our abilities gives us.”

Bettinelli calls poetic creativity a dream with open eyes, without loss of consciousness, and this is perhaps fair, since many poets dictated their poems in a state similar to sleep.

Goethe also says that a poet requires a certain cerebral stimulation and that he himself composed many of his songs while in a sort of fit of somnambulism.

Klopstock admits that when he wrote his poem, inspiration often came to him during sleep.

In a dream, Voltaire conceived one of the songs of the Henriade, Sardini - a theory of playing the harmonic, and Seckendorff - his charming song about Fantasia. Newton and Cardano solved mathematical problems in their sleep.

Muratori composed a pentameter in Latin in a dream many years after he stopped writing poetry. It is said that while he was sleeping, La Fontaine composed the fable “Two Doves,” and Condillac finished the lecture he began the day before.

Coleridge's Kubla and Golde's Fantasia were composed in a dream.

Mozart admitted that musical ideas appeared to him involuntarily, like dreams, and Hoffmann often told his friends: “I work, sitting at the piano with my eyes closed, and reproduce what someone from the outside tells me.”

Lagrange noticed an irregular pulse in his heart when he wrote, while Alfieri’s eyes grew dark at the same time.

Lamartine often said: “It is not I who think, but my thoughts that think for me.”

Alfieri, who called himself a barometer - to such an extent his creative abilities changed depending on the time of year - with the onset of September could not resist the involuntary impulse that took possession of him, so strong that he had to give in and wrote six comedies. On one of his sonnets, he wrote the following inscription in his own hand: “Random. I didn't want to write it." This predominance of the unconscious in the work of brilliant people was noticed in ancient times.

Socrates was the first to point out that poets create their works not as a result of effort or art, but thanks to some natural instinct. In the same way, soothsayers say beautiful things without realizing it at all.

“All works of genius,” says Voltaire in a letter to Diderot, “are created instinctively. The philosophers of the whole world together could not have written the Armides of Cinema or the fable “The Sea of ​​Beasts,” which La Fontaine dictated without even knowing well what would come of it. Corneille wrote the tragedy "Horace" as instinctively as a bird builds a nest."

Thus, the greatest ideas of thinkers, prepared, so to speak, by impressions already received and by the highly sensitive organization of the subject, are born suddenly and develop as unconsciously as the rash actions of madmen. This same unconsciousness explains the unshakability of convictions in people who have internalized fanatically known convictions. But as soon as the moment of ecstasy, excitement has passed, the genius turns into an ordinary person or falls even lower, since the lack of uniformity (balance) is one of the signs of a genius nature. Disraeli expressed this perfectly when he said that the best English poets, Shakespeare and Dryden, can also find the worst poetry. They said about the painter Tintoretto that he was sometimes higher than Carracci, sometimes lower than Tintoretto.

Ovidio quite correctly explains the dissimilarity of Tasso's style by his own admission that when inspiration disappeared, he was confused in his writings, did not recognize them and was not able to appreciate their merits.

There can be no doubt that there is a complete similarity between a man who is mad during a seizure and a man of genius thinking about and creating his work.

Remember the Latin proverb: “Aut insanit homo, aut versus fecit” (“Either a madman or a poet”).

This is how the doctor Revellier-Parat describes Tasso’s condition:

“The pulse is weak and uneven, the skin is pale, cold, the head is hot, inflamed, the eyes are shiny, bloodshot, restless, darting around. At the end of the period of creativity, the author himself often does not understand what he stated a minute ago.”

Marini, when writing Adone, did not notice that he had severely burned his leg. During his creative period, Tasso seemed completely insane. In addition, when thinking about something, many artificially cause a rush of blood to the brain, such as Schiller, who put his feet on ice, Pitt and Fox, who prepared their speeches after drinking immoderate porter, and Paisiello, who composed only under the cover of many blankets. Milton and Descartes threw their heads back on the sofa, Bossuet retired to the cold room and put warm poultices on his head; Cujas worked while lying face down on the mat. There was a saying about Leibniz that he thought only in a horizontal position - to such an extent he needed it for mental activity. Milton composed with his head thrown back on the pillow, and Thomas and Rossini - lying in bed; Rousseau pondered his works in the bright midday sun with his head open.

Obviously, they all instinctively used drugs that temporarily increase the flow of blood to the head to the detriment of the rest of the body. Here, by the way, it is worth mentioning that many of the gifted and especially brilliant people abused alcoholic beverages. Not to mention Alexander the Great, who, under the influence of intoxication, killed his best friend and died after draining the cup of Hercules ten times, Caesar himself was often carried home by soldiers on their shoulders. Socrates, Seneca, Alcibiades, Cato, and especially Septimius Severus and Mahmud II were so intemperate that they all died from drunkenness due to delirium tremens. The Constable of Bourbon, Avicenna, who is said to have devoted the second half of his life to proving the futility of the scientific information he acquired in the first half, and many painters, for example Carracci, Steen, Barbatelli, and a whole galaxy of poets - Murger, Gerard de Nerval, Musset, Kleist, Mailat and at their head Tasso, who wrote in one of his letters: “I do not deny that I am a madman; but I like to think that my madness came from drinking and love, because I really drink a lot.”

There are many drunkards among the great musicians, for example Dussek, Handel and Gluck, who said that “he considers it quite fair to love gold, wine and fame, because the first gives him the means to have the second, which, inspiring, gives him glory.” However, besides wine, he also loved vodka and finally got drunk on it.

It has been noticed that almost all the great creations of thinkers receive their final form, or at least become clear, under the influence of some special sensation, which here plays, so to speak, the role of a drop of salt water in a well-constructed voltaic column. Facts prove that all great discoveries were made under the influence of the senses, as Moleschott confirms. Several frogs, from which it was supposed to prepare a healing decoction for Galvani's wife, served as the basis for the discovery of galvanism. The isochronic (simultaneous) swinging of a chandelier and the falling of an apple prompted Newton and Galileo to create great systems. Alfieri composed and thought about his tragedies while listening to music. When Mozart saw an orange, he remembered a Neapolitan folk song that he had heard five years ago, and immediately wrote the famous cantata for the opera Don Giovanni. Looking at some porter, Leonardo conceived his Judas, and Thorvaldsen found a suitable pose for a sitting angel at the sight of his sitter’s antics. Inspiration first struck Salvatore Rosa while he was admiring the view of Posilino, and Hogarth found types for his caricatures in a tavern after a drunkard broke his nose there in a fight. Milton, Bacon, Leonardo and Warburton needed to hear the ringing of bells in order to get to work; Bourdalou, before dictating his immortal sermons, always played some aria on the violin. The reading of one of Spenser's odes aroused a penchant for poetry in Cowley, and Sakrobose's book made Gammad addicted to astronomy. While considering cancer, Watt came up with the idea of ​​constructing a machine that would be extremely useful in industry, and Gibbon decided to write the history of Greece after he saw the ruins of the Capitol 4).

But in the same way, certain sensations cause insanity or serve as its starting point, sometimes being the cause of the most terrible attacks of rabies. For example, Humboldt’s nurse confessed that the sight of her pet’s fresh, tender body aroused in her an uncontrollable desire to slaughter him. And how many people have been involved in murder, arson or tearing up graves at the sight of an ax, a blazing fire and a corpse!

It should also be added that inspiration and ecstasy always turn into real hallucinations, because a person then sees objects that exist only in his imagination. Thus, Grossi said that one night, after he had worked for a long time to describe the appearance of the ghost of Prin, he saw this ghost in front of him and had to light a candle to get rid of it. Ball tells about Reynolds' son (successore) that he could make up to 300 portraits a year, since it was enough for him to look at someone for half an hour while he sketched a sketch, so that later this face would constantly be in front of him, as if alive . The painter Martini always saw in front of him the pictures that he painted, so one day, when someone stood between him and the place where the image appeared to him, he asked this person to step aside, because it was impossible for him to continue copying, while he existed only in in his imagination the original was closed. Luther heard arguments from Satan that he could not have come up with himself before.

If we now turn to solving the question - what exactly is the physiological difference between a genius and an ordinary person, then, on the basis of autobiographies and observations, we will find that for the most part the whole difference between them lies in the refined and almost painful impressionability of the first. A savage or an idiot is insensitive to physical suffering, their passions are few, and among the sensations they perceive only those that directly concern them in the sense of satisfying the needs of life. As mental abilities develop, impressionability grows and reaches its greatest strength in brilliant individuals, being the source of their suffering and glory. These chosen natures are more sensitive in quantitative and qualitative terms than mere mortals, and the impressions they perceive are distinguished by their depth, remain in memory for a long time and are combined in various ways. Little things, random circumstances, details, invisible to an ordinary person, sink deep into their soul and are processed in a thousand ways to reproduce what is usually called creativity, although these are only binary and quaternary combinations of sensations.

Haller wrote about himself: “What is left for me except impressionability, this powerful feeling, which is a consequence of a temperament that vividly perceives the joys of love and the wonders of science? Even now I am moved to tears when I read the description of some generous act. My characteristic sensitivity, of course, gives my poems that passionate tone that other poets do not have.”

“Nature has not created a more sensitive soul than mine,” Diderot wrote about himself. Elsewhere he says: “Increase the number of sensitive people and you will increase the number of good and bad actions.” When Alfieri heard music for the first time, he was, in his words, “astounded to such an extent, as if the bright sun had blinded my sight and hearing; For several days after that I felt extraordinary sadness, not without pleasantness; fantastic ideas crowded into my head, and I would have been able to write poetry if I had known then how it was done...” In conclusion, he says that nothing acts on the soul as irresistibly powerful as music. A similar opinion was expressed by Stern, Rousseau and J. Sand.

Corradi proves that all of Leopardi's misfortunes and his very philosophy were caused by excessive sensitivity and unsatisfied love, which he first experienced in his 18th year. And indeed, Leopardi's philosophy took on a more or less gloomy tone, depending on the state of his health, until finally a sad mood became a habit among him.

Urkvitsia fainted when he heard the smell of a rose.

Stern, after Shakespeare the most profound of the psychological poets, says in one letter: “Reading the biographies of our ancient heroes, I cry for them as if for living people... Inspiration and impressionability are the only tools of genius. The latter evokes in us those delightful sensations that give great strength to joy and cause tears of tenderness.”

It is known in what slavish subordination Alfieri and Foscolo were to women who were not always worthy of such adoration. The beauty and love of Fornarina served as a source of inspiration for Raphael not only in painting, but also in poetry. Several of his erotic poems have still not lost their charm.

And how early the passions of brilliant people manifest themselves! Dante and Alfieri were in love at the age of 9, Russo - 11, Carron and Byron - 8. The latter had convulsions already at the age of 16, when he learned that the girl he loved was getting married. “Grief choked me,” he says, “although sexual desire was still unfamiliar to me, but I felt such passionate love that it is unlikely that I subsequently experienced a stronger feeling.” At one of Kitz's performances, Byron had a seizure of convulsions.

Lorby has seen scholars swoon with delight when reading Homer's works.

The painter Francia died of admiration after seeing Raphael's painting.

Ampere felt the beauty of nature so vividly that he almost died of happiness when he found himself on the shores of Lake Geneva. Having found a solution to some problem, Newton was so shocked that he could not continue his studies. Gay-Lussac and Davy, after their discovery, began to dance around their office in their shoes. Archimedes, delighted with the solution to the problem, ran out into the street dressed as Adam, shouting: “Eureka!” (“Found!”) In general, strong minds also have strong passions, which give special vivacity to all their ideas; if for some of them many passions fade, as if fading over time, this is only because little by little they are drowned out by the prevailing passion for fame or science.

But it is precisely this too strong impressionability of brilliant or only gifted people that in the vast majority of cases is the cause of their misfortunes, both real and imaginary.

“A precious and rare gift, which is the privilege of great geniuses,” writes Mantegazza, “is accompanied, however, by a painful sensitivity to all, even the smallest, external irritations: every breath of wind, the slightest increase in heat or cold turns for them into that dried rose petal , which did not allow the unfortunate sybarite to sleep.” La Fontaine may have meant himself when he wrote:

A genius is irritated by everything, and what for ordinary people seems like just pin pricks, with his sensitivity already seems to him like a blow from a dagger.

Boileau and Chateaubriand could not be indifferent to hearing praise from anyone, even their shoemaker.

When Foscolo was talking one day with Mrs. S., writes Mantegazza, whom he was strongly courting, and she laughed at him angrily, he became so furious that he shouted: “You want to kill me, so I’ll crush my skull right now at your feet.” . With these words, he threw himself headfirst into the corner of the fireplace with all his might. One of those standing nearby, however, managed to hold him by the shoulders and thereby save his life.

Morbid impressionability also gives rise to exorbitant vanity, which distinguishes not only people of genius, but also scientists in general, starting from ancient times; in this respect, both of them are very similar to monomaniacs suffering from prideful insanity.

“Man is the most vain of animals, and poets are the most vain of people,” wrote Heine, meaning, of course, himself. In another letter he says: “Don’t forget that I am a poet and therefore I think that everyone should give up everything they are doing and start reading poetry.”

Menke tells about Filelfo how he imagined that in the whole world, even among the ancients, no one knew the Latin language better than him. Abbot Cagnoli was so proud of his poem about the Battle of Aquileia that he became furious when any of the writers did not bow to him. “What, you don’t know Cagnoli?” - he asked.

The poet Lucius did not rise from his seat when Julius Caesar entered the meeting of poets, because he considered himself superior to him in the art of versification.

Ariosto, having received a laurel wreath from Charles V, ran like a madman through the streets. The famous surgeon Porta, present at the Lombard Institute during the reading of medical works, tried in every possible way to express his contempt and dissatisfaction with them, whatever their merit, while he listened calmly and attentively to works on mathematics or linguistics.

Schopenhauer became furious and refused to pay bills if his last name was written two paragraphs apart.

Barthes lost sleep in despair when, during the printing of his Genie, the sign was not placed over E. Whiston, according to Arago, did not dare to publish a refutation of Newton's chronology for fear that Newton would not. killed him.

Everyone who had the rare good fortune of living in the company of brilliant people was amazed at their ability to interpret every action of those around them in a bad way, to see persecution everywhere and in everything to find a reason for deep, endless melancholy. This ability is determined precisely by the stronger development of mental powers, thanks to which a gifted person is more able to find the truth and at the same time more easily comes up with false arguments to confirm the validity of his painful delusion. In part, the gloomy view of geniuses on their surroundings depends, however, on the fact that, being innovators in the mental sphere, they with unshakable firmness express beliefs that are not similar to the generally accepted opinion, and thus alienate most ordinary people.

But still, the main reason for melancholy and dissatisfaction with the life of chosen natures is the law of dynamism and balance, which also governs the nervous system, the law according to which, following excessive expenditure or development of strength, there is an excessive decline of the same strength - a law due to which Not a single miserable mortal can show a certain strength without paying for it in other respects, and, finally, the law that determines the unequal degree of perfection of their own works is very cruel.

Melancholy, despondency, shyness, selfishness - this is a cruel retribution for the highest mental talents that they waste, just as abuse of sensual pleasures entails a disorder of the reproductive system, impotence and diseases of the spinal cord, and excess in food is accompanied by gastric catarrh.

After one of those ecstasies during which the poetess Milli discovers such enormous power of creativity that it would have been enough for a lifetime for minor Italian poets, she fell into a semi-paralytic state that lasted several days. At the end of his sermons, Mohammed fell into a state of complete stupor and once himself told Abu Bakr that the interpretation of three chapters of the Koran had driven him to stupor.

Goethe, the cold Goethe himself, admitted that his mood was sometimes too cheerful, sometimes too sad.

Lombroso was born on November 6, 1835 in Verona, the kingdom of Lombardy-Venetia, into a wealthy Jewish family. His father, Aaron Lombroso, was a merchant from Verona, and his mother was Zeffora (or Zephyra) Levi from Chieri near Turin. Lombroso came from a line of rabbis, which led him to study a wide range of topics at university. Despite conducting religious studies at the university, Lombroso ultimately decided to continue his studies in medicine, which he successfully completed at the University of Turin.

short biography

After graduating from university, military service and leaving the army, Lombroso ran a psychiatric hospital in Pesaro. Lombroso married a woman named Nina de Benedetti on April 10, 1870. They had five children, one of whom, a daughter named Gina, continued to edit Lombroso's works after his death. Lombroso was later influenced by his brother-in-law Guglielmo Ferrero, who made him believe that not all criminality comes from innate factors and that social factors also play a significant role in the process of becoming a criminal.

The future author of Genius and Madness, Lombroso, studied literature, linguistics and archeology at the universities of Padua, Vienna and Paris, but changed his plans and became an army surgeon in 1859. In 1866 he was appointed lecturer in Pavia, and in 1878 became professor of forensic medicine in Turin. In the same year, the creator of "Genius and Madness" C. Lombroso wrote his most important and influential work L "uomo delinquente, which went through five editions in Italian and was published in various European languages. However, only in 1900 his work was published in English. Lombroso later became professor of psychiatry (1896) and criminal anthropology (1906) at the same university. He died in Turin in 1909.

The concept of criminal atavism

The general assumption was that repeat offenders differ from malefactors in numerous physical anomalies. He suggested that criminals represented a return to the primitive type of man, characterized by physical features reminiscent of apes, lower primates and early humans, and preserved to some extent, he said, in modern "savages". The behavior of these biological “kickbacks” will inevitably contradict the rules and expectations of modern civilized society.

Years later, after anthropometric studies of criminals, madmen and normal people, Lombroso became convinced that the "congenital criminal" (reo nato - the term given by Ferri) could be anatomically identified due to such features as a sloping forehead, ears of unusual size, facial asymmetry, prognathism, asymmetrical skulls and other “physical stigmata.” He believed that specific criminals, such as thieves, rapists and murderers, may have special characteristics. Lombroso also argued that criminals had less sensitivity to pain and touch, sharper vision, a lack of moral sense (including remorse), more vanity, impulsiveness, vindictiveness and cruelty.

Criminals on a whim and everyone else

In addition to the "natural criminal" type, Lombroso also described "criminoids" or accidental criminals, criminals by instinct, "moral idiots" and "criminal epileptics". He acknowledged the smaller role of organic factors in many habitual offenders and referred to the delicate balance between predisposing factors (organic, genetic) and precipitating factors such as environment, positive opportunity, or poverty.

Crime and women

In The Criminal Woman, presented in English translation by Nicole Hahn Rafter and Mary Gibson, Lombroso used his theory of atavism to explain the criminality of women. In the text, Lombroso sets out a comparative analysis of "normal women" versus "criminal women" such as thieves and prostitutes. However, Lombroso's "stubborn beliefs" about women presented an "insoluble problem" for this theory. The creator of the concept of genius and insanity, Lombroso, was convinced that women are inferior to men in everything, including the tendency to commit crimes.

Scientific methods

Lombroso's research methods were clinical and descriptive, with precise details of cranial measurements and other anthropometric data. He did not engage in rigorous statistical comparisons between criminals and non-criminals. Although he later learned about psychological and sociological factors in the etiology of crime, he remained convinced of the superiority of his criminal anthropometry. After his death, the skull and brain were measured according to his own theories by a colleague, as he had requested in his will. His head was preserved in a jar and is still on display with his collection at the Museum of Psychiatry and Criminology in Turin.

Lombroso's theories were rejected throughout Europe, especially in the schools of medicine associated with Alexandre Lacassane in France, but not in the United States, where sociological studies of crime and the criminal predominated. It is believed that his ideas about the physical differentiation between criminals and non-criminals were seriously challenged by Charles Hering (The English Convict, 1913), who analyzed carefully and found negligible statistical differences.

Cesare Lombroso, "Genius and Madness" - summary

In addition to his contributions to criminology and the introduction of the concept of “degeneration,” he believed that genius was closely related to madness. In his attempts to develop these concepts, the author of the concept of genius and insanity, Lombroso, traveled to Moscow and met with Leo Tolstoy, hoping to discover and provide evidence for his theory of genius. And he succeeded, as the further history of his famous and scandalous work shows.

Psychiatrist Lombroso's book Genius and Insanity was published in 1889, and it argued that artistic genius was a form of hereditary insanity. To substantiate this claim, he began amassing a large collection of “psychiatric art.” He published an article on this topic in 1880, in which he identified thirteen characteristic features of the “art of the mad.” Although the criteria are generally considered outdated today, his work inspired later writers on the subject, notably Hans Prinzhorn.

Connection with the scientific world

The book “Genius and Madness” by the Italian psychiatrist C. Lombroso inspired the work of Maxim Nordau, as evidenced by his devotion to the concept of degeneration, and he considered Lombroso himself his “dear and honored teacher.” In his study of geniuses descending into madness, Lombroso stated that he could only find six people who showed no symptoms of "degeneration" or madness: Galileo, Da Vinci, Voltaire, Machiavelli, Michelangelo and Darwin. On the other hand, Lombroso argued that people such as Shakespeare, Plato, Aristotle, Mozart and Dante all showed "degenerate symptoms of insanity."

Symptoms of degeneration in geniuses

To determine which geniuses were "degenerate" or insane, Lombroso rated each genius by whether they showed "symptoms of degeneration," which included prematurity, longevity, versatility, and inspiration. Lombroso supplemented these personal observations with measurements including facial angles, “anomalies” in bone structure, and brain fluid volumes. The measurements of the skulls taken included those of Kant, Volta, Foscolo and Fusinieri. Lombroso's approach to using cranial measurements inspired the research into phrenology of the German physician Franz Joseph Gall.

Genius and physiology

The author of Genius and Madness, Lombroso, associated genius with various health disorders, listing signs of degeneration in the second chapter of his work, some of which included various physiological abnormalities such as excessive pallor. Lombroso listed the following geniuses as "sick and weak in childhood": Demosthenes, Bacon, Descartes, Newton, Locke, Adam Smith, Boyle, Flaxman, Nelson, Haller, Corner and Pascal. Other physical afflictions associated with degeneration, according to Lombroso, included rickets, emaciation, sterility, leftism, unconsciousness, stupidity, somnambulism, dwarfism or disproportion of the body, and amnesia. In his explanation of the connection between genius and insanity, Lombroso cites Ibsen, George Eliot, Browning, Louis Blanc, Swinburne, etc. Lombroso further cited certain character traits as markers of degeneration: “love of special words” and “sense of inspiration.”

Criticism

The methods and explanations in psychiatrist Lombroso's book Genius and Madness were refuted and criticized by the American Journal of Psychiatry. In a review of the book, they stated: "There is a hypothesis here, claiming to be the result of rigorous scientific research and reluctant conviction, supported by obvious truths, distortions and assumptions." Lombroso's work has also been criticized by the Italian anthropologist Giuseppe Sergi, who, in his review of Genius and Madness, concludes that all theories attempting to explain the nature of geniuses are based on observation and subjective assumptions.

Despite the criticism of the scientific community, success was nevertheless ensured by Lombroso’s book “Genius and Madness” - reviews of it still remain enthusiastic, because the reading public, as is known, loves unusual and exotic theories.