Why Didn't Van Gogh Sell Anything? (Schizo/Psycho War pt. 3)
Cuckfucius here—welcome back to the Cyber Ascetics Collective; the terminally-online gooner shitposter ex-gifted-kid’s one stop shop for half-chub spirituality and too-based-for-academia essays.
We begin with a concerning contradiction:
Renowned painter Vincent Van Gogh only sold one painting in his entire life.
Almost 200 years later, we now recognize the deep brilliance of his work. To the point that he’s in the running for the GOAT of painting award.
How in the everloving f*ck is this possible.
The potential greatest painter in history sold basically nothing during his lifetime.
What the hell is going on? Were people in his time born without eyeballs??
The LeBron of painting was born, lived, and died in obscurity. WHY? HOW??
This is one of the greatest conundrums in all of art history.
No one has a compelling answer to this…
…Until now.
Fantastic conundrums deserve a fantastical explanation.
This essay attempts to present an answer. A headass, ridiculous, nonsensical answer. Yet.. a potentially groundbreaking one... for those willing to squint hard enough.
But first, we need to lay some crucial groundwork. To understand Van Gogh, we need to talk about Nietzsche. We need to talk about The Enlightenment in the West. We need to touch on thoughts and feelings and ripples and resonance. There are copious memes to review and analyze. We got a great show lined up for yall.
And of course, the answer will only show itself upon delving further into the depths of the Schizo/Psycho War.
Thank you for being here.
Part 1: Review
The Schizo/Psycho War Table of Contents:
Why Didn’t Van Gogh Sell Anything?
I’d highly recommend going back to read parts one and two of this essay series as they provide necessary context. However, here are some of the main bullet points in case you don’t want to do that:
There is a war raging between the Schizos and the Psychos.
The war is largely a proxy war to influence the Normies (95% of the population)
Psychos use slavery as their main tool; Schizos use resonance as their main tool.
Psychos try to dominate&control Normies, Schizos can see&call out Psychos.
The Psychos are oriented toward the external world; Schizos are oriented toward the internal world.
“Schizo” is broader than “schizophrenic” and “Psycho” is broader than “psychopath”
Part 2: Vincent
Earlier, we learned about the Schizo As Homeless archetype, and the way that Psychos use hostile architecture to keep their natural enemy at bay.
Here, it is helpful to understand a second Schizo archetype:
The Schizo As Artist.
Vincent Van Gogh spent his entire short life painting. He was wildly prolific, and during his active years averaged about one painting or drawing every two days.
He also suffered from mental illness and episodes of psychosis during his life. The madlad even chopped off part of his own ear in a bout of emotional turmoil.
Crucially,
Van Gogh was not painting as a means to sell art, make money, and become famous.
He was not driven by such Psycho motives.
Van Gogh painted because he had that dawg inside him that demanded to be let out.
Van Gogh’s life was about his insides—from his art to his mental illness. His interior drove every aspect of his life. An inverse to the way the pursuit of external money and power can drive every aspect of a Psycho’s life.
Here we need to tweak our understanding of the Schizo condition:
Thus far we’ve said that Schizos act “in order to induce resonance in others”. This phrasing implies that they use action as a means to achieve the end of resonance. But this is not quite right.
The purest Schizos simply act.
Money be damned, fame be damned, even resonance be damned.
They express what is INSIDE them. IF others resonate with the Schizo’s expression, then that’s a happy accident. For the True Schizo, it is not the main goal. The main goal is expression; the purer and more honed the expression, the broader and deeper the resonance.
The Psycho mind cannot comprehend this—they see the Schizo act and the people applaud, and view the Schizo as a master manipulator who A/B tested and calculated exactly how to maximize applause.
When in fact, the Schizo simply acted.
((I promise this relates back to Vinny))
This is very confused in today’s world.
The world today has broadly recognized the value and utility of resonance. “Creators” are now coveted and praised, can make boatloads of money via their expression—both for themselves and their Psycho sponsors.. Lotta Psychos out there in the world masquerading as Schizos these days. Be careful and vigilant, struggler…
But more on the modern world in a later essay.
The main point of this section is this:
Vincent Van Gogh did not act for any ulterior motive. His dope ass paintings weren’t getting him even a drop of that sweet sweet 1880’s pussy. They were getting him a life of poverty and misery. And yet, he persisted. Because that Thang inside him was too powerful to turn away from. More powerful than any sort of external circumstance. His insides, for some reason, demanded his full attention.
Today, we recognize Van Gogh’s brilliance in hindsight. Just like we recognize the brilliance of Diogenes and of Luigi Mangione in hindsight.
Not all Schizos are so fortunate. Even if their expression is “good” (palatable to Normies, able to be spread)…
…only a small percentage of Schizo Warriors will receive any sort of recognition in life. Most won’t be able to hone their expression to a level where that’s possible.
This is important because resonance is how Schizos fight in the Schizo/Psycho War.
Psychos attack directly, Schizos attack indirectly.
Known Schizo Warrior Frank Sinatra once said “the best revenge is success”. This highlights the Schizo fighting style in The War to a T. If they punch you, go triple platinum anyway.
Yet, just 1% of Schizos will see any such success. This pattern, curiously, is reflected in Psycho structures as well—
The median OnlyFans creator only earns ~$50 per month, while the top 1% can earn 10k/month or more. OnlyFans models can be a very interesting type of Schizo trapped inside a Psycho business model, and deserve their own essay altogether. The median OF creator lives a distinct yet potent condition—baring one’s holes to the world and receiving a single Dumbledore clap in return does a rare sort of emotional damage.
I am intimately familiar with this as I bare the gaping, cavernous hole in my head to you all, on this site, the “Onlyfans for intellectuals” as Liv Boeree so eloquently put it. Please consider subscribing below to help me become the Amouranth of Substack:
In our sublime 21st century wisdom, we now grasp that Vinny’s Van Gussy was dropping straight heaters on the daily. For no other reason than just to do it. But the central question of this essay remains:
WHY didn’t he get that reputation during life? What exactly was holding him back? If his expression was “good enough” to induce so much resonance as time has gone on,,,,,, why wasn’t it “good enough” to induce it in his time??
The problem is, Van Gogh lived from 1853 to 1890. The madlad chose to incarnate during probably the worst time in history for a humble Schizo.
That is, at the direct tail-end of the Enlightenment in the West.
Also called, by those who understand the Schizo/Psycho War…
…the biggest Psycho W in history.
Let’s get into it.
Part 3: The Enlightenment
The Enlightenment in the West was the second time in history that the Psychos managed to break free from the back-and-forth of The War.
((The agricultural revolution was the first, but that’s for another essay))
It makes me shudder just to consider the insurmountable advantage that Psychos made during this time. One that persists to this day.
Don’t get it twisted—the Enlightenment was a very multifaceted time and Schizos also made some concessions. Anti-slavery movements, ideals of liberty && equality, and the rise of the public sphere allowed ideas to spread outside of aristocratic && ecclesiastical control, advancing the Schizo cause.
However.
The rise of empiricism would eventually relegate the Schizos to an almost impossibly small corner of society.
Let’s be clear—empiricism and the scientific method have made sensational material gains, and made the lives of all humans measurably more comfortable quite rapidly. However, these modes relegated Truth to the domain of the External.
Pause on that for a moment.
Pre-enlightenment, where does Truth come from? It comes from God. It comes from Myth. It comes from stories, methodologies, observation, dreams, ancestors, authorities, reasoning.
Post-enlightenment, where does Truth come from? Observation. Science.
This is a massive oversimplification, but also the broad strokes of the matter. You don’t materialize the perverse being that is a Reddit Atheist without first setting the groundwork with the Enlightenment.
Even the freaking word choice man, FRICK
The word “Enlightenment”, in the Schizo-coded East, refers to the most refined internal state possible. It is in many ways, the Schizo pinnacle. The highest a Schizo can aim for. Maximum inner refinement.
The fact that the Psycho-coded West took that, bastardized it completely, and used it to refer to the greatest mass External-orienting Psycho movement in history is part and parcel for how this whole thing works.
Schizo Sees something Real, Psycho takes, imitates, recreates for their own ends.
Just as Advertising is the clunky Psycho attempt to recreate ART in order to induce resonance in Normies to get them to buy shit.
The basis, the very first step in the Scientific Method is what?
Observation.
»»»»»»»BUT CRUCIALLY, OBSERVATION OF THE EXTERNAL«««««««
Of the Natural World. The one on the outside of you. Don’t look inside—please for the love of god don’t look inside! Look outside, observe outside. All can be known through the sense organs. Make experiments with things out there. Use the microscopes to look at even smaller things out there and the megascopes to look at the big things out there. Microscopes and Megascopes point outwards.
Where are the microscopes and megascopes that point inwards?
Science has made rapidly accelerating discoveries & inventions in the time since the Enlightenment. We have tech unfathomable to people living just 100 years ago for the first time in history. Most people in most Western countries have all their material needs met and then some.
But listen close:
...How’re your insides?
...Are you happy?
...Are you satisfied with your life?
...Are you “having a good time rn”?
If you are, that’s cool. Many aren’t. It doesn’t really need repeating in depth that we’re in the midst of a mental health crisis. The result seems to be clear: for all the material gains we’ve made due to post-Enlightenment empiricism, our internal worlds seem to somehow be deteriorating.
Much like how Van Gogh’s inner world was deteriorating in his time.
Here’s a nagging question for the backburner: why do things under Psycho rule lead to an increase in suffering across the board? What is it inside the Psycho psyche that ripples outward into the world to structure it as they do? When Psychos gain power, material comfort increases while inner comfort appears to decrease.
But that’s a topic for next time, when we get into the present day, AI, the internet, and so-on. The dynamics of the Schizo/Psycho War today have shifted.
This wraps up the first part of our answer: Van Gogh was not able to receive recognition during life because he was born (1853) right after the Enlightenment (which ended ca. 1815), directly into a wholly Psycho world setting.
He was a seed planted in the desert.
Here’s the rub:
Vincent Van Gogh was not the only Schizo Warrior born in this post-enlightenment period.
He had a contemporary. Not by blood, not even by correspondence—just a brother fighting the good fight of the humble Schizo Warrior.
If you know anything about Friedrich Nietzsche, it’s that he was about as Schizo as they come. In his later years he was even driven directly to madness. Just like Van Gogh.
The story goes that Nietzsche saw a cab driver whipping a horse in Turin. In a single moment, Nietzsche was so overcome with emotion that he ran over, threw his arms around the horse to protect it, then fell to the ground weeping.
This episode would trigger a mental breakdown that would last for the rest of his 11 years alive. It’s why some even call Nietzsche the first animal rights activist.
Here we see another common thread—Schizos often bear an immense amount of internal pain. Just like Van Gogh, just like Luigi. They fight internal battles.
Not to mention, like Van Gogh, Nietzsche’s work was not accepted during his lifetime, and he lived in relative obscurity. Yet once again, today we recognize the impact and value of his ideas.
Another Schizo seed kept from blooming by the Psycho sands.
Now that begs a question—are all those vindicated by history secretly based Schizo warriors? Surely not. But, there must be some underlying mechanism as to why some stories and character profiles persist through the ages. Calling it “survivorship bias” is handwaving with a thought-terminating cliche. Why do some survive in the first place? And furthermore, it’s CURIOUS that some people have something good and worthwhile that they express, that gets no recognition until they are dead.
Imagine you made something, people called it a pile of shit, and then you died.
But then for literal hundreds of years after, generations praise your genius and display your work in museums. How does this possibly happen?? How does it make any possible sense??
The Psycho model is somewhat the inverse—the Psycho builds tall buildings and monuments that etch into the land. People stare in awe at their glory while they’re alive, and then they fade into relative obscurity. Buildings are torn down, towns repaved. That new Wal-Mart that just went up? No one can quite place what was there before… New Psychos with new visions for buildings come in and build over the old. Psychos affect the landscape in the here-and-now, and often their monuments fade over time.
But the fact that Schizos can live their whole life with NOTHING to show for their work, and then be celebrated for generations after makes no sense.
And yet, it happens like this time and time again.
This means that Schizos DO something REAL. It’s easy to see that Psychos do something real, because their doings are out in the open for everyone to see.
The Schizo cooks in a ghost kitchen. But let them cook long enough, and soon everyone’s mouth is watering. Even if they die before anybody gets a taste.
So. We have Van Gogh, Schizo extraordinnaire. His fellow Schizo Nietzsche. The post-Enlightenment soil that suffocated them… for a time. The uncanny reality that their shit was good.. REAL good, but for some reason not good enough.. in their time.
The post-enlightenment shit soil is one piece of the answer. That was the factor that muffled their expression before it was allowed to blossom. But the question remains, why did their expression eventually blossom at all?
More broadly, what makes any expression “good”?
Perhaps this deserves its own essay, but we’ll touch on it briefly. Here we must consult the Iceberg of Inner Stuff:
Simply put, the further down a person is able to access, the deeper they’ll be able to resonate with other people.
The shit at the top of the iceberg is what makes people different, the shit at the bottom is what makes us the same.
Tickle the briny depths, and all a sudden you got resonance, baby.
Most people live at the top, fully engrossed with their own thoughts, their own emotions, their own bodily sensations, their own homes, jobs, lives, and so-on.
Some people, by circumstance, practice, or a combination of both, are able to dive down deeper.
This is still abstract—let me make it concrete. Take a look at this image:
.
.
.
Haha, gotcha!
…
Look again. Look closer.
…
A certain percentage of you just suffered heavy psychic damage. If that’s you, I apologize but you’re about to Get It.
If you’re still lost, this meme should clear things up a bit:
Check it: loss became Loss in real time, in front of our eyes. I promise this is relevant. The original artist Tim Buckley stuck his arm into the briny depths of the collective unconscious like a Mississippi Noodler and wrenched out this original comic:
It isn’t clear what exactly about this comic resonated so widely and deeply. Perhaps the emotional nature of miscarriage, perhaps the uncannnily inexpressive faces, perhaps the utter impact of the first frame, or the strangely drawn hands, or a drop of the fact that this comic felt sudden and incongruous with the rest of Tim’s work up to that point.
Regardless of the reason, the floodgates opened:
But why tf are we talking about Loss.jpg all of a sudden?
Loss is a concrete example of an archetypical symbol moving from the subtle to the gross. The bottom of the iceberg to the top. It was previously unrealized (hidden), and then a spark of artistic inspiration gave it form in the original comic, then the symbol became realized (unhidden), collectively, over time.
With Loss.jpg, this happened rapidly because of the internet.
But imagine this—wait let me put on my Ben Shabibo voice:
Imagine that the original “loss” comic was penned in 1889, the same year as Van Gogh’s “Starry Night”. Say it was tucked away in a drawer, then found in 2008, scanned, and uploaded to the internet.
Assume for the sake of argument that somehow, it was the exact same comic. Same artstyle, panel arrangement, etc. Everything else in the world remains the same. Same reaction, same tornado of memes.
The point here is that the Loss comic contained some catalyst. Some latent spark. A seed of sorts. The Loss.jpg meme fire wouldn’t have been lit without it.
The comic was the straw that broke the camel’s back. But why would a straw break a camel’s back? There must’ve been enough straws there already that just one more would do the trick. A pound of feathers is heavier than a pound of steel…
Put concretely:
The world came to a state where it was ready to realize Loss.jpg. The logs were positioned just so, the kindling was set—it just awaited a spark.
IF the Loss comic had been penned in 1889, it would’ve been a spark without kindling.
The world would not have been ready for it yet.
Are you feeling it now Mr. Krabs??
Sometimes, the world is ready, but a spark doesn’t come; sometimes, a person strikes flint and steel, but the kindling isn’t there.
A blaze requires both spark and kindling to roar.
This is the second part of the answer.
Van Gogh’s paintings, Nietzsche’s writings… these can be considered the Loss comic of their time. They’re on that level. Beautiful, powerful sparks.
However, the world was not yet ready to burn. The two greats lived and died in obscurity because they were ahead of the world at large. It still needed some decades and centuries to catch up, and meet them where they were at.
Why was the World Kindling damp in the mid-to-late 1800’s?
Because it was coming off the back of the biggest Psycho W in history.
It was not the custom, at the time, to look inward. Looking outwards was in vogue. The pendulum had to swing back ever so slightly away from it’s radically Psycho orientation in order to properly recognize the work of these greats.
But you don’t have to take my word for it. Let’s look at a few key points in the timeline of Van Gogh’s rise in popularity:
1890 - Van Gogh unalives himself in minecraft completely irrelevant at age 37
1890s - Vinny’s bro’s wifey Johanna van Gogh-Bonger works to promote Vinny’s art and letters
1901 - Retrospective in Paris, interest growing in France
1924 - Publication of Van Gogh’s letters reveals the depth of his inner life, adding to the “tortured genius” narrative.
1935 - Museum of Modern Art in New York City gives the first major solo exhibition of his work in the US. Broad Institutional Recognition.
1960s - Post WW2 (WW2 was a heavily Psycho-coded time in the world), the pendulum swings back Schizo, free love, hippies, art world emphasizing emotional expression and individuality. Van Gogh is global both in institutions and popular culture.
Also, as an aside, it’s very telling that the Psycho-coded Nazis considered Van Gogh’s work as a “degenerate” threat to their ideal of Aryan art.
Phew.
Okay. We’ve come a long way today.
Let’s take stock:
Vinny Van Gogh sold little during his lifetime, yet exploded in popularity and recognition decades after his death.
He, like Nietzsche, was born into the Psycho-coded, outward-facing, post-Enlightenment West, which was not fertile soil for the acceptance and celebration of his work—aka the expression of a deeply tortured Schizo.
Every spark needs it’s kindling as we discovered through Loss.jpg, and though Vinny’s work was stifled during his life it’s spark held strong.
Decades later, the world would become ready for Van Gogh, and his spark would catch fire and set the whole world ablaze.
Throughout all of this, we can see clear imprints of the Schizo/Psycho War. Nietzsche and Van Gogh’s struggles with mental illness combined with brilliance speak to a deeply inward orientation—the hallmark of a Schizo Warrior. The Psycho-coded post-enlightenment world stifled their work. At first.
This is the form The War takes time and time again; the internally-oriented Schizo asks the world if he can simply exist, and through existing, express what’s inside. Not for any ulterior motive. The externally-oriented Psycho says “absolutely not”, your existence must produce something valuable in the world to be justified. Existence by itself and for itself is not permitted, tenable, or even conceivable, as we discussed in Part 1 with hostile architecture.
This is the core of what we’re exploring in this series. “Schizo” and “Psycho” are the terms the shitposting community has chosen to loosely && intuitively signal “internal” and “external”.
I hope you’ll enjoy the journey into the depths of this tension as much as I do, as there is still much ground to cover.
We are just getting started.
If you read this far, please send this essay to your most Normie friend and/or parents to utterly mog them ((and lmk how they react to it))
See you next time,
Cuckfucius
Schizo / Psycho looks a lot like Nietzsche’s Dyonisos / Apollon (if you haven’t read Birth of Tragedy, I recommend it to you)
great post as always damnn