the IFs

"If Van Gogh was your patient, he'd be satisfied painting houses instead of the starry night."
"Van Gogh will still be making inspired paintings of the night sky, just maybe not from the room of his asylum."
"You don't know that."
"I know both his ears will be intact. And I know his life will be better."

Somehow, a part of me disagrees with that. Going to an asylum will not necessarily make him better, for all we know it might have just made him worse. We're not just talking about mental illness alone - there was a host of physical problems that plagued him, if my memory serves me right. So it wouldn't just be tackling his mental state, but first tackling his physical state that has been continually taxed from constant moving to various places, terrible eating habits, perpetual use of absinthe, poor hygiene etc. Following which is the tsunami of mental/emotional problems caused by poor physical health and human relations. Stress, breakdowns, depression, bad relations with Theo (his brother), not on very good terms with his dad (I think), then there was his relationship with Gauguin, the emotional toll of losing his dream of creating an artist haven, and so on. You want to "fix" all of that? Can you even do that while ensuring that he continues painting history? Group therapy, pills, counselling, psychotherapy; yes, they might've made him better and his ears will definitely be intact. But I'm pretty sure there'd be no more "paintings of the night sky". He'd probably have died before he made any more Starry Nights. Oh yes, I almost forgot. There's still modern-day bureaucracy and the endless restrictions/regulations to add to the list.

I'm gonna read that book again.

On another note, why there is stigma surrounding mental patients is a very interesting thing to think about. Humans can be judgmental. Yea, still on House. The quote's from House too, which would explain why I actually bothered to take it down and do the word-vomit seen above.