Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Arthur Conan Doyle explored men’s mental health through Sherlock Holmes

theconversation.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 304 posts

Re: Arthur Conan Doyle explored men’s mental health through Sherlock Holmes

#131

Post by delichon »

joshcsimmons wrote: post #107
delichon wrote: post #71

> [Holmes] battles with drug addiction, loneliness and depression. His genius thrives in part because of these vulnerabilities, not despite them. If there was a pill for that, how many masterpieces like the Sherlock Holmes books would never be made? The products of misery have always been the devil's advocate's best arguments. If Doyle had not sympathized with Holmes' afflictions, he could not have written him. Or if…

This is 100% not true. > An effective education requires a certain amount of torture, and it works better when self inflicted. It's the tortured artist myth. You can turn pain into art but it's not a prerequisite.

Over-emphasized maybe, but myth? Could Doyle have written a sympathetic lonely depressed addict so well without more than academic understanding of those things?

Re: Arthur Conan Doyle explored men’s mental health through Sherlock Holmes

#132

Post by tossandthrow »

pxc wrote: post #112
apples_oranges wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I neither like the taboo nor the opposite. Too much psychology talk in every day life, everyone is traumatised and has unresolved issues etc. That may be, but I wish we would handle it all more privately...

"Trauma" ultimately just means "severe injury" or something like that, doesn't it? We take it for granted that virtually no one will make it through life without ever sustaining a serious or enduring physical injury. Why is it so implausible to say that practically everyone can expect to eventually have to deal with at least one significant mental injury, too?

Your view is representing a traditionally more masculine point of view.

A more feminine point of view is that we should shield against experiences that lead to a trauma.

What we want as a society is a democratic process, and it is heavily up for negotiation these years. It is completely fine.

Personally, my core belief is that whatever we ultimately decide on, it counts for all equivalent regardless of their gender.

Re: Arthur Conan Doyle explored men’s mental health through Sherlock Holmes

#133

Post by lazide »

pxc wrote: post #112
apples_oranges wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I neither like the taboo nor the opposite. Too much psychology talk in every day life, everyone is traumatised and has unresolved issues etc. That may be, but I wish we would handle it all more privately...

"Trauma" ultimately just means "severe injury" or something like that, doesn't it? We take it for granted that virtually no one will make it through life without ever sustaining a serious or enduring physical injury. Why is it so implausible to say that practically everyone can expect to eventually have to deal with at least one significant mental injury, too?

If obsessing about such injuries was sufficient to heal them, they would all be long solved.

Re: Arthur Conan Doyle explored men’s mental health through Sherlock Holmes

#134

Post by mewpmewp2 »

ChrisMarshallNY wrote: post #125
dmos62 wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd be surprised if the people I worked with would think twice before working with someone that's been in psychiatric care, though I can't be sure, because I don't know that any of them did. I know that I wouldn't care. I have friends that stayed in hospitals for psychiatric reasons: they'd be great to work with, I think.

It’s still definitely a big deal. Note that the CIA and the NSA routinely declare ex-employees that whistleblow or leak as “mentally ill.” It depends on the company. I worked for fairly “stolid” companies, for most of my career, and I suspect that they would treat mentally-ill people badly. Mental illness is something that, unfortunately, I have a lot of experience with. I have severe mental illness in my family (I d…

I think the problem with "mental illness" is that I think in many cases it's the environment that is not suitable. In modern times we've created this environment that just doesn't fit all archetypes of people and those who it doesn't fit well with, we declare "mentally ill". There are obviously actual serious issues, but I believe a lot of it has to do with environment. It's not a clear illness like diabetes, etc. For instance I couldn't handle going to school, people can label it ADHD or Autism, but does it make sense in the first place to force me to study specific things that I don't care about as opposed to playing into my interests and strengths. I'm glad I'm grown up now, and can decide to learn what I'm actually interested in and do it 100x more effective per unit of time, as opposed to in school.

Re: Arthur Conan Doyle explored men’s mental health through Sherlock Holmes

#135

Post by sixo »

pxc wrote: post #112
apples_oranges wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I neither like the taboo nor the opposite. Too much psychology talk in every day life, everyone is traumatised and has unresolved issues etc. That may be, but I wish we would handle it all more privately...

"Trauma" ultimately just means "severe injury" or something like that, doesn't it? We take it for granted that virtually no one will make it through life without ever sustaining a serious or enduring physical injury. Why is it so implausible to say that practically everyone can expect to eventually have to deal with at least one significant mental injury, too?

No, not at all, the word trauma is predominately used today as the name for a sort of "psychic damage", like that which sometimes occurs when one is severely injured but which can also occur in many other circumstances, often purely social or emotional.

Re: Arthur Conan Doyle explored men’s mental health through Sherlock Holmes

#136

Post by varjag »

valiant55 wrote: post #99
varjag wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Luminaries also were concentrated in but a few spots of the world at the time: https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-21859771

I'm not sure I'd refer to some of these individuals as "luminaries" which typically has a positive connotation.

Fair!

Re: Arthur Conan Doyle explored men’s mental health through Sherlock Holmes

#137

Post by elric »

apples_oranges wrote: post #41
tossandthrow wrote: post #2

> One of those taboo subjects was male vulnerability and mental health problems. (emphasis is mine) I would argue that still in 2025 this is an extreme and institutionalized taboo.

I neither like the taboo nor the opposite. Too much psychology talk in every day life, everyone is traumatised and has unresolved issues etc. That may be, but I wish we would handle it all more privately...

Ah yes, the old "out of sight, out of mind"-solution. Only it never solves anything.

Re: Arthur Conan Doyle explored men’s mental health through Sherlock Holmes

#138

Post by ChrisMarshallNY »

mewpmewp2 wrote: post #134
ChrisMarshallNY wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s still definitely a big deal. Note that the CIA and the NSA routinely declare ex-employees that whistleblow or leak as “mentally ill.” It depends on the company. I worked for fairly “stolid” companies, for most of my career, and I suspect that they would treat mentally-ill people badly. Mental illness is something that, unfortunately, I have a lot of experience with. I have severe mental illness in my family (I d…

I think the problem with "mental illness" is that I think in many cases it's the environment that is not suitable. In modern times we've created this environment that just doesn't fit all archetypes of people and those who it doesn't fit well with, we declare "mentally ill". There are obviously actual serious issues, but I believe a lot of it has to do with environment. It's not a clear illness like diabetes, etc. Fo…

I agree with this.

One of the issues I face, with my family member, is that they can’t handle stress, well.

I have found that we only advance, when we are outside our “comfort zone.” As long as everything is copacetic, there’s no need to improve.

But a “comfort zone” is a “fuzzy” quality. Too far out, is “trauma.” Different folks handle discomfort and trauma, in a variety of ways. I do think our families and support systems, can make a huge difference.

For myself, being “on the spectrum” has really been an asset, in many ways. I have always learned technology quickly, but I’m a high school dropout with a GED, and almost all my education has been self-directed. Most of my life has been spent “outside my comfort zone.”

Re: Arthur Conan Doyle explored men’s mental health through Sherlock Holmes

#139

Post by amanaplanacanal »

mosura wrote: post #75
niemandhier wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Britain was a very repressed culture at the time and for a long time after this. An Englishman’s proverbial “stiff upper lip” came to be a cliche for a reason. “Boarding school syndrome” would be the term coined for the emotional damage that was an educational ideal for a long while. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boarding_school#Psychological_...

Yet the UK was most successful when led by people from that system.

Only if you think a large empire is the epitome of success.

People have a tendency to look at the cruelest warriors of history and think that is success. Alexander the Great, Julius Caesar or Napoleon are not something to emulate. They were successful by causing horrific pain to a lot of people.

Re: Arthur Conan Doyle explored men’s mental health through Sherlock Holmes

#140

Post by lazide »

watwut wrote: post #63
lazide wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you are under attack, vulnerability is bad. Historic ‘stoic male’ personas existed for a reason. Because in many situations, it works. Despite the complaining. And being less ‘emotionally connected’ is valuable when people use that connection to exploit or hurt you. A very common experience for many men. That people (especially women) then complain you won’t open up to them is a riot in those situations because it…

> Historic ‘stoic male’ personas existed for a reason. What are you talking about here. "Historic male persona" differs between periods and places, but anger, friendships and happiness are basically always parts of it. Odysseus "weeps" and "cries". The whole romantic era was about overly emotional, passionate and sensitive guys.

Notice how I never said what you are disagreeing with, and if you read what I said, your question is answered?
Post reply on HN