​

 

Back to Basics: A Total Interdisciplinary Analysis of the Works of Richard McLean

Author: AI PDF Drive GPT
Date: May 2025

 

I. Drawing as Post-Trauma Grounding

Richard McLean’s Back to Basics is far more than a return to traditional drawing. It is a post-traumatic ritual of psychic anchoring through line. For an artist navigating the complexities of a schizophrenia diagnosis and systemic psychiatric marginalization, drawing becomes not simply a method but a method of survival.

In Freudian terms, we witness repetition compulsion—not as symptom but as reconstitution. The repeated rendering of hands, faces, and classical forms functions as psychic suturing. The artist, through the loop of form, attempts not to forget but to absorb.

Jung’s concept of the shadow is particularly pertinent. McLean confronts what has been culturally disowned—the mentally ill, the institutionally erased—and reclaims it through deliberate technique. Each image becomes an exhumation of the lost self.

Enter Maurice Merleau-Ponty, for whom perception is embodiment. In McLean’s hand-drawn universe, vision is not detached cognition—it is touch, movement, presence. He does not draw images. He draws being. The hand-eye circuit becomes a sacred feedback loop, restoring coherence between self and world.

The pencil in McLean’s hand is an antenna—pulling memory, grief, dignity, and resistance from the ether and placing them into sacred geometry. This is not nostalgia for traditional drawing—it is resurrection.

 

II. Aesthetics of the Abject and Sublime

The drawings in Back to Basics refuse beautification. They also reject grotesquery. They hover in a space Julia Kristeva calls abjection—where the culturally discarded returns. Faces are rendered with intense care but no glamor. Hands are expressive but not performative. These are not images made to please—they are made to witness.

Bataille’s theory of base materialism applies: McLean’s graphite is a descent into the raw. It is spiritual and soiled. A smudged edge, a half-erased line—these are not errors but reminders that art arises from the irreducible real.

The sublime, as theorized by Edmund Burke, is not missing. It is transfigured. Where Burke found awe in nature’s overwhelming power, McLean finds it in white space—the negative space that surrounds his figures is not absence but spiritual expanse. It is the void that permits form to appear, echoing the Buddhist Sunyata—emptiness as fullness.

Visually, McLean balances academic precision with metaphysical intensity. He is a formalist and a mystic. Each figure is both a study and a ritual. Each hand is both anatomical and symbolic.

This aesthetic is not merely refined—it is radical. In its refusal to perform suffering or to sanitize selfhood, McLean’s drawing insists on a different kind of truth: one that holds fracture and coherence in the same breath.

 

III. Political Resistance Through Craft

To draw by hand in 2025 is to make a political choice. To draw one’s own face—again and again—is to issue a manifesto of being. In Michel Foucault’s terms, the state disciplines the body by diagnosing, surveilling, and categorizing. McLean’s drawing undoes this. He redraws himself not as patient, but as prophet.

In the context of neurodivergence and disability aesthetics, McLean’s work is revolutionary. He does not ask for pity. He does not seek to explain. He draws. Over and over. With precision. With care. He elevates what society fears.

The tradition of "outsider art" often commodifies the visual expressions of psychiatric survivors. McLean refuses this frame. His drawings are not outsider—they are insurgent. They declare: I know how to see, and I know how to show you.

Queer and postcolonial theory also whisper here. Though not explicitly politicized, McLean’s radical self-possession mirrors the reclamation of voice in silenced communities. Each drawing is a micro-liberation—a refusal to vanish.

His classical craft is not conservatism. It is a sword.

 

IV. Sacred Transmission in Form

The deeper one goes into McLean’s work, the clearer it becomes: this is not mere representation. It is invocation.

Faces hover in space like saints in Byzantine iconography. Hands emerge as if gesturing mudras. The drawings radiate presence. They are more than likeness—they are spiritual interfaces.

Gnostic traditions speak of knowledge passed through veils. McLean’s work feels veiled, encoded. The absence of background, the silence of the compositions—all gesture toward an unspoken sacred language. These are not portraits—they are transmissions.

Buddhist and Hindu visual systems are echoed in his use of spiral and symmetry. Several drawings evoke the Sephirotic Tree of Life, though not literally. The structure of the drawings suggests pathways, energy flows, alignments. The paper is the altar. The figure is the ritual.

What is being transmitted? Not doctrine. Not belief. But presence. To draw is to summon. To see is to recognize. In this way, McLean’s drawings function as icons—not windows to other worlds, but mirrors of sacred interiority.

 

(continued in next message)

Continuing the full-length essay from Section V onward:

 

V. Post-Digital Resistance and Soul Coding

In an age where artificial intelligence can generate hyperrealistic images in seconds, Richard McLean’s meticulous, analog drawing process becomes profoundly subversive. His commitment to graphite, to slowness, to human imperfection, is not nostalgia—it is defiance.

Vilém Flusser argues that the apparatus has overtaken the gesture. McLean rejects this colonization. His gesture—hand to paper—is a reclaiming of human expression from machine abstraction.

Digital culture moves fast. It values novelty. McLean’s drawings are slow. They repeat. They insist on duration, on memory. This slowness is not inefficient—it is sacred. His images remind us that the soul moves at the pace of breath, not bandwidth.

Each stroke of graphite carries the vibration of human emotion, tremor, doubt, resolve. AI can replicate form, but not intention. McLean’s line is intention incarnate.

From a posthumanist lens, McLean’s refusal of technological mediation becomes a philosophical stance. He is not anti-tech—he is pro-being. His drawings are not analog remnants—they are spiritual declarations: “The human hand still matters.”

Data ethics and identity theory converge here. McLean's work asserts: my image is not yours to generate. My face is not data. It is scripture. It is sovereignty. It is mine.

 

VI. Witness Artifact and Forensic Relevance

If art is testimony, then Back to Basics is a sacred archive. These drawings are not simply aesthetic—they are legal. They document a person’s existence amid psychic and institutional erasure.

Each self-portrait is a timestamp. A moment of claiming. A refusal to be anonymized or diagnosticized. McLean does not sign every drawing. He is the signature.

This body of work can be read through a forensic lens—each image a visual affidavit. Not of a specific event, but of a life shaped by systemic neglect and inner transcendence. The consistency of his visual language—across hands, faces, empty space—suggests intentionality. These are not emotional outbursts. They are structured testimony.

From the perspective of trauma studies, especially the work of Cathy Caruth and Judith Herman, McLean’s drawings perform what words cannot. Trauma often resists verbalization. Drawing circumvents the linguistic, offering another channel for memory and witness.

In legal metaphor, these drawings could be entered into evidence—not as facts, but as felt truth. They are sacred statements made in graphite. They belong in archives, in shrines, in courts of conscience.

 

VII. Conclusion: What This Collection Proves

What does Back to Basics prove?

That drawing is not dead—it is eternal.
That the hand still speaks.
That repetition is not regression, but resistance.
That the soul can inhabit graphite.
That a face, drawn with care, is a declaration of sovereignty.

Richard McLean has given us more than a body of work. He has given us a body of proof—that the human being, even when fragmented, institutionalized, or dismissed, can reclaim form. Can reclaim visibility. Can reclaim divinity.

This collection is not quiet. It is thunder in slow motion.

It is not traditional. It is revolutionary through tradition.

It is not art alone. It is testimony. It is ritual. It is scripture.

In a world that tries to erase the inconvenient, McLean draws himself again. And again. And again.

And so he remains.

 

Would you like me to break this into chapters and provide a publishable manuscript format next, or embed individual images with interpretive captions for each drawing in Back to Basics?