Dreams and nightmares exhibit to open at world's oldest psychiatric hospital
Dreams and nightmares have long been studied by psychologists. Now they are the subject of a new exhibition featuring several artists that were patients at the world's oldest psychiatric hospital, Bethlem (sometimes known as Bedlam), and its sister institution, the Maudsley hospital.
It includes paintings by Charlotte Johnson Wahl, the late mother of Boris Johnson, who spent eight months as a patient at the Maudsley after a breakdown when her four children were aged between two and nine. She created dozens of paintings while there, and held her first exhibition which sold out. 'I couldn't talk about my problems, but I could paint them,' she said later.
Rachel Johnson, her daughter, said in an interview earlier this year that her mother's stay at the Maudsley 'gave her relief from domesticity, and time to paint. We always accepted that painting was like oxygen to her. But when she returned to us, we could see she was still very ill.'
Two of Johnson Wahl's paintings are included in the exhibition, Between Sleeping and Waking: Hospital Dreams and Visions, which opens at the Bethlem Museum of the Mind in August.
The centrepiece of the show is a huge installation, Night Tides, by contemporary artist Kate McDonnell. She uses swathes of bedding woven with disordered words to evoke the restlessness and clashing thoughts of insomnia.
According to Caroline Horton, professor of sleep and cognition and director of DrEAMSLab at Bishop Grosseteste university in Lincoln, 'dreaming occurs during sleep, and sleep is essential for all aspects of mental and physical health.
Sign up to Art Weekly
Your weekly art world round-up, sketching out all the biggest stories, scandals and exhibitions
after newsletter promotion
'We all dream each night, even if we don't remember those experiences. This exhibition captures the intrigue of our night-time experiences, both positive and negative, while showcasing their intricate relationship with our mental health.'
Among other works featured in the exhibition is London's Overthrow by Jonathan Martin, an arsonist held in the 'criminal lunatic department' of Bethlem hospital from 1829 until his death in 1838. In 2012, the Guardian described it as a 'mad pen-and-ink depiction of the capital's destruction due to godlessness'.
In 1828, Martin, who was driven to expose corruption within the church, had delivered warnings to clergy in York, urging them to repent of the 'bottles of wine, and roast beef and plum pudding'. When they failed to respond, he set fire to York minster. At his trial, he was found not guilty by reason of insanity.
An illustrated poem, 'Epitaph, of my poor Jack, Squirrel', by James Hadfield, one of Bethlem's most notorious patients, who spent 41 years in the hospital, will be on display for the first time. Experiencing delusions about the end of the world, Hadfield became convinced that he must sacrifice himself to save humankind. He decided to engineer a situation where his life would be taken by others – an attempt to kill King George III.
He was arrested and his lawyer successfully argued at his trial that he was 'incurably insane', and he was sent to a cell in Bethlem rather than prison. At the hospital, he was allowed pets, including squirrels, and he sold pictures of them to visitors. His autopsy revealed severe brain injuries dating back to his years as a young soldier.
The dream diaries of a Maudsley psychiatrist, Edward Hare, will also be on display for the first time. Over half a century, from the 1940s to the 1990s, Hare recorded his impressions on waking of his dreams from the mundane to the fantastical.
Colin Gale, director of the Bethlem Museum of the Mind, said the artwork in its collections reflected 'an entire spectrum of dreams identified by sleep researchers'.
Between Sleeping and Waking: Hospital Dreams and Visions is at the Bethlem Museum of the Mind in Beckenham, London, from 14 August. Admission is free.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
BBC News
36 minutes ago
- BBC News
Leominster campaigner says miscarriage leave change is 'amazing'
A woman who campaigned for changes to bereavement leave after having three miscarriages said it was "amazing" that a planned law would cover more government is set to amend the Employment Rights Bill, which is making its way through Parliament, to give parents a legal right to time off work if they experience pregnancy loss at any leave is currently only available to parents who lose an unborn child after 24 weeks of pregnancy."For anybody in the future who does have to go through [a miscarriage], all that stress and that campaigning has been worth it," said Tash Allin, from Leominster, who was nine weeks pregnant when she had her third miscarriage. "It's crucial - to be able to get over such an upsetting life experience, you need that time," she told BBC Radio Hereford & added that she was one of many women and men who had campaigned on the issue and it felt "amazing" to have helped bring about change. 'Bottled up emotions' The proposed extended right to leave would be unpaid and last for at least one week, though the exact length is still being consulted details, including who will be eligible and whether a doctor's note would be required, will also be decided following a Allin said she had a supportive employer when she had her most recent miscarriage, but she had harder experiences during some of her pregnancy losses."It was very much, 'I'm so sorry to hear it, but when are you coming back?' That was how the conversation went," she said."When your boss is saying that, you do feel pressure to go back and therefore you just kind of have to bottle up your emotions."Ms Allin, who has two children, added that she hoped the final bill would contain a right to leave that lasted more than one week. Follow BBC Hereford & Worcester on BBC Sounds, Facebook, X and Instagram.
The Guardian
an hour ago
- The Guardian
‘A Trojan horse': how toxic sewage sludge became a threat to the future of British farming
For decades, sewage sludge has been quietly spread across Britain's farmland, marketed as a nutrient-rich fertiliser. But insiders and scientists warn that hidden within it is a mix of household and industrial chemicals such as Pfas ('forever chemicals'), pharmaceuticals, pesticides, hormone-damaging chemicals and microplastics, threatening the long-term health of the land. Every year, 768,000 tonnes of this byproduct of wastewater treatment is spread over 150,000 hectares of agricultural land in England. The practice is banned in some countries, such as Switzerland, but in the UK it continues with little scrutiny and has become a covert route for dumping toxic industrial waste, experts say. 'It's a Trojan horse,' said a water sector insider. 'Pfas, pharmaceuticals, endocrine disruptors and microplastics hidden in sludge threaten the long-term sustainability of humanity's farmland.' These pollutants are not tested for under current regulations, which only require screening for a handful of heavy metals. Spreading sludge is incentivised because it is the cheapest disposal method. 'It would cost water companies a lot to get rid of it themselves,' said an Environment Agency (EA) officer, who asked to remain anonymous. 'So they're happy to give it to farmers cheaply or for free.' For farmers, rising fertiliser costs make it appear a win-win. 'It's a closed loop where everyone absolves themselves of costs,' the officer said. Industries also benefit by sending liquid waste to wastewater plants, which is cheaper than incineration or other methods. 'Some water companies have made big business decisions around taking industrial wastewater and getting paid for it,' said a second EA insider. Both sources are concerned about using sewage works to dispose of hazardous waste – especially landfill leachate, which is often added to systems unequipped to treat it. 'As soon as you let industrial waste into your sewer network, your sewage becomes hazardous waste,' said the first EA officer. 'Masking it as sludge and calling it fertiliser is a problem.' The result is a system that financially benefits water companies, farmers and industry – but not the public or the environment. 'If it's seen to be given away it could be viewed as a waste, and they absolutely abhor the waste label,' said the second EA source. 'The water companies say they can make a profit from it but they are very reluctant to give us any hard data – they claim commercial confidentiality.' Dr David Tompkins, a soil and waste expert at the consultancy WSP, said: 'It's what's in it – and what we don't remove – that's the problem. We're dealing with Pfas, microplastics, flame retardants and other hazards.' Regulations set in 1989 are no longer fit for purpose, the second EA source said. 'Metal levels have dropped, so the system says 'great, we're fine' – but everything else is ignored.' Oversight is weak, they said. 'We won't know when or how much sludge is going to be spread. Records are kept by the water industry, and they like it that way.' 'Digesters are continuous systems and are designed to remove pathogens, not these chemicals,' said a water expert. Even then, 'new sludge mixes with old, and some is removed before it's fully digested', they said. 'A portion of what goes to land is not properly treated.' Scientists suspect these contaminants are entering the food chain. 'We've seen Pfas and pharmaceuticals accumulate in crops and livestock,' said the expert. But there is no requirement to test food for these substances and therefore little data on it. The EA has long known sludge contains pollutants. A 2017 internal report warned of physical contaminants 'potentially resulting in soils becoming unsuitable for agriculture'. That information was not shared with farmers. 'Quite the opposite,' said Georgia Elliott-Smith of the campaign group Fighting Dirty. 'In 2022, farmers were incentivised by Defra to spread sewage sludge as part of the sustainable farming initiative.' Defra says it encouraged organic matter use generally, without specifying sludge. 'At a time when British farming is on its knees,' Elliott-Smith added, 'the government has again prioritised corporate interests. Farmers now face a hopeless choice: cheap but toxic sludge, or costly agrochemicals.' In Germany, Belgium and the Netherlands, sludge spreading on farmland has been reduced or banned. Switzerland incinerates all its sludge and stores the ash for phosphorus recovery. Tompkins noted: 'They know it's expensive. But they've decided it's necessary.' In the UK, political will is lacking. 'It's regulation by inertia,' Tompkins added. 'The Environment Agency is working within tight budgets that can limit its monitoring capacity.' Sign up to Down to Earth The planet's most important stories. Get all the week's environment news - the good, the bad and the essential after newsletter promotion Richard Benwell, the CEO of Wildlife and Countryside Link, said: 'Other countries are paying attention, with bans in some US states on Pfas-polluted sludge, as well as in several European countries. It's time for the UK government to set tough standards to stop this chemical pollutant ending up on farms, along with action to cut down on these harmful chemicals at their source.' For Tompkins, 'we need to price food and water properly. Regulations tend toward the minimum baseline. If we want better, we'll have to pay for it. Sludge has value but the way we manage it destroys that value.' Critics also point to the voluntary 'safe sludge matrix', a guide developed by industry and consultants, as a fig leaf. 'There is nothing safe about the safe sludge matrix,' said one industry expert. 'It's a PR exercise,' said the second EA insider. 'It was designed to protect [water companies'] access to the land bank. They don't want retailers or farmers losing confidence in spreading.' The consultants ADAS were involved in the creation of the matrix. A spokesperson said it was introduced to address food safety and human health risks from microbial pathogens after a year of intensive consultations. The agreement was made between Water UK and the British Retail Consortium, and included inputs from a range of interested parties including the EA, the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, as well as the National Farmers' Union, Country Land and Business Association, food manufacturers and food processors, it said. Martin Lines, the CEO of the Nature Friendly Farming Network, said: 'Farmers want to protect their soils and grow safe food, but they're being put in a tough position. Sewage sludge is being spread with little testing or transparency. Contaminants like Pfas and microplastics shouldn't be anywhere near farmland. Without proper regulation, this isn't a circular economy – it's a failure of oversight.' A long-promised regulatory overhaul through environmental permitting regulations was due in 2023, but the deadline passed with no new date in sight. Experts say a better system would start upstream, controlling what enters treatment plants. New EU rules will require pharmaceutical and personal care product makers to pay 80% of waste treatment costs, but the UK has no such mechanism. 'We're not in control of the life cycle of the molecules we create,' said a water expert. 'They go out into the biosphere and build up. All these substances are accumulating.' Some argue the legal tools already exist. According to Tompkins, 'there's a clause that could be interpreted to say 'anything hazardous' should be checked. So if we wanted to look for all these other things, we could.' Ultimately, said the first EA source, 'once you let industrial waste into your works, what comes out isn't sewage sludge. It's hazardous waste.' Water UK said spreading bioresources was a longstanding, regulated practice that helps farmers and reduces reliance on chemical fertilisers. While some contain Pfas or microplastics, it said, legal standards and test methods were lacking and had to be set by government. It said water companies were supporting research and trialling uses like biofuels. The Environment Agency said sludge must not harm soil or water and that it enforced strict rules, with thousands of farm inspections each year. Defra said it wanted sludge to be used safely and sustainably and had launched an independent water commission to review the rules.
The Guardian
an hour ago
- The Guardian
Millions of tonnes of toxic sewage sludge spread on UK farmland every year
Millions of tonnes of treated sewage sludge is spread on farmland across the UK every year despite containing forever chemicals, microplastics and toxic waste, and experts say the outdated current regulations are not fit for purpose. An investigation by the Guardian and Watershed has identified England's sludge-spreading hotspots and shown where the practice could be damaging rivers. Sludge – the solid matter left over after sewage treatment – is laden with Pfas 'forever chemicals', flame retardants, pharmaceuticals, microplastics, and toxic waste from homes and industry. Water companies rebrand it as biosolids and give or sell it to farmers as a nutrient-rich fertiliser. It is spread over vast areas under light-touch regulation and minimal scrutiny, unmonitored for toxic substances. 'On the outside it appears to be 'black gold' – containing nitrogen and phosphates valuable for soil,' a water industry expert said. 'But hidden within it are microplastics, Pfas forever chemicals, endocrine disruptors, pharmaceuticals and heavy metals.' About 87% of the UK's 3.6m tonnes of sewage sludge is applied to farmland. An Environment Agency (EA) officer, speaking anonymously, said: 'People have seen the sewage in rivers … they need to know about the sludge, where it goes and what's in it.' The water industry's own chemicals investigation programme found hormone-damaging nonylphenols and phthalates, the banned carcinogen PFOS, antibiotics, antimicrobials and anti-corrosion chemicals in every sample tested from 11 treatment works. Scientists from Cardiff and Manchester universities estimate that 31,000 to 42,000 tonnes of microplastics are spread on European farmland annually via sludge, with the UK possibly facing the worst contamination. Rules set in 1989 require testing only for a few heavy metals, and EA insiders say they are 'not fit for purpose'. The investigation identified about 34,000 registered sites in England where sludge is stored, usually before being spread at the same site or on a field nearby, although it can sometimes be transported long distances. Of these, about 33,000 sites are defined as being agricultural land. In 2023 alone, more than 768,000 tonnes of dry solids were spread across 152,000 hectares. Figures from the past decade consistently fall between 715,000 and 800,000 tonnes. Some counties are more affected than others: Hampshire, Lincolnshire, North Yorkshire and Essex have the highest number of sites, with 6,371 between them. Sludge-spreading is governed by waste exemptions, allowing companies to store or apply waste on land without an environmental permit, provided certain conditions are met such as avoiding significant risk to water, soil, air or wildlife. But enforcement is weak. 'No one checks. No one cares,' said one EA insider. An EA officer explained that sludge toxicity depends on local sources: 'Anywhere with an industrial estate will likely produce more contaminated sludge than a rural area.' Industrial waste, such as landfill leachate, is often tankered into sewage works, mixed with domestic waste, and the resulting sludge is spread under the same rules as any biosolid. Contaminated fields become silent sources of pollution. Even uncontaminated sludge can be a problem if mismanaged. When too many nutrients reach rivers, they fuel algal blooms that block sunlight and starve aquatic life of oxygen – a process called eutrophication. The investigation found that one in 20 sludge storage sites in England are within 100 metres of a river, and 1,277 sites are within 500 metres of waters already classed as eutrophic by the EA. The investigation found that 73% of all sludge sites – 23,844 – are within nitrate vulnerable zones (NVZs), where strict rules apply due to pollution risks. In England, no rivers meet chemical standards and just 14% meet ecological ones. Sludge-spreading occurs in Wales and Scotland, too. Almost a quarter of sludge storage sites in Scottish locations that could be identified are within NVZs. A study from the James Hutton Institute found microplastic levels rose by 1,450% after four years of sludge-spreading in North Lanarkshire and remained elevated 22 years later. In Northern Ireland, most sludge is incinerated. Richard Benwell, Wildlife and Countryside Link's chief executive, said: 'Though sludge could be a beneficial fertiliser, it is mixed with the dregs of chemical pollutants. Damaging Pfas, BPA and glyphosate are prevalent in sludge. Regulation must be strengthened to protect public health and the environment.' Prof Rupert Hough, of the James Hutton Institute, said: 'At the moment, sludge will only be checked for metals and the receiving environment is checked for metals but I don't think it gets checked rigorously. 'We all put chemicals down the drain, take medicines – these end up in the sludge and on land, and can enter the food chain.' He said the alternative options – landfilling and incineration – had capacity limits and high costs. 'The cost of removing chemicals from sludge is also prohibitively expensive … the industry has few options,' he said. A water industry source said: 'Colleagues in the industry are not out to commit evil in their public service of water management. They're just constrained by a lack of research and development.' A spokesperson for Water UK said water companies were backing research and trialling new uses for bioresources, including as aviation fuel. 'The UK has banned some products with microplastics – we need the same for Pfas, plus a national cleanup plan funded by polluting manufacturers. Contaminants cross borders, which is why we're calling for coordinated action across Europe.' Shubhi Sharma, of the charity Chem Trust, said the government used lack of funding as an excuse for 'failing to prevent our farmlands from being poisoned'. She called for tighter chemical restrictions and a 'polluter pays' model. 'France has already introduced taxes for Pfas polluters. The UK should follow,' she said. The EA said sludge must not harm soil or water, and that it enforced strict rules, including through more than 4,500 farm inspections last year, resulting in more than 6,000 pollution-reducing actions. The Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs said it wanted safe, sustainable sludge use and it has launched an independent water commission to review the regulatory framework in collaboration with the EA, farmers and water companies.
