Psycho-Babble Psychology Thread 441267

Shown: posts 1 to 13 of 13. This is the beginning of the thread.

 

Is creativity valuable if it isn't shared?

Posted by Dinah on January 12, 2005, at 17:00:10

One subset of my argument with my therapist today.

I think creativity is valuable even if it's just for you. He thinks creativity is only valuable if it brings something positive to the world. Like whoever it was' poetry that was only published and shared after death. I say it was valuable before it was shared, he says it is valuable because it was eventually shared.

I *really* think he's wrong on this one, but I wonder if I'm missing something.

 

Re: Is creativity valuable if it isn't shared? » Dinah

Posted by All Done on January 12, 2005, at 17:09:58

In reply to Is creativity valuable if it isn't shared?, posted by Dinah on January 12, 2005, at 17:00:10

> One subset of my argument with my therapist today.
>
> I think creativity is valuable even if it's just for you. He thinks creativity is only valuable if it brings something positive to the world.


It *has* to be valuable to the person that created the creativity, no? (Does that make any sense?) My childhood creativity got me through a lot of tough times even though it was shared with no one but myself. It was my own little world sometimes. A very valuable little world, if you ask me.

 

Re: I'm definitely with you » Dinah

Posted by mair on January 12, 2005, at 17:21:25

In reply to Is creativity valuable if it isn't shared?, posted by Dinah on January 12, 2005, at 17:00:10

While it's wonderful to benefit from the creative efforts of another, creativity is part of the essential core of a creative person and I'm sure very important to their self image or their sense of who they are. And even if the broader "world" isn't benefitting, aren't the person's friends and families benefitting.

Why is this different from other character traits. Let's say you're a person of strong morals. Are those morals only of value if others benefit from them? Are they only of benefit if the broader world is impacted? I'd say no to both. You might feel good about yourself because of your sense of morality, even if no one else was in a position to see it, and of course those closest to you probably feel better about you because you have that trait.

Am I misunderstanding his point?

Mair

 

Re: Is creativity valuable if it isn't shared? » Dinah

Posted by thewrite1 on January 12, 2005, at 17:36:00

In reply to Is creativity valuable if it isn't shared?, posted by Dinah on January 12, 2005, at 17:00:10

I think the person that wrote the piece (or whatever medium) would disagree. I write poetry. I don't usually share it, but it's valuable to ME. I could care less whether or not it's valuable to anyone else. *shrug*

 

Re: Of course you're right! No question!! (nm) » thewrite1

Posted by annierose on January 12, 2005, at 18:08:32

In reply to Re: Is creativity valuable if it isn't shared? » Dinah, posted by thewrite1 on January 12, 2005, at 17:36:00

 

I thought his position was indefensible.

Posted by Dinah on January 12, 2005, at 18:54:50

In reply to Re: Is creativity valuable if it isn't shared? » Dinah, posted by thewrite1 on January 12, 2005, at 17:36:00

I suspect he was too busy trying to make his larger point to concede a smaller one, and thus not only said but defended a ridiculous position.

Sigh.

Maybe I *shouldn't* ask him to let me in on his thought processes more. :(

 

He's Dead Wrong

Posted by Skittles on January 12, 2005, at 19:44:20

In reply to Is creativity valuable if it isn't shared?, posted by Dinah on January 12, 2005, at 17:00:10

and you can tell him I said so!

 

If I can cure cancer and keep it to myself

Posted by Fallen4MyT on January 12, 2005, at 19:55:05

In reply to Is creativity valuable if it isn't shared?, posted by Dinah on January 12, 2005, at 17:00:10

is that cure valuable?

 

Re: If I can cure cancer and keep it to myself » Fallen4MyT

Posted by TofuEmmy on January 12, 2005, at 21:25:16

In reply to If I can cure cancer and keep it to myself, posted by Fallen4MyT on January 12, 2005, at 19:55:05

It is if you have cancer!

 

Re: Is creativity valuable if it isn't shared?

Posted by Shortelise on January 13, 2005, at 12:58:45

In reply to Is creativity valuable if it isn't shared?, posted by Dinah on January 12, 2005, at 17:00:10

Could he mean that it's valuable to you? Could he mean that you don't get what you need from your own creativity unless you share it and are appreciated for it?

Art is for art's sake, whether or not it is seen by anyone but the creator of it.

But your T is entitled to his opinion. This is a subject of much debate.

ShortE

 

Re: Is creativity valuable if it isn't shared?

Posted by pegasus on January 13, 2005, at 15:00:22

In reply to Is creativity valuable if it isn't shared?, posted by Dinah on January 12, 2005, at 17:00:10

If you benefit from your own creativity in any way, then of course that's valuable. Because you're a happier or more well adjusted or less stressed or better integrated person (or whatever it does to benefit you). I would think most therapists would agree that that is valuable, no? Even if you don't share the actual object of your creativity with anyone.

pegasus

 

Re: Is creativity valuable if it isn't shared?

Posted by bimini on January 14, 2005, at 7:57:57

In reply to Is creativity valuable if it isn't shared?, posted by Dinah on January 12, 2005, at 17:00:10

> He thinks creativity is only valuable if it brings something positive to the world.

What does that mean? Positive compared to what, to whom? Whose standards?
Can't be objective about the value of art if your mind is restricted by rubberstamp morals.

If your creativity brings you contentment, that IS the positive it brings to the world.

bimini

 

Re: Is creativity valuable if it isn't shared?

Posted by Joslynn on January 14, 2005, at 9:04:46

In reply to Is creativity valuable if it isn't shared?, posted by Dinah on January 12, 2005, at 17:00:10

I am in a creative field. My thoughts...Using your therapist's analogy, would Emily Dickinson have written her poetry at all if she had thought it would only be valuable if shared? She had no idea that it would be shared after her death, yet she still wrote it, for the creativity of the moment, that state of flow. I do think that literature and art are meant to be shared eventually, but that initial act of creation is something we can do for ourselves, or more specifically, for the piece of art itself. Just to see it come to life.

However, if he was making that point because you have some really good pieces of artwork, poetry or music that you are hiding in a box or something, maybe he was just trying to encourage you. If you do have something good that you have created, you may be suprised by how much other people will get out of it. Seeing other people's reactions can expand the work in a way that it becomes bigger than it was before.


This is the end of the thread.


Show another thread

URL of post in thread:


Psycho-Babble Psychology | Extras | FAQ


[dr. bob] Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD, [email protected]

Script revised: February 4, 2008
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/cgi-bin/pb/mget.pl
Copyright 2006-17 Robert Hsiung.
Owned and operated by Dr. Bob LLC and not the University of Chicago.