blog ten

Where is the Surgeon General's warning for searching for creativity? (To answer my own question, obviously nowhere; the package is always different so where would Dr. Gupta put it?)

Essentially (what I'm attempting--and probably failing--to do is comically illustrate that), it is amazing how closely related illness and creativity really are. I was pleased to see that Hughes included the great Frida Kahlo in his assessment of mental and physical handicap and their effects on her profound and mysterious creations. It is noteworthy that Hughes includes mental incarceration or fragmentation (in depression, schizophrenia, epilepsy, and others) as well as physical limitation (paralysis, blindness, deafness, etc.) in his discussion of creativity. I'm sure many of us have heard of blind people who seem to naturally increase their senses of smell or hearing; we're used to the idea of losing something but gaining something else. But to look at it from the standpoint of analyzing or understanding an artist, the effects of a limitation or limitations on creativity are fascinating. Although it is unfortunate that these artists are afflicted by illness of some kind and must suffer, it appears that there is uniform consent that (at one time in their lives) they appreciated their lot and embraced it (as evidence by its manifestation in their created works). The part that is scary (and related to my bad joke at the beginning of my blog) is that Hughes suggests that the spirit of creativity may, itself, be a madness that, when turned inward, manifests itself in the form of illness (be it physical or mental).

Chapter ten was an enjoyable chapter for me, as I saw many interersting insights into how the sexes think, create, approach situations, etc. I think gender roles are always a fascinating topic and the idea that sex is the act that leads to the ultimate form of creation--procreation--is absolutely spot on. It also explains (possibly) why women have been oppressed for many years and why the realms of education and religion were exclusively for men. They were trying to catch up :) It is also very interesting to consider, however, that women we associate with sex or sexuality, were often times puppets of men but simultaneously controlled those men in other ways. Hughes points out this give and take idea of sexuality when he talks about aggressive possession on page 141. Basically, he cites various sources, all of whom suggest that sex is so powerful and provocative because it is a bit dangerous in the sense that someone has to sort of "win" over the other; there is a dominant partner and a submissive partner. I think it's an interesting comparison that Hughes makes when he points out the similarities between sexual relationships and creatives (and their creations). This is especially apparent in his metaphor about childbirth and the birth of a new (man-made, as opposed to man-and-woman-made) creation. Other times throughout this book I had a similar idea pop into my head, so I think Hughes relays this concept extremely well when he points out how sexuality can be used to so concretely represent the creative process and even how it is a part of it.